Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8  (Read 691274 times)

Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5884
Re: The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8
« Reply #1020 on: April 16, 2014, 05:10:42 AM »
Also, one of the key workings is the inner core of the secondary. When the primary flux level is able to penetrate the shield, that flux continues one to be attracted to the sec inner core, in which the flux induces current in the sec along the way.  Then the sec flux, because it is carrying current now, is suppose to be mostly if not all attracted to the inner core and not affecting the primary like a normal transformer does. Once the inner core contains a combination of flux from bot the pri and sec, it has to be able to contain all that flux to avoid saturation. So the sec loading also need to be of a particular value also, 'for a particular build', so as to not produce to much flux as to bring the inner core close to or beyond saturation. Your inner core looks of good size to work with decent power levels. ;)   Let the core be with you. ;D   The thickness of the shielding, and material used, determines how much input needed to break through the shield to get to the inner core, as the shield needs a certain amount of input for the primary flux to saturate it. And any power input beyond that point of saturation(rising ac sine voltage and current in the primary) the additional flux beyond that point then passes through to the inner core. So thin shield, less input to get correct phase shift, and thick shield, more input to get the same phase shift. ;)

So first adjust your input for phase correction, then start adding load. Increase the load until there is a phase difference then back off on the load till phase is back to max shift and that will be the target input and output for your particular build. ;)   

I have to look back and see, its been a while, but I believe you want your input limiter to be resistive(toaster). Not sure if a toaster has much inductance to affect the primary or circuit response overall much.  That is a resistive limiter if not using a controllable ac input.

Mags

Real Boots

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 37
Re: The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8
« Reply #1021 on: April 16, 2014, 06:36:45 AM »
mags;
I used a variac on input, cannot see any phase shift of significance from primary to secondary, adjust variac till I see 120vac on load.  Tried single 60w bulb as well and still got power factor very close to 1.
Could my shield be too thin for 60hz?  Shield is 3 plates thick of about 1mm thick steel insulated between plates to reduce eddy losses. 
-boots

dieter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 938
Re: The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8
« Reply #1022 on: April 16, 2014, 11:50:13 PM »
You call it shield, but isn't it more of a core? And for a core, yes, 3mm seems too little. I have experienced undesired effects in using thin elements for inductive flux guide. You may try to add some layers on top, tho, not funny to rewind that outside coil.


Can you try to run the prim. in series and /or parallel with a cap of high capacitance? would be interesting to see possible changes in the PF.


Regards


Real Boots

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 37
Re: The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8
« Reply #1023 on: April 17, 2014, 03:49:19 AM »
Mags;
So I read over your response and fired this thing up again with load attached but very small input current and like 5vac on the primary.  Adjusted variac on input till I saw the max phase shift(30deg).  Put 3.3ohm resistor on load due to low out volts and phase from primary voltage to secondary voltage increases to about 35deg however input current also rises.  Definitely no over unity on this the way it is right now but phase shift increase when lower resistance is added to secondary is interesting.  Will try and see if I can find a constant current on secondary sweet spot by trying varying load resistances.  Tesla mentioned two features in the patent, one being phase shift from primary to secondary and the other being constant secondary current when it's setup certain way. 
Dieter;
The outer shell is a core but from what I understand it is a shield to delay the flux from entering the secondary not high flux carrying like the inner core.  Problem I was seeing is that at high flux on primary the shield wasn't shielding hardly at all, need to lower primary flux to see shield effect apparently. 
-boots

Real Boots

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 37
Re: The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8
« Reply #1024 on: April 17, 2014, 05:45:26 AM »
Lower resistance load on secondary gives more phase shift but lower total output power as the output volts drops with input at 6-7vac while input power and current goes up.  Without any load on secondary there is no phase shift to be found on this build so far. 
-boots

Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5884
Re: The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8
« Reply #1025 on: April 17, 2014, 06:55:45 AM »
Sorry Rb, I just got in from work a bit ago and was posting in another thread last night late.

Your shell, is it insulated like the shell described, where the bottom half is not electrically connected to the top half?

gots to showa.  Mags dirty. Work Work work work work.  I tell ya, Im 48 and recent years Ive had pain in my hands(joints), wrists, right knee, and more recently for months, my lower back. And neck sometimes. 

Started drinking raw milk a month and a half ago. 2 gal in that period. not a lot.  All the pains I described are gone, nill, nuttin, nada.  ALL gone.  ;) Inflamation. And non pasteurized milk has live enzimes and bacteria that fight inflammation.  My buddy has been telling me about this for over a year, and now, Im a believer.  To be able to bend down and pick something up without blurting Oooo OHHhh, or just ride my bike and the wrists ache. Squeezing a pair of pliers only as hard as the pain would let me. And then being able to do it all again really takes some getting used to after years of unconsciously training my self for limits of what I could do before maximum, or even minimum pain levels.

I didnt realize it all at first. I was at work and I was squeezing my fists for some odd reason and noticed I was doing it. Then I realized I could squeeze way tighter than I have been for some years now.  And when I put it all together, I realized all of them were gone. A very strange feeling to have. Like a miracle really. here one day gone the next, and still gone later?   ;) ;)

And energy levels through the roof. Like being in the 20s again. No joke.  I may just have more time for this stuff now cuz it doesnt take me long to get the necessities done now.  Not that  felt like doing much of anything if I didnt have to. :(

If interested, find some organic farm stores in your area and see if they have it. If so, they got raw butter, yogurt and the buttermilk is gone before you see it come in. ;) But the milk is the one to do.

Had a thyroid problem for over 8 years. Like half a peach on the right side of the adams apple. A few months ago, I started taking selenium, in a month and a half I noticed it some what smaller. 2 weeks later just noticeable. Now just a small tiny itty bitty, cant see it but can feel it just a bit. ;D

I thought at first it was the magnesium because I started that just before the shrinking began. But I looked them up on a very cool vitamin site, and for selenium, it only said thyroid, magnesium no thyroid listed. 

I took 2 weeks off of the selenium and it came back. Started taking it again, nada bump. lol

5 bucks sundown naturals.

My friend I have known for a couple years asked me recently what happened to it. I told her and she said her cousin is worse than mine was and was going to tell her about it. like clockwork, a month and a half later noticeable difference, and 2 weeks later her doctor said they didnt understand it.  ::)   My friend also has 3 other family members, all with lumpy thyroid and they are now recovering also, I cant say its actually recovering, but it is a fix if you  take the selenium at least every other day after max shrinkage.

Some may say, Mags, 8 years?  Did you go to the doctor?   lol, My friends family members have been being treated for it for years and they were worse than I was before he started the selenium.
So no. I didnt see a doctor for it. ;)

Sorry for the health stuff.  I just wanted to share as many even younger people get these afflictions and these things I have presented are real and I highly recommend them. 

The raw milk was a monster for me.  In a way, I have been partially debilitated with the hand, knee and back pains and just living with it. I can literally bust out 10 squats without a wimper. lol
 But the hands and back were more in the way of doing things like putting on socks and shoes, getting up from a chair, etc.


Mags

Real Boots

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 37
Re: The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8
« Reply #1026 on: April 17, 2014, 02:39:59 PM »
Mags;
Good to hear about the raw milk, makes total sense to me as all milk contains mothers immunity, that is how all mammals develop their young's immune system with passive immunity through milk which would probably be burnt up In Pasteurization.  My sister would freak on me though as she is health inspector, problem is in mass distribution where you need to pasteurize it to kill bugs that get in there from everything related to mass production.  Almost need your own cow but not really an option for city people. 

In regards to the test last night, I am wondering how the heck others got any phase shift at all with such small cores and thin shells as per the start of this thread.  I read this entire thread before beginning this project, pretty darn confused at this point and starting to wonder if some posters were trying to deceive or not take proper measurement data. 
-boots

dieter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 938
Re: The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8
« Reply #1027 on: April 18, 2014, 07:24:21 AM »
It may however be, that certain devices need a certain load to run 90° deg out of phase, but do consume current without load. You can still use such a system to eg. load batteries, or pump up water or other weights to store energy in gravity (for a gravity motor).


If phase shift is what you're after, then check this out:



 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Hr2C1vvvx4

Seems to be the real deal. Makes me think of a circuit that adjusts the capacity automaticly, to get a 90° phase shift with any load.... hmm...

Regards



PS. milk rocks  8) . Lotsa vitamin A and C.

gyulasun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4117
Re: The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8
« Reply #1028 on: April 18, 2014, 02:52:52 PM »

...
If phase shift is what you're after, then check this out:



 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Hr2C1vvvx4

Seems to be the real deal. Makes me think of a circuit that adjusts the capacity automaticly, to get a 90° phase shift with any load.... hmm...
...

Hi Dieter,

Sorry to "chime in", but I wonder whether you have noticed gotoluc's comment made under his video abt 3 months ago?  It turns out that 2 different things  'joked' him.  This is his comment under his video you gave the link above:

"To all who have not been following the forum topic at Overunity .com?... user id poynt99 has identified an error in my scope settings. I was using AC coupling for my power measurements when it should be set at DC coupling. I'm not the only one that was doing this.Two other experimenters said they were doing the same thing. I've since re-tested everything with the scope on DC coupling and I now see no real power gain or advantages in the circuit as when I was first testing with AC coupling. There is a big difference in results from AC to DC coupling as far as scope math is concerned.
It's also clear that a plug in meter cannot calculate a 90 degrees phase shift power correctly. So results using just that need to be questioned.

As for my generator tests, even though they had no effect on the gen prime mover the energy source has been identified by user id TinMan that it was a transfer of power from the gens exciter field to the load and which by coincidence had no effect on the prime mover.
So two different things happening which made the results look good but now look like there is no real power gain after all.
Maybe reactive power can be used to an advantage if you had a circuit which would use the return cap discharges (at 45 degree) and convert it to mechanical power (like I thought my generator was doing) or shore it in a battery. But none of this is happening if using single phase grid or gen. A 90 degrees phase shift for the single phase grid is like a short circuit and the wires just heat up.

That's where things are at this time. Sorry if you were not informed. In the future it would be best to use the link to the forum topic which are in the about tab under all my videos.  This way you would be the most up to date with the research.
All the best in your experiments.   Luc"

Gyula

Real Boots

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 37
Re: The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8
« Reply #1029 on: April 18, 2014, 05:35:22 PM »
If I can get ou I will make it usefull even if it's 10mw I will find a way to scale it up I promise you.  For now I would be happy to replicate a useful version of what tesla described. 
That video does stress what I think is happening to most people who think they have found ou however, "measurement error" is our enemy, we must make all efforts to debunk our own builds in order to really see what is going on.  False info in the form of measurement error is bad for everyone.  Even if an experiment doesn't have the nice result you are hoping for if you take proper measurements it is not a waste of time!  A negative result is still a result! 
For my little project shown above I am debating whether or not to rip off the primary and add more shell, can add another 1mm to shell thickness but it would be a pain in the butt for sure as the 2 spare plates I have left for top and bottom are not cutout yet and would be another session of jigsaw and tin snip hell for sure. 
I have also been thinking about another idea as well, what do you all think about a 3 core gabby?  Inner toroid with output coil wrapped in magnetic shield as per tesla patent, then a second coil shorted possibly around that magnetic shell, then an outer shell and the primary around the outer shell?  If indeed we can get phase shift through each shell then we may be able to double the phase shift in such a way? 
-boots

dieter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 938
Re: The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8
« Reply #1030 on: April 18, 2014, 08:18:09 PM »
Boots,


You may try that, but it sounds like a lot of work. Basicly, in a transformer the phase shift is in 90° when there is no load. What does that mean? A load means we let the current flow in the secondary. Only then it causes the opposing magnetic field. This field or flow will force the primary in 0° phase IF IT REACHES THE PRIMARY. At this point, we have to confess that science  does not fully understand induction yet (just like gravity): the core does arrange the magnetic flux, practicly absorbs any surrounding "fieldlines", so why in the world should those field lines have any impact on the copper in the secondary at all, they never get close! (see also Dollard lectures about this subject). My intuitive interpretation is: They don't. The magnetic field does not cause the current directly, but when the atomic structure is released from the magnetic field, they snap back to their basic equilibrium and this motion causes a pulse of a certain mysterious, yet unknown energy or radiation  that kicks asses of surrounding copper electrons. This explains why a current is induced only when the magnetical field changes. Very intuitive  8) .


Basicly, we just have to care about the opposite field, or Back MMF. We need something like a magnetical diode.


Heins approach was, to offer a big outer core to the BMMF, so it won't fight the MMF of the primary. You said, it didn't work, ok. I also still see a problem in that design, because the BMMF like any MMF wants to close a loop, but faces a like pole from the other secondary and cannot effectively close that loop. It may be better to use only one secondary, as seen in early Heins designs.


I think for the Gabriel device the same principle applies. Trap the BMMF in a seperate core, but don't let the Forward MMF use that seperate core to skip the secondary coils. Be aware of airgaps, even thin insulations or uneven surfaces, act as a substancial barrier to the magnetical flux, so you should isolate only the top of the plate, as thin as possible.


This may be the basic philosophy you have to follow, separate the BMMF from the primary flux. knowing that the BMMF appears only during field changes, which means in a AC transformer at the primary peak voltages there is NO BMMF, but as the wave rises or sinks, there is most BMMF, so while the primary voltage AND field is zero, the BMMF is fully active.


Gyulasun,


well that's bad news. Clearly, those who read are in advantage  :-[ .


But I have to say, I am having problems with this explanation. Scope needs DC coupling? The hole thing in every aspect is about AC, so why DC coupling? But ok, but then the mover/exiter energized the alternator coincedently? Come on. (not losing speed on load is fundamental) Maybe it was just Lucs Belief that was lost on the run and this altered reality on a omnidimensional quantum space level? Or Luc was replaced by a naysaying Android made in Langley  8) . kidding.
I hear your words, but I have to say, I've heard this before and I personally made successful tests: You can bring your current out of phase with caps and yet consume energy from the circuit. I was even capable of getting more output than without phase shift, so to me this chapter is not yet closed.


Theoreticly, when you feed a transformer with a +90° current, then it should run with a 0° phase unloaded, but with a +90° current when fully loaded.
Whether this is free energy or just tricking the power company is an other question tho.


Regards

Real Boots

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 37
Re: The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8
« Reply #1031 on: April 19, 2014, 05:46:45 PM »
Dieter;
I am starting to think the concept of flux is flawed and not reflective of what is going on.  I measure the inductance of my primary and it is something like 100mh but keeps dropping on the meter with secondary open cct.  When I short the secondary it immediately drops to the 4 to 5 mH range.  This tells me that no matter the magnitude of the primary current there is immediate reflection into primary to cause the current to rise when load is applied. 
The interesting thing I am seeing is that when you overload the secondary with very light primary mmf ( 6 vac) the secondary goes further out of phase.  In normal transfo the two should get closer in phase when load is applied. 
There is still reflection here as primary current does rise much more than what is phase shifted.  In fact power measurements show it eats much more energy than secondary produces in this condition. 
The flux concept must be flawed, perhaps we need to think of this as not field lines themselves but as applied field gradients following the natural curvature in space time that must be created along its own axis by the presence of the high perm material itself(iron core and steel shield)? 
Starting to think the iron has virtual field lines that become real as applied field fills the iron, that is why my inductance meter sees secondary core and not shielded as you may expect by the outer core.
With the design I chose to build it is possible to thicken the shell, i may need to do this to get further useful data to see what difference and trends we see.
-boots

AquariuZ

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 645
Re: The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8
« Reply #1032 on: April 19, 2014, 08:56:58 PM »
What happened to user Mavendex?

Looks like he pretty much proven the concept here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rt5Mjau_Ehk

So where is he?
Why no new videos?

Last post two years ago he said he wanted to scale up.

dieter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 938
Re: The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8
« Reply #1033 on: April 19, 2014, 09:35:47 PM »
Boots,


I totally agree about the "fieldlines" being a simplification, mainly invented to allow for simple 2D illustration in school books. When you watch a ferromagnetofluid in action, it becomes more clear how the field interacts.


I prefer the term "magnetical vector" instead of field, because it isn't just a field, but a force and a direction. On the ferromagnetic side it is an anomaly in gravity. Probably more mysterious is the electroinductive property. The elementary magnets in eg. iron, as they are called, the tiny partical features, are then elementary magnet vectors. Chaoticly aligned in the matter.  As a magnetical vector may also use air, the elementary magnet vectors EMV must be a feature of a particle that can be found in any matter, most likely part of the proton or electron or both. In ferromagnetic matter this feature must be highly increased, which we may consider being a useful marker in order to understand the processes.


Additionally there seems to be almost something like intelligence when a path can be closed. The magnetical path acts like a jetstream trough matter, including air, but especially iron. "Don't seek no longer, we have found the path!" seem the EMVs on the path to say to the other ones, and indeed, they relax and go into their chaotical equilibrium, while in the jetstream every available EMV is drafted to be aligned with the macro vector.


Got to eat my dinner before it's burned, so... to be continued...

dieter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 938
Re: The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8
« Reply #1034 on: April 20, 2014, 12:13:17 AM »
continuing...
So this jetstream between north and south is probably what Ledskalnin meant by "Magnetical Current".


The saturation of a core seems to be the result of a copper coil, being able to transfer its area of impact from its own atoms to the core mass, which indicates that EMV activity is not bound to the atoms of the coil itself, but to the "radiant radiation"  8)  of the coil, that is not magnetism by itself, but is cumulated in surrounding permeability peak areas. This explains jetstreams, at least partially.


There may be a reverse mechanism, where EMV activity in a core causes an Anti radiation that is able to cumulate in nearby matter of high electrical conductivity and finally causes electron charge separation, known as induction. Both processes may run simultanously.
Well, there's a lot of things to learn and to understand.


Your measurement of inductance seems to be fine when you consider that a small current is sent trough the probes. The shell does not shield because the secondary picks up the magnetism and forwards it to the inner core. I bet in the inner core the MMF is out of phase.


Nonetheless, the primary can see the inner core because first of all coupling is fine, and second of all  the probe current is extremly small, so any BMMF can easily build a parallel path to the MMF path in the same core part. At least I think so.


Having losses as you described could be due to eddy currents, but since we are playing with the phase shift you should also keep an eye on the unloaded phase to see if it dissipates due to an angle other than 90°, and, if you like, try to push it to +90° or -90° with a cap in series, to see if it makes any diffrence.


Regards