Folks, here are some FACTs against Chris's claims he wrote here
https://aboveunity.com/thread/melnichenko-s-effect/?order=all#comment-9ba8d63d-398e-4072-aec2-aeec0134ad63 I include his relevant text here:
"
Captainloz gave you 100% of the data, as has Jagau, and you still cant make it work!
In the end, we have given you 100% of the data! Its all here on THIS Website!
Polarity of L1's Voltage changes at Mosfet TOff, the CURRENT Does NOT!
Polarity of L2's Voltage and Current do NOT Change!
This is purely a DC System and there is no AC Component here!
Voltage is Generated in L2 at Mosfet TOn and the Potential of BOTH L1 and L2 increase to VMax over Time t, at this point the Mosfet is turned Off, TOff, and the Demagnetisation Phase occurs!
The Demagnetisation Phase must always be longer in Time t than the Magnetisation Phase!
Through this entire period, L1 and L2 oppose each other!"Claim 1:
"Captainloz gave you 100% of the data, as has Jagau, and you still cant make it work!" Fact: Chris here means the POC setup for which Captainloz measured COP of 2. Captainloz used his precision current shunt resistor (metal strip through-hole resistor) at the 800 kHz frequency range, where the U shaped metal strip manifested 35 nH self inductance as per Itsu measurements on the same off the shelf shunt resistor. Itsu used Vector Network Analyzer to characterize the frequency dependence of the shunt, see data here:
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=3691.msg85851#msg85851 and the original 0.1 Ohm (at DC) manifested 0.23 Ohm impedance at 800 kHz, a 2x increase, it explains Captainloz COP of 2 "measurement" on his POC setup. Chris keeps deep silence on this fact.
Fact: Jagau has not given 100% the data, what he mentioned was "Melnichenko did not clearly reveal how to do it, so why is so much expected of us? Work a little, it does not kill anyone." He has not shown measurements like Itsu did on the input output-power relations, he only claimed 4.5 W in, 7 W out. This is not a complaint from me, just giving readers the facts.
Claim 2:
In the end, we have given you 100% of the data! Its all here on THIS Website!
Polarity of L1's Voltage changes at Mosfet TOff, the CURRENT Does NOT!Fact: He says the obvious: when the current in a coil is switched off, the polarity of the voltage across the coil changes to the opposite polarity of the input voltage (back spike appears) and the coil tries to maintain its current it has had at the switch-off moment. As the collapsing field goes down so does the current and its polarity does not change, a well known fact.
And a scope shot by Itsu on his Melnichenko setup clearly shows this behaviour, see it in his Reply #57 here
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4312.0;attach=45127;image for instance the yellow (L1 voltage) and green (L1 current) scope traces. These traces show exactly the obvious behaviour, question is why Chris says this belongs to his given data? Any decent website dealing with coil current switch-off topic discusses this obvious behavior.
By the way, neither Itsu nor anyone else said the current would change at Mosfet T
Off, why Chris mentions this as if it were said ??
Claim 3:
Polarity of L2's Voltage and Current do NOT Change! Fact: The first part is not correct: the voltage polarity across L2 changes, see Itsu's blue trace (L2 voltage) in his scopeshot (referred to above) when the current is off in L1. This is because during the magnetization phase L2 senses an expanding and increasing magnetic field coming from L1 and at the current switch-off moment the magnetic field starts collapsing, hence the induced voltage in L2 should change polarity. Basic Faraday induction on the direction of moving magnetic field.
Fact: the second part of Claim 3 is incomplete, the L2 current is zero during magnetization (D2 and D3 diodes block current as wanted) and starts flowing at the moment of the input current switch-off in L1. So current changes from zero to a maximum value in L2 during the demagnetization, then reducing to zero as the collapsing field diminishing also to zero.
Claim 4:
This is purely a DC System and there is no AC Component here!Fact: This is a pulsed DC system. Who said there is AC component here?
Claim 5:
Voltage is Generated in L2 at Mosfet TOn and the Potential of BOTH L1 and L2 increase to VMax over Time t, at this point the Mosfet is turned Off, TOff, and the Demagnetisation Phase occurs!Fact: This is also claiming the obvious, Itsu's scope shot clearly shows this, and this is the wanted operation established by Melnichenko, and Jagau also wrote this is the needed modus operandi. So what??
Claim 6:
The Demagnetisation Phase must always be longer in Time t than the Magnetisation Phase! Fact: Yes, this is also achieved by Itsu, in the scopeshot referred to above the magnetization time is around 63 us and the demagnetization time is around 90 us for L1 voltage and current, and around 110 us for L2 voltage and current, this depends on the load resistances too. So what ??
Claim 7:
Through this entire period, L1 and L2 oppose each other!Well, this needs explanation what exactly Chris means here. Because, during the magnetization time L2 is not active magnetically (for it has no current) so the coils cannot oppose each other through the entire period. Entire period for me means the time from one switch-on moment to the next switch-on moment. Of course, the input current in L1 magnetizes the core in L2 but the two coils cannot oppose each other through the entire period.
Anyway, these are as Chris says the 100% given data, so where are the data?
On Chris's forum, there are 3 other replicators, besides Jagau, who actually built the Melnichenko setup under discussion as Jagau described. Why is it then that they achieved the same 75% to 93% efficiency just like Itsu did? Where is the famous 'helping each other' claimed so much and so often on Chris's forum?
One more thing worth mentioning: IF the POC setup works with COP > 1 performance, then where is its practical application? What does Chris use it for during the long years? What do the many 'successful' replicators on his forum use the POC for?
Since the many years he has come up with such 'aboveunity' claim but it has never ever proved by him or by anybody with correct measurements, why is that? IT is ridiculous to have fear from showing measurements.
This situation is like he has been shelving a COP > 1 device for years now (but of course if it indeed performs like that). The setup surely works, the question is its input and output power ratio.
And Chris can call me or Itsu or all others as trolls, trouble makers, it does not matter, he has been doing this for years with anyone asking for proof (and he bans any member on his forum who does not 'behave'). The right questions should always be asked and he avoids answering them correctly at all cost. Why is that? Just for fear, or ?
Gyula
Author
Topic: A Melnichenko effect replication (Read 11047 times)
