Bi-toroid Transformer of Thane C. Heins

[BroMikey]

Bloch Wall Hard To Understand

[QUOTE=Hey Mike
Just thought I'd add this comment from JB from another thread to support your reference to his remarks::[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=
Quote:
Originally Posted by John_Bedini View Post
Dave, Matt,
... If you look at the coil in space it can be viewed with vectors all pointing in but not coupled to form energy. As the coil is pulsed compression and decompression takes place these vectors get sucked in through the Bloch Wall while it is in compression mode forming magnetic poles, North and South. This was never released to the public as it would drive everybody nuts. The Engineers at the school answered me with; we never looked at it this way...
John Bedini:[/QUOTE]


Hello Mr Smith

Thank you for you reinforcing comments that make this technology easier to understand. A special thanks to YOU JOHN. I think people are finally becoming more grateful for the old ENERGY FROM THE VACUUM DVD's.

Mikey

[Iamnuts]

With results like 128%, it's surprrizing that Thane C Heins,
John Bedini or the likes haven't snapped up the OU. one
watt prize.
John.

[Bob Smith]

Hey Mike
Just thought I'd add this comment from JB from another thread to support your reference to his remarks:

Dave, Matt,
... If you look at the coil in space it can be viewed with vectors all pointing in but not coupled to form energy. As the coil is pulsed compression and decompression takes place these vectors get sucked in through the Bloch Wall while it is in compression mode forming magnetic poles, North and South. This was never released to the public as it would drive everybody nuts. The Engineers at the school answered me with; we never looked at it this way...
John Bedini

[BroMikey]

Follow The Experiment

Hello Wayne

I am glad you can follow my experiment, this means I am succeeding at what I set out to do and as far as I am concerned is a compliment. Thanks for that


Also I had wanted to talk about your other comment with the gap. It has been going around in my mind with the Bloch Wall being the focal point. The bloch wall it where extra energy can enter especially at the higher speeds of operation. Down low at 60hz I have little room to work with yet even down low I have watched the voltage increase so gaps are another control method.

If you read the paper above you would know that gaps bring about more stability as temperatures and power levels can throw tuning out fast.

Let's face it if we are to move up to more than just a few Milli-watts other issue could develop making a practical unit to be cost effective.

We have the effect. This is like having the SG Mono Pole effect but not having several thousands of dollars to make a practical amount of power.

Much time and energy must be invested.

What I really wanted to talk about was JOHN BEDINI's talk on the Howard J magnetic gates DVD. The bloch wall is where the energy is stored or coming into the system and Howard would make gaps in magnets using rubber.

It really does make more sense these days after hearing John B talk all these years about SWITCHING THE FIELD. Think about the Phrase "SWITCHING THE FIELD"

Ferrite cores get magnetized during operation and are switching magnets.


North south north south north south they go back and forth with every fluctuation or impulse. There is an invisible BLOCH WALL where the oposing fields of north and south meet together in the middle of that material.

These C-cores operate as electromagnets.

The gap could create a larger opening for outside energy to come into the bloch wall area already there.

I will be trying to do more with that. Up til now I only used a spacer on one side but both sides should be tried as well. Here is a picture.




I have not gotten that far. It is coming.

Adjusting the gap or having a gap adjuster is a good idea on all coupling links.

When I look at the Thane videos now I see what looks like adjusters in his Bi-toroid video's. Thane had adjustments from side to side and the other axes as well, probably X,Y,Z.

Thane and others have spent hundreds of thousands and I am sure this adjusting idea was not left out.

It is something to think about in addition to all of the other specifications thus far.

Stay tuned, free energy circuits are everywhere.

Mike

[wayne.ct]

Just a few comments

Hi Mike, I just want to jump in and add a few comments.

1. I'm glad you moved your ammeter where Dave suggested. The new diagram (of 3 days ago) shows the meter where it should be.

2. I have been following this thread with great interest since you first started it and I want to encourage you to stick with your plan. You have been clear and your replication is easy to follow. The photos are a big help. I think most replicators will be able to follow along with what you did and are doing.

3. If I am reading you correctly, adding a gap in the magnetic "circuits" caused a drop in COP. You might want to repeat that experimentally. Try it both ways, keeping everything else as same as possible. You can't make the gap less than zero, but you need to know whether the gap improves performance, or not.

4. There are many other things that can be varied to find out what works better and what makes things worse. One of those, of course, is the frequency. As long as you are staying with power from the power company you will be stuck at 60 Hz. If you feel so inclined, switch from power company power to a variable frequency sine wave generator so you can vary the frequency up and down slightly and compare COPs.

5. Just a note: I also see you adjusted the attached capacitors to improve the COP.

6. If I may suggest one caution it would be this. Trust what your experiments are telling you. Don't listen to abstract criticisms that depend on theory. Theory has led too many down a wrong path. Starting with COP of 1.27 or 1.28 is nothing to scoff at. From my side of the table, I want to read what works so my build will also work properly.

7. Another idea: I think it would probably be easy to rearrange the load bulbs to vary the resistance and current. For example, you could change from a 3 by 2 arrangement to a 2 by 3. Later you might want to power everything from a battery and have a battery charger as the load. Don't jump to that stage prematurely. The idea is that some will trust the voltage reading on a charged or partly depleted battery when they won't trust an AC power reading because of the imperfect sine wave being measured.

8. Don't do anything solely based on my ideas. You do what you think is best and best wishes to you.

[BroMikey]

Serps Call in

I missed the SERPS call in time with Jim and Paul

Thanks for letting me know these guys are looking over our shoulder incase we need more help. We can always use experienced help.

Excellent facts to share Dog-One great to have you around, looks like you are collecting the gold from these guys who are far more advanced.

Mike

[Dog-One]

I think a gap might help your rig. Did you try any gaps? Or loads that vary resistance with power level increases? This may help you.

What Jim told me is the gap lowers the inductance and provides an avenue for outside energy to enter the system. He also studied Tesla and noted that Tesla discovered the gap must be adjustable to track the impedance of the load. So if you have a fixed gap, you must have a fixed load. If you have an adjustable gap, you can hunt for the most optimal combination where the COP climbs to its peak. And if you're really good, you can automatically adjust the gap to track your load dynamically.

I get the feeling Jim really understands this phenomena and Paul is learning quick. Jim said to me straight away, if you keep after it, you'll figure this all out for yourself. That and his hints, I think we can do this. I think a looper is possible. We just need to focus on what's important. We need to figure out how to find the sweet spot, which means knowing when you are too high or too low with each specific parameter. We get a protocol that tackles that issue and we're home free.

[BroMikey]

Testing BH curves.

I'm very aware that core material is going to play a key role in function of such a device.


I have run tests from 30 Hz all the way up to 200 kHz. The BH curve of my material is very square, much like Amorphous Core Material of Metglas.

Where did you catch Thane discussing his core material? I'm interested in looking into this.

Dave

Hey Dave

I saw that video in the few he has on his you-tube channel I think. He goes on to say that Permalloy can vary in permeability and that the primary could have a core material of 100x greater resistance.

But this is based on 60hz I believe as Thane is showing only the basis of his findings at an easy frequency for everyone to get.

I am glad to hear you say that you have run the figures. I never saw any posts like this. So are you at COP .5? You know like standard EM EE designs?



I saw an amp on ebay for under $15 a mono single channel good for 25 watts rated higher for the max.


I think a gap might help your rig. Did you try any gaps? Or loads that vary resistance with power level increases? This may help you.

BroMikey

[Web000x]

I'm very aware that core material is going to play a key role in function of such a device. All that I am saying is that, MY RESULTS are very SIMILAR to the RESULTS IN THE VIDEO. I went on to say that I'm probably missing something and is the reason I'm not seeing anything unusual. I do believe that Thane Heins is a capable man and has shown us a novel effect. Remember, what doesn't work is just as important to know as what does work.

And yes, I am following Bill's line of logic. (Small Primary, Big Secondaries, Square BH Curve) Just because I posted a video a while ago showing that I was operating at higher frequencies than Bill, doesn't mean that I haven't sat down and tediously taken measurements and calculated results for ALL FREQUENCIES that the impedance of my primary winding permits. I have run tests from 30 Hz all the way up to 200 kHz. The BH curve of my material is very square, much like Amorphous Core Material of Metglas.

Where did you catch Thane discussing his core material? I'm interested in looking into this.

Dave

[BroMikey]

The effect

I'm using 10 - 1 Ohm carbon resistors in parallel to get 0.1 Ohm of resistance. This greatly reduces any stray inductance. As I perform power calculations for various loads at various frequencies, I always seem to fall short of 100% efficiency.


Currently, I'm following Bill's line of logic where my primary is of a small inductance compared to the large inductance of the secondaries. Maybe this will be a new avenue for me that proves to be fruitful.

Dave

Follow the effect.

Sounds like a gap is in order. Bill is running approx 3khz and tuned for this frequency and so you can not say you are following Bill in this respect. Also Bill used Metglas.

I can't think of your exact frequency but I think it was 20-30 times higher than Bill's 3khz, so this is way higher. Not saying that we couldn't reinvent the BiTT to operate at the region.

In my frequency work with harmonics you see more power at the low end. Let's look at Bill's demo. First he runs a standard transformer at 1200cps
then he runs his BiTT at 3200cps.

Also look at Thane's demos at 60hz showing the proper phase angles and effects. If the effects are there all that is left to do is vary the frequency and tune with caps.

Look at Mr Clean's videos his best experiment running pulse DC is at 2900cps.

You must be to high. Use and air gap to ensure that saturation does not persist and lower frequencies with tuning caps for the lower ranges. Start at 250hz and find the effects at every frequency.

I know it is a long drawn out documentation to do so many frequencies and cap resonant tunings. In almost every frequency range there will be positive results yet not optimum.

For instance at 1000cps the BiTT may increase in efficiency over the 120cps setting and so on til we get to 5000cps.

If ultra high frequency operation is desired such as 200,000cps then yes i would say go for the exotic high cost custom cores. The design energineers at ALPHA DIRECT can calculate both costs and core material changes.

I think the expense out weighs the benefits.

These are my personal viewpoints on the subject.

I need to find some carbon resistors as well. It seems like all I can find are 1 watt carbon for the largest size.

Hang in there, this stuff requires all of your experience and then some. Thanks to guys like Dog-One gathering facts from Bill,Jim,Paul we can keep from drowning in wonder.

They are on our side, on the side of the average Joe experimenter.


This is our advantage. Thanks Guys

Mikey

[BroMikey]

Iron Cores

I don't think the guy that produced the video that I referenced is a disinformation agent at all. He is reporting the same results that I have seen.
Dave

The guy has IRON for a core in every square inch of his Transformer.

I think we need to stop right here, because to jump over this detail, speaking of this other guys iron core in the same light as a ferrO cube is like saying marshmallows and white rubber balls are pretty close to the same thing.

If we are not going to establish the foundation for this work then others will be mislead. I can't stress the significance of core material as specified by the inventor first and of course so many other highly intelligent individuals using that principle to recreate their own version.

I understand the way the mind works when reviewing video content in the privacy of the mind. Looking back I think some will confuse data put forth by replicators of the BiTT/SFT2.

Make no mistake, thane has never one, I repeat NEVER ONCE used an all iron core to demo his Bi-Toroid. In standard 60hz mode we see a possibility that the primary MAY use a less permeable core material such as iron but this is never declared and even if it is said to be iron in the primary the other portion or the bulk of the complete core material is of a higher permeability.


So now that we have established that the nice well meaning guy in the video has the wrong setup, how can we call it the same?

And then say we get all the same results from a completely different material.

Look at the recent video I just posted with the JLN BiTT. He turns it over so we can see the bottom. That material used in the secondaries is NOT and iron core. Look at the primary. Look at the material. The first thing our minds say is that the primary MUST be a transformer with the top bar cut off so it is open to attack to the secondaries.

So we assume that it is an iron core for the primary and since it is a low resistance flux path fits the design criteria. This is a false assumption. JLN Labs has a primary core material that is rewrapped with 3-4 times as much wire till it looks like it is going to burst.

Look at it. Why did he put so much wire on that core. Why does it take so much more wire to the point that the entire spool of a single coil takes up the same room as a secondary and primary normally takes up? Why?

Sound familiar? The reason why is that the core material is not pure iron as we may have to quickly concluded. Gaps also help high frequency switching so how in the world is WHTS HIS NAME going to gap his IRON transformer?

How is an IRON transformer the same as THANE's core material?

A statement like this shows that we do not understand the experiment. Even the best of us make blunders like this.

We must follow the instructions of the core material and NEVER compare IRON cores with our setups. They are not going to respond the same way.

Mikey

[BroMikey]

Design Guide

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...KphJww&cad=rja

[Web000x]

@Dave

Did you replace your wire wound resistor with a carbon type. And did you loose your phase angle? Time for tuning? What happened?

Mikey

I don't think the guy that produced the video that I referenced is a disinformation agent at all. He is reporting the same results that I have seen.

I'm using 10 - 1 Ohm carbon resistors in parallel to get 0.1 Ohm of resistance. This greatly reduces any stray inductance. As I perform power calculations for various loads at various frequencies, I always seem to fall short of 100% efficiency. This could be for any number of reasons. My cores might not be good for this, my coil impedances might not be correct, improper load matching, or not operating at the optimum magnetizing force. All of these things could play a critical role in why I am not seeing anything. However, I've tried varying these parameters with my 3r1 cores and haven't seen it make much of a difference. I always see an increased positive power factor when I load the transformer. The closer to impedance matched the load is, the more power it draws from the primary. I have yet to see my phase shift be unaffected between a loaded and unloaded secondary.

I was looking back through some BiTT videos last night and noticed that most of the replications, that show the phase shift remain stable for loaded and unloaded, are using a much higher inductance primary than that of the secondaries. Currently, I'm following Bill's line of logic where my primary is of a small inductance compared to the large inductance of the secondaries. Maybe this will be a new avenue for me that proves to be fruitful.

Dave

[BroMikey]

Mind The Gap And Improve Your Low-Power Flyback Transformer Design | Energy content from Electronic Design




Mind The Gap And Improve Your Low-Power Flyback Transformer Design
Dec 13, 2009 Glen Cotant | Electronic Design

[BroMikey]

Specific Tuning

Taking with Paul and Jim the other night, two things we need to investigate:

1. The air gap in the cores.

2. The optimum load.


Both of these guys are hot to look into this device. They both see the similarities to the SERPS device and feel this may be the avenue to pursue to give us the same effect without all the switching electronics.

The concept Jim mentioned relates a motor/generator with a transformer and he knows how to make a motor be only a motor and a generator be only a generator. The concept is directly applicable to a transformer as well.

I need to get winding coils...

Hey Dog-One

The thing is with putting gaps in your C-core is you get less current draw first and second is faster reversals? Well I don't know why but this gap is found when I take all of my flyback cores out. And it crossed my mind then as I removed the cores from their natural habitat why isn't someone giving gap information? Of course I just caulked it up to those skilled in the arts would know this.

@Everyone Thanks for the reminder

In a standard Tv the flyback C-cores use gaps to enhance switching is my guess.


Here is someone else talking


"A forward-topology transformer doesn't need any gap since the peak flux density is a function of the applied volt-seconds only; the power being delivered 'through' the transformer isn't a variable (other than its effect on duty cycle). It's only the magnetizing current that moves the core along its hysteresis loop, which doesn't pose any saturation risk if everything is well-designed, since the primary and secondary ampere-turns cancel each other out.

A flyback transformer doesn't have the ampere-turn cancellation benefit of a forward converter, so the entire 12LI2 primary energy moves the core up its hysteresis curve. The air gap flattens the hysteresis curve and allows more energy handling by decreasing the permeability of the core. You will of course need to add more turns to get your desired inductance compared to no-gap, but you avoid core saturation."