The reactive sink experiment

  • 521 Views
  • Last Post 25 January 2019
cd_sharp posted this 16 January 2019

Hi, friends,

Following the advice from my buddy, Chris, I am giving this effect a name and I'm starting to study it closer.

This is the basic circuit schema ( I didn't add the protection components just to keep it simple ):

The "good" ferrite core is 3C90.

The big coil core is made up of laminations from a standard 50Hz transformer.

The circular "bad" coil core is some ferrite from a SMPS from what I remember.

I'd very much like to find out why only the 3C90 ferrite shows this effect that I name RS (Reactive Sink) effect.

Here is an older experiment using a radio ferrite core:

Thanks, CD

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
Chris posted this 16 January 2019

Hey CD,

Awesome Thread!

How does the Space Flux Coupled Alternator appear to operate beyond unity? An approximate analogy, not by any means perfect, is as follows:

Picture a side-wheel paddle steam boat making its way down stream in the same direction as a fairly strong tidal flow. Assume the steam engine to be highly efficient, say 80%. Now assume the engine to be working at this efficiency and that the tidal energy integrates with that of the engine in propelling the ship. The acceleration increases to a point where the horsepower increases beyond that equivalent energy consumed by the engine. If one were not aware of the tidal flow energy integrated with that of the consumed energy, one would conclude the engine efficiency was greater than unity. This is hypothetical. As the momentum of the tide relates only to the mass of the steamboat’s displacement of the medium, water. Actually if the forward momentum of the tide was able to relate only to the paddle wheel the forward or positive force would tend to force the wheel to turn in the opposite or negative direction.

Then in the hypothetical case, the force of the tide on the mass of the ship would equal the force acting on the paddle wheel and the ship would be motionless. In order to move in the forward direction, the engine would need to overcome the negative force of the tide on the wheel. Little engine hp would be needed, as it would integrate with the positive flow of the tide, acting on the displacement mass of the ship. The above is not achievable in practice, as the only way the tide could relate to the paddle wheel in such a manner, the mass of the ship would have to be completely out of the water and only the wheel within the flow of the tide would turn, as the momentum of the flow of the tide would not be in effect. This is reactive power – no work is done. The wheel turns but the ship is motionless. Conversely, if this were a possibility, then a ship moving against a strong tide, would be able to traverse a river without either engine of sail, by means of the force of a moving mass of water against the wheel paddles. As stated, the force of the mass of water flowing against the displacement mass of the ship predominantly opposes the positive motion of the ship. The analogy though far from perfect, suggests that if one were not aware of the visible force acting on the movement of the ship, at times, assuming all parameters were measurable, the indication might be that the engine was capable of greater than unity efficiency.

In the case of the Space Flux Coupled machine, there is no visible entity. It’s abstract. A steady state coherent force is present when brought under the influence of the electromagnetic controllable forces. It returns to an incoherent state when the initiating magnetic forces are absent (except in the case of a permanent magnet).

Ref: Floyd Sweet - The Space-Flux Coupled Alternator

 

The word Integrated, or variants of it, the number if times it is used, the Water Current is the Magnets.

   Chris

Zanzal posted this 17 January 2019

Thank you for sharing, it is a very interesting idea, I'll try incorporating it into future experiments and will let you know if I discover anything.

cd_sharp posted this 17 January 2019

@Chris, you are wise, my friend. So now we can understand that the paddle is L2 and since L1 is not inside the magnetic field, it is "out of the water". So, the ship (L1) is in the air, the paddle (L2) is in the water and the paddle is turned by the tide (magnetic field) against the flow of the stream, thus moving the ship forward with the stream.

The displacement mass would be the number of turns on L2. That's why if I put too many turns on L2 it "displaces" too much, it's "heavier" than the ship (L1).

Still sleeping on this, it's hard to picture everything and how it relates to EM induction and Lenz's Law.

Thanks guys. I'll keep researching as time permits.

cd_sharp posted this 18 January 2019

Friends, here are some more experiments. The basic circuit schema is:

Yellow is the current trace, blue is the voltage over the timing capacitor. The capacitor switches close to the current peak.

Chris posted this 18 January 2019

CD, your Experiments are very important!

I do wish others here would participate a little more! I know people get busy but imagine if all here joined in, sharing, goodness knows we humans need it!

Superb Work My Friend! You are a genius!

   Chris

  • Liked by
  • cd_sharp
  • Wistiti
cd_sharp posted this 18 January 2019

Let me add a correction. The yellow probe is against the flow of current, so I inverted the trace. This is the correct current trace.

I wonder if I can sniff the peak current better with another capacitor.

@Chris, buddy, I enjoy so much this "peak current" chase. Thanks, man!

Chris posted this 18 January 2019

Hey CD,

My Friend you have set a bar very high in your work! This is fantastic! Thanks for sharing!

   Chris

Atti posted this 19 January 2019

Hey CD.

Excellent work!

You know, however, that inductive resistance is reduced by the space of a permanent magnet. If you shorten L2 with a wire, how much voltage will you get? And how much do you measure with a permanent magnet?

  • Liked by
  • Vidura
  • Chris
cd_sharp posted this 19 January 2019

@Atti,

that inductive resistance is reduced by the space of a permanent magnet

what an excellent statement. We don't see any "inductive resistance" due to the magnet. In the last experiment L2 is made of 0.2 mm enameled copper wire (very thin, high resistance). Only the ends of it are made of thicker wire to be able to insert it into the bread board.

We expect the magnet to add to the impedance by decreasing the permeability of the core (partially saturating it). But we see the duty factor increases when L2 is inside the field. So, the thinner the wire, the stronger effect we see from the magnet.

Here are some older experiments showing that NdFeB magnets do not have any effect on the current flowing through L2:

If you shorten L2 with a wire, how much voltage will you get?

The standard calculated from Ohms Law.

And how much do you measure with a permanent magnet?

Having enough turns but not too many in L2, the entire input current equivalent moves through L2 and the load. It's something I double checked years ago. I did not measure any noticeable gains. In other words, we have a coil without resistance and with tiny reactance depending very much on the number of turns.

I guess you know what's missing from the setup: POC and timing.

Jagau posted this 19 January 2019

well done CD

Thank's to share

Jagau

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Chris posted this 19 January 2019

Hey CD,

If I may ask, adding a small switch across the Coil L2:

 

 

being affected by the magnets, does this change the light on LA1 between switch open and closure?

   Chris

cd_sharp posted this 20 January 2019

I did the experiment on the current setup and yes, the light is stronger when the switch is closed. The entire reactive current flows through LA1. Also, the magnet does not have any effect because the current avoids flowing through L2.

Switch open:

Switch closed:

 

From previous experiments I'm confident that having the right number of turns on L2 causes also the entire reactive current to flow through LA1 without a switch. It's just a matter of experimentation and measurements.

This is like the correct number of turns reduces the impedance of L2 to 0.

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Chris posted this 20 January 2019

Hey CD,

More testing will be required, to confirm, but I think we are seeing a Saturable Reactor here.

 

This tech is an old tech, it has many implications!

   Chris

  • Liked by
  • cd_sharp
cd_sharp posted this 20 January 2019

Hey, buddy,

Let me add something I can remember from a few years ago when I experimented this deeply. I am so sorry I did not take any photo.

I used a big 3C90 ferrite I126 (I think) with the same exact circuit:

First I wound the wire directly on the core, powered the circuit and took an eye reading of the intensity of the light and power consumption.

Then I unfolded the wire and I wound a thick paper layer all around the core so as to dramatically decrease the inductance of the coil (L2) I would wind over the paper.

Next, over the paper layer I wound the L2 wire with the same number of turns as in the previous case and it had much lower inductance than would have had if I wound it directly on the core. This was expected.

Then I powered the circuit and I noticed approximately the same eye reading intensity and the same power consumption on the DC source as in the first case.

I concluded that this effect is the property of the space between the magnets (like Floyd said) and not related to the distance between the winding and the core. In other words it doesn't have to do with the inductance, but it has to do with the number of turns in L2 that are inside the field.

I'm very sorry I didn't take records except my memory.

I ordered an ACS712 and until I receive it I can repeat this experiment if you think it's worth it. Please let me know, buddy!

I understood what is a saturable reactor. If the above experiment is true do you think it's the same phenomenon?

Is that in the above video an AC source?

  • Liked by
  • Chris
  • Aetherholic
Chris posted this 20 January 2019

Hey CD,

I cant be sure, but a process of elimination will help figure out what's going on.

When the small core saturates, the Coil becomes a resistor and not an inductor. If shorting the resistor shows more energy in the secondary pulse, effectively by passing the Resistor, then its fairly sure its a Saturable Reactor.

But I urge you to make sure, eliminate my observation or prove it to be right I guess?

All Experiments are important! If we can learn anything, then its important!

   Chris

  • Liked by
  • cd_sharp
  • Aetherholic
cd_sharp posted this 21 January 2019

Hey, Chris,

Here is the experiment with the switch, this time I reversed the coils. L1 has greater resistance (diameter of 0.2 millimeters wire) and L2 wire is 0.6 mm in diameter. I can only think that the impedance goes to zero.

There is also the spike which I guess is because of saturation, that shows up when closing the switch.

Otherwise there is no visible difference between case with switch closed and case switch open but magnets added.

  • Liked by
  • Chris
  • Zanzal
Chris posted this 21 January 2019

Hey CD,

Excellent experiments! I agree, the Magnets appear to be acting as a Switch. Effectively switching the Coils Inductance to zero because of Saturation. A Saturable Reactor.

Good detective work My Friend!

   Chris

  • Liked by
  • cd_sharp
Chris posted this 25 January 2019

CD and other readers,

I would like to emphasize the worthwhileness of on going exploration in these experiments!

Working up around the Knee of the BH Curve can have benefits.

We must realise, the BH Curve:

 

 

Also known as the Hysteresis Curve is an Energy State above that of Equilibrium, above Zero on the below Plot:

 

 

Ref: Magnetic Hysteresis

 

Magnetic energy and electric energy are related by Maxwell's equations. The potential energy of a magnet of magnetic moment m in a magnetic field B is defined as the mechanical work of the magnetic force (actually magnetic torque) on the re-alignment of the vector of the Magnetic dipole moment and is equal to:

Ep,m = − m ⋅ B

while the energy stored in an inductor ( of inductance L ) when a current I flows through it is given by:

Ep,m = 1/2 LI2 

This second expression forms the basis for superconducting magnetic energy storage. Energy is also stored in a magnetic field. The energy per unit volume in a region of space of permeability μ0 containing magnetic field B is:

u = 1/2 B2 / μ0

More generally, if we assume that the medium is paramagnetic or diamagnetic so that a linear constitutive equation exists that relates B and H, then it can be shown that the magnetic field stores an energy of

E = 1/2 ∫ H ⋅ B dV

where the integral is evaluated over the entire region where the magnetic field exists.

Ref: Magnetic Energy

 

 

Energy is stored in the Magnetic Field, this is straightforward, most of us know these experimental proofs. The Inductive Spike experiments of John Bedini and so on. As you have shown in this Thread.

So, Saturation is an Energy state above the Zero graticule line on the plot:

 

Saturation occurs because as we remember from the previous Magnetism tutorial which included Weber’s theory, the random haphazard arrangement of the molecule structure within the core material changes as the tiny molecular magnets within the material become “lined-up”.

As the magnetic field strength, ( H ) increases these molecular magnets become more and more aligned until they reach perfect alignment producing maximum flux density and any increase in the magnetic field strength due to an increase in the electrical current flowing through the coil will have little or no effect.

Ref: BH Curve

 

Some core materials hold Residual Flux or Remanence.

A closed Core will not release Flux in most cases, for example Ed Leedskalnin PMH. A Gap is required to allow the movement of Flux. Raselli1's Channel ( www.youtube.com /user/Raselli1/videos ) is worth a look for more information.

Floyd Sweet's Magnets were in the order of around 800 Gauss - I believe he did have partial Cores, I also believe they were bought up, around the knee of the BH Curve.

 

Please see, these two images are related, H is strength, B is Density, we must see Newtons: What goes up, must come back down.

 

So I would like to encourage more work on this experiment!

   Chris

  • Liked by
  • Zanzal
  • cd_sharp
Zanzal posted this 25 January 2019

So I would like to encourage more work on this experiment!

I agree, there is more here worth exploring. I think similar to the permanent magnets would be to have a winding on a core which is fed a constant DC current. It should have the same effect but be more compatible with toroidal core geometries. Now if the same effect is known to be achieved using electric power or using permanent magnets that relationship could prove beneficial. A current is easy to control and vary the strength so it lends itself to studying both the effect and the effect it changes with saturation level. For me then I'll be looking at it more from that angle when I get more time to experiment.

Chris posted this 25 January 2019

Zanzal is correct!

I quoted Floyd Sweet above, remember the "Integration" of the Water's Flow to the Paddle Wheel.

Perhaps another quote:

The essence of the effect lies in the fact that the addition of electromagnetic fields (constants and variables) are added no energy, and the field amplitude. The field energy is proportional to the square of the amplitude of the total electromagnetic field. As a result, the simple addition of the energy fields of the total field can be many times the energy of the initial fields separately. This property of the electromagnetic field is non-additivity of the energy field. For example, when added to a stack of three flat circular permanent magnet energy of the total magnetic field is increased to nine times! A similar process occurs with the addition of electromagnetic waves in the feeder lines and resonance systems. Total energy of a standing electromagnetic wave can be many times greater than the energy of waves and the electromagnetic field to add. As a result, the total energy of the system increases.

Ref: Andrey Melnichenko - Transgeneratsiya Electromagnetic Field Energy

 

I think we see a common theme again, one we have covered many times: Standing Wave

When two Waves Slap together, we can see more than twice the amplitude, this is true!

 

The Thread: Impulse Pressure Wave, particularly Jagau's post in the pdf document on Ferro-Resonance, also describes these effects.

   Chris

  • Liked by
  • Jagau
  • cd_sharp

Support Our Effort

Since Nov 27 2018
Members Online:

No one online at the moment

The great Nikola Tesla:

Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by a power obtainable at any point of the universe. This idea is not novel. Men have been led to it long ago go by instinct or reason. It has been expressed in many ways, and in many places, in the history of old and new. We find it in the delightful myth of Antheus, who drives power from the earth; we find it among the subtle speculations of one of your splendid mathematicians, and in many hints and statements of thinkers of the present time. Throughout space there is energy. Is this energy static or kinetic? If static, our hopes are in vain; if kinetic - and this we know it is for certain - then it is a mere question of time when men will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheelwork of nature.

Experiments With Alternate Currents Of High Potential And High Frequency (February 1892).

Weeks High Earners:
Your Support:

More than anything else, your contributions to this forum are most important! We are trying to actively get all visitors involved, but we do only have a few main contributors, which are very much appreciated! If you would like to see more pages with more detailed experiments and answers, perhaps a contribution of another type maybe possible:

Support Us (PayPal)

The content I am sharing is not only unique, but is changing the world as we know it! Please Support Us!

Support Us (Patreon)

Thank You So Much!

Close