PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
OverUnity Research > Electrical / Electronic Devices > Steven Mark's TPU > The TPU: Was It Real ?
2024-11-24, 13:34:10
News: Registration with the OUR forum is by admin approval.

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 [21]
Author Topic: The TPU: Was It Real ?  (Read 287202 times)
Topic Options img
img  Grumpy
Re: The TPU: Was It Real ? « Reply #500 on: 2023-05-15, 20:11:39 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
why an electric arc is called an arc:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_arc

Sir Humphry Davy discovered the short-pulse electrical arc in 1800.[2] In 1801, he described the phenomenon in a paper published in William Nicholson's Journal of Natural Philosophy, Chemistry and the Arts.[3] According to modern science, Davy's description was a spark rather than an arc.[4]

In the same year Davy publicly demonstrated the effect, before the Royal Society, by transmitting an electric current through two carbon rods that touched, and then pulling them a short distance apart. The demonstration produced a "feeble" arc, not readily distinguished from a sustained spark, between charcoal points.

The Society subscribed for a more powerful battery of 1,000 plates, and in 1808 he demonstrated the large-scale arc.[5] He is credited with naming the arc.[6] He called it an arc because it assumes the shape of an upward bow when the distance between the electrodes is not small.[7] This is due to the buoyant force on the hot gas.
   
img  Centraflow
Re: The TPU: Was It Real ? « Reply #501 on: 2023-05-18, 18:24:07 »

Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2982


Buy me a beer
One frequency, two pulses with different multi-pulse duties and sequence timing.

A and C timing gap dictates the output voltage, it is a differential output. Any ground used on the output is the second ground.

Regards

Mike



---------------------------
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860

As a general rule, the most successful person in life is the person that has the best information.
   
img  bte
Re: The TPU: Was It Real ? « Reply #502 on: 2024-04-16, 08:38:54 »
Full Member
***

Posts: 208



I know this is ancient but do you have a link to this post? Or do you remember how it was switched? My fets get hot at 6mhz.

Quote from: Grumpy on 2010-11-04, 14:20:26
The overheating and "flipping over shut off" effects were only present on early units.

In the video "stevennew.mp4" with U.E.C at the top of the screen, SM states that these devices utilize a different method of induction which causes electron flow to produce useful electricity.  One of the device runs for about 20 minutes and the voltage is checked at the start (about 170 volts) and at 20 minutes (about 169 volts).  He states that this device makes batteries obsolete, can power cars and other devices, and that no other energy source offers the same energy density.  (See report by Michael Fennell.)

SM states that the devices are not recievers, and that the electricity is produced within the device.

Even if you abhore conspiracy theories, and such, you can see that if SM's claims are true, then we have a slight problem with the TPU.  It is a viable replacement for "oil" as an energy source.  Oil is still required for many other purposes and used in many many products.  The TPU does not replace oil entirely, it augments it.  It allows us to go beyond the level of energy that oil can supply to us.  There is no ground connection required.  There are no connections to anything but the load.  The TPU allows us to utilize an energy source anywhere in the universe, at any time, for any purpose - indefinitely!  This device and devices that use these same principles can usher in a new era for mankind!

Unfortunately, very few believe, and only a meer handful are willing to put in the bench time to achieve success. 

Instead, we fight over the rights to the planets energy supply.  We surpress devices that are "too efficient".  We complain and argue.  We spend our time on projects that have less documentation than the TPU, and a miniscule amount of success.

Some have argued that the TPU must not bne "real" since so many people have been working on it and it's variations for so many years and nothing has come of it.  This is an incorrect assumption.  A frined of mine came forward on the Eergy Builders Forum and discussed his version that did produce useful power in excess of the power applied for operation.  (I don't recall exactly but I think he put 100w in and got 170w out.)  This device was a collector loop of several turns with four coils wrapepd over it, forming a toroid.  The coils were switched sequentially at around 28mHz.  It was not impessive until he looped the output back to the input.  After brief operation it overheated, cooked, fireballs on the bench, etc.  Two other people witnessed this event on Skype.

Everyone also seems to forget that GK's GK4 device produced some interesting results and was referenced by Spherics.

Before you say "nothing has come of all the work", take a good look at the work that was actually performed.  You will see that most of it is inapplicable, and unrelated, say 70% of it.  20% was wasted do to misunderstanding the information presented.  That leaves a paltry 10% of the useful, which amounts to a few weeks.  So, not much work has actually been performed towards a working TPU.
   
img  Grumpy
Re: The TPU: Was It Real ? « Reply #503 on: 2024-04-16, 15:20:21 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Quote from: bte on 2024-04-16, 08:38:54


I know this is ancient but do you have a link to this post? Or do you remember how it was switched? My fets get hot at 6mhz.

From what I can remember the only "schematic" from SM was the brown paper one that Mike (Centraflow) reverse engineered.

The schematics from Spherics were very basic high or low side switching of MOSFETS with a snubber.  Shortly after the Spherics info was provided, Roberto in Italy built a unit, but he only used 1kv, which is below the minimum requirement.  I think he said you have to drop 1kv across the CCU coils.

I tried HV MOSFETS, but they were slow and had an intrinsic effect that made them very noisy and hard to work with.

I worked diligently with HV BJT's for over a year, got burned out on it, and have not touched it for over a year.  Next step is to rebuild my test board with heatsinks for the BJT's.

Busy with work and home now though...
   
img  bte
Re: The TPU: Was It Real ? « Reply #504 on: 2024-04-16, 15:34:29 »
Full Member
***

Posts: 208
Quote from: Grumpy on 2024-04-16, 15:20:21
From what I can remember the only "schematic" from SM was the brown paper one that Mike (Centraflow) reverse engineered.

The schematics from Spherics were very basic high or low side switching of MOSFETS with a snubber.  Shortly after the Spherics info was provided, Roberto in Italy built a unit, but he only used 1kv, which is below the minimum requirement.  I think he said you have to drop 1kv across the CCU coils.

I tried HV MOSFETS, but they were slow and had an intrinsic effect that made them very noisy and hard to work with.

I worked diligently with HV BJT's for over a year, got burned out on it, and have not touched it for over a year.  Next step is to rebuild my test board with heatsinks for the BJT's.

Busy with work and home now though...

Understandable. All of my noise issues disappeared when I went to an isolated gate drive, but the chinese isolated driver boards need long pulse widths (>100ns) and I'm opting to build my own with faster FETs.
   
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 [21]
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-11-24, 13:34:10