Transformer Turns Ratio

  • Last Post 4 weeks ago
Munny posted this 5 weeks ago

Took me a while to figure this out, but I think I finally got my head wrapped around the concept.

We all "think" we know how transformer turns ratios work right?  Simple stuff, step-up, step-down right, all based on the number of turns for the primary and secondary?  Not so fast though, there's more to it...

Let's take a simple example.  We have a step-up transformer, ten turns primary; 20 turns secondary.  In this configuration the output voltage doubles and the current is cut in half.  If we flip this transformer around and use the secondary as the input and the primary as the output, the voltage is cut in half and the current doubles.  Easy peasy, but why does this happen?

For starters we assume a common core with a single flux path loop for the magnetic field to travel around/through.  This assumption with strong coupling between the coils and core is what makes the numbers work out the way they do.

When we energize a transformer and put our volt meter on the output, we see the maximum EMF the transformer is capable of based on the input.  If we increase the number of secondary turns, the voltage rises.  If we lower the number of secondary turns, the voltage decreases.  It's the voltage that drives things here.  The number of turns becomes a multiplier, since we know each turn contributes a certain portion of the total EMF the transformer outputs.  Voltage is the easy part to this, amperage is where things get interesting...

To even measure amperage, it is assumed we have a closed electrical circuit.  But when we close the circuit on a secondary of a transformer, we do something quite unwanted in the process.  By closing the circuit, the secondary of our transformer begins to produce an opposing magnetic field to our primary.  The question we need to ask is:  How much of an opposing magnetic field?  That my friend comes from how many turns are on the secondary.  If there is only one turn on the secondary and say 100 turns on the primary, the opposing field we produce isn't very strong and does very little to the magnetic field in the core produced by the primary.  But now lets make the secondary have 100 turns, same as the primary.  Now what happens?  Can you see it?  The load we put on the secondary and the number of turns on the secondary is real amp-turns that will be opposing the amp-turns of the primary.  So the current limitation is a direct result of Lenz Law, plain and simple.  By loading our secondary we make the primary become less efficient at producing a magnetic field.  Here lies the problem.  The loading is instantaneous.  The exact moment we load the secondary is the exact moment we clobber the magnetic field produced by the primary.  The more turns we put on the secondary, the worse we make things.

What I want you to comprehend here is this:  The magnetic field produced by the primary is there for the taking, but when we start adding turns to the secondary we destroy this field.  What did Tom Bearden tell us?  "Don't destroy the dipole!"  In other words, don't allow Lenz Law to affect the primary.

So let's imagine we have a mechanical means to prevent any magnetic field produced by the secondary from reaching the primary.  Next, let's put lots of turns on the secondary and, let's use large wire able to handle lots of current.  Splendid right?  What would the obvious characteristic be of this kind of transformer?  I'll give you hint.  This transformer would only pass electrical energy in one direction.  The other thing about this transformer is that it simply would not obey normal transformer turns ratio calculations.  Why?  Well, as we concluded above it's Lenz Law that limits how much energy can push through a conventional transformer.  With this transformer we can step-up the voltage to high levels AND we can have it push a lot of current since the opposing magnetic field never gets back to the primary to weaken the field strength.  Voltage AND current?  Yeah, that's Watts, that's real power.  So I imagine by now you're asking yourself, "Sounds like some kind of impossible magic transformer."  Maybe and maybe not.

Suppose we take two pot-cores, wind as many turns as we can get onto the bobbins for these cores.  Try to use a fairly heavy gauge wire, though it's not all that necessary if we can get the output voltage quite high.  Next, take a pair of C-cores (two make a set) and sandwich the pot-cores between the two C-core halves.  The pot-cores will contain the secondaries.  Then on one or both C-cores we wind the primaries.

The idea here is that the secondaries have their own flux path.  When current is produced in the secondaries, the magnetic field created by this current circulates within the pot-cores and does not get back to the C-cores where the primary flux is circulating.  What you may notice here is that some of the primary flux will leak around the outside of the pot-cores.  This is okay.  It's the flux that goes through the center of the pot-core that will induce a voltage in the secondary windings.  With this concept in mind, let's turn to how we drive this device...

First, think about a normal tank circuit with an inductor and a capacitor.  If we put this tank circuit into resonance we will notice the voltage and current stabilize 90 degrees out of phase.  This is typically classified as reactive power and doesn't cost us much to produce.  However, there is real amperage there and that amperage creates a real magnetic field.  If we take our Anti-Lenz transformer and connect a capacitor to the primary and push it into resonance, magnetic flux will begin to flow in the C-cores and pass through the pot-cores.  The secondaries in the pot-cores will produce a real EMF.  That EMF can drive a real load and regardless of that load, the primary flux will never be impeded.  The phase angle between voltage and current on the primary will stay at 90 degrees, just as though there was no secondary at all.

Yes, I'm theorizing here, but Thane Heins was onto a very similar concept.  His BiToroid Transformer (BiTT) was an attempt to minimize the dreaded Lenz Law.  My concept uses simple off-the-shelf cores and can be stood-up fairly easy as a proof of concept.  Keep in mind this one thing:  If it is possible to get 1 Watt of output power while consuming only 0.9 Watts of input power, we're off to the races...


Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
Chris posted this 5 weeks ago

Hey Munny,

You are on the right track, but not quite right on some areas, or at least to a degree.

There are several things to a Transformer, that needs to be taken into account:

  • Magnetising Current. This is a Loss because it takes Current to push the Core through the Hysteresis Curve. On reasonable size transformer, this can be several watts or more.
  • Input Ampere Turns = Output Ampere Turns minus Losses. Always equal and Opposite no matter turns or load, as soon as a Secondary Current is Drawn.
  • Input Power is equal to Output Power minus Losses. This is because there is a Symmetrical Transfer of Energy, V x I = P over Time. Which means: ( Output  = ( Input - Losses )) = Below Unity.
  • Yes, Turns multiplied by Current is Ampere Turns, which is a Magnetic Field, every time we have a Current Flow we have a Magnetic Field! Always! No matter how little or large the Current or the Turns!
  • A Change of Current is the same as a Change of Magnetic Field, they are one and the same beasts!
  • There is no: "Anti Lenz's Transformer", unless one first of all is to incorporate Asymmetry in the Transformer, and not Symmetry.
  • E.M.F, is entirely Transformable. In other words, B, N, or T, if they change, E.M.F does also and either one can change the E.M.F. In a Transformer, an input Transient can cause an output Transient for example.
  • In a Symmetrical Transformer, Amperage is always, as stated above, equal and opposite Ampere Turns minus Losses, which is always below Unity!
  •  Yes, Turns Ratio is a baseline standard that does work for Transforming Voltage for given parameters. For the same Parameters, Turns is the only way to change E.M.F unless something else changes.


The Secondary always loads the Primary, as soon as you put a Current through these turns! Always! This never changes! Regardless of Turns.

The trick to this technology is to make one of your Output Coils Assist the Input Coil! We have done this already: Here, and many Members have working machines at varying stages. Fighter independently Here. Jagau Here.

The right Understanding is Key to making this work!

Don't give up! This is very important study! Knowing this stuff, and knowing this well, properly, how it really works, is super critical for a base understanding of how to move forward!

Thane Hein's machine, although appearing similar, is a very different machine from what we are working with. The machines are not the same!

I strongly recommend a very good study of Transformers for all interested! A proper understanding in this field will be of immense help to make sure this technology is grasped properly.

True and Correct discovery of the Transformer is Important!

At Other Readers, please add to my post if you think I have missed anything.

Best wishes,


Munny posted this 5 weeks ago

Well dang it.  I thought maybe I was on to something.

Thanks Chris for all the good bullet points.  Back to studying some more...


Chris posted this 5 weeks ago

Hey Munny,

You are defiantly on the right track! Stay on track, you are very close!

Best wishes,


  • Liked by
  • Jagau
  • Mimo
Vidura posted this 5 weeks ago

Hello friends! @All I totally agree with Chris that a thorough study of transformers, as well as a solid background in EM and physics is absolutely necessary to be successful in our task. And to understand an asymmetrical transformer, first we need to know how a conventional one works. Then we can find the holes in EM theory and looking for the missing information, and use it to our advantage. If we take as an example a Tesla transformer, the conventional turns ratio formula does not apply eventually, the step up can be 10 to 50 times the expected value. Why? To understand this we need to understand first how oscillatory circuits works. There are many physical principles involved in this, and it is very important to have a basic understanding of these, not necessarily a master degree, but if we have no clue, we will hardly be successful. So I would recommend to do some studies and once you have a solid foundation, you will be able to progress quickly with the guidelines provided on the forum. Best wishes, Vidura.

Jagau posted this 5 weeks ago

Hi Munny

You are quite right in your definition of the standard transformer and what happens with Lenz's law and all the design formulas for transformers that will not be repeated here but a conventional transformer is a device with an efficiency <1.

An asymmetric transformer works differently due to their primary and secondary circuit operation.

It is the use of the phases and clock cycles of the induction of the secondary circuits that differentiates it from an ordinary transformer.

This makes it possible not to create counter-emfs on the primary circuits and therefore the electrical consumption on the primary circuit of the transformer becomes much lower than the power received at the output of the secondary circuit.

Such transformers are called asymmetric transformers.

Most of the projects we are working on here are related to this.


Munny posted this 4 weeks ago

Stumbled on to a bunch of documents here and here.  I'll probably be reading well into next year.

  • Liked by
  • Vidura
Chris posted this 4 weeks ago

Hi Munny,

I started with very simple, straightforward experiments:


And my 101 Series:


I studied Richard Feynman and George I Cohen. I have found much greater value in the information in the 1960's or so, as there is so much more accurate, well laid out information!

All the above information matches this video:


There is a thousand years of study that could be done and really be of no benefit if one is not careful! I put a Support Page together to help others but no one visits it, perhaps it is not obvious enough, there is a lot of information that really makes for good study for all learning!

Know the definition of Voltage and Current!

Then you are on your way!

Best wishes,


  • Liked by
  • YoElMiCrO
  • Vidura
Munny posted this 4 weeks ago

Just curious, has anyone other than myself built the Bill Alek Split Flux Transformer?

When I tested the darn thing, I never saw what Bill claimed should happen.  It does have similarities to the POC, only more complex.

What kind of bothers me when I go down the rabbit hole of many of these devices, I always end up finding something about negative energy or cold electricity.  Usually the author goes on to say something like, "Oh yes, this form of energy can power motors and lights."  Some of these guys even go so far to say the electricity involved is running in a reverse time domain.  Almost all of them claim you cannot take a portion of the output and loop it back to the input to have a self-running device.  That becomes a bit of problem if I'm shooting for something that can keep my refrigerator running when the utilities go dark.  I'm not sure what to think, let alone do.  I guess I can keeping working on my POC device and if it won't do what I need, just accept it for what it is, another experiment, or learning tool.  What I'm most concerned about it not fully understanding its operation, then not being able to scale it up.  My goal was always to find a means to power a 100 Watt filament lamp, 24 by 7.  Sure seems like that milestone is way out of reach.


  • Liked by
  • cd_sharp
Chris posted this 4 weeks ago

Hey Munny,

A thorough read of this forum might give you a head start like no other!

We have many successful Independent Replications at various stages! Some that have not yet gone public. Focus on what's real, what is right in front of you, what is achievable now with the right understanding!

Builders Guide to Aboveunity Machines, is one place to start!

Of course, those that want to Learn and Achieve, will, those that do not, will not.


  • Liked by
  • cd_sharp awesome starts here! - Thank You L0stf0x
Members Online:
Since Nov 27 2018
Recomended Protocol:
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:

Donate (PayPal)

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

Donate (Patreon)

Thank You So Much!

Weeks High Earners:
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).