PopularFX
Home Help Search
Advanced search 
Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2025-03-31, 22:41:07
News: Check out the Benches; a place for people to moderate their own thread and document their builds and data.
If you would like your own Bench, please PM an Admin.
Most Benches are visible only to members.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Author Topic: Checking out Joel Lagace - Hang on I'M SERIOUS!!  (Read 14536 times)

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4236
good go at it itsu.  i dont have super caps like these.  but, i think normal caps should work similarly.  while you have that set up already, would you have a 1 to 1 ratio transformer to try? i would say preferably much lower ohms on the windings.  i think you could get better results as in 'closer' to 100% total, similarly to what i found in sim.

my tests with the orbo will be with more normal caps.  first will be to test the toroid inductor to try and get nearly all of cap A to cap B.  then take from the pickup coil to cap C.  all done in just 1 shot, no pulsing. if we can get more in cap C with one shot than was lost in cap B, then we are good.

thanks for showing.  ;)

mags

Thanks Mags,

i also think that normal caps will behave similar, so no need for super caps.

Next thing is to find out what things are influencing the setup so that it does behave more abnormal, and my guess too will be the transformer.
I will see if i can find transformers that will show a major difference, like your suggested 1 to 1 ratio.

All the leads / probes will probably have a negative influence also, like introducing leakage and thus loss.

Looking forward to your test results.

Itsu
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4236
Thank you, Itsu, for performing that well documented experiment and confirming what a lot of us suspected.  I would love to be wrong and think that there is more to this setup such as finely tuned impedance matching/mismatching relationships, but it is hard to tell without Joel being willing to shine a closer light on some of the specifics.

Thanks,

Dave

Hi Dave,

i am not sure Joel is able to see this thread as it is a private one, but indeed we have still some unknowns in this setup which we need to overcome.

Itsu
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4236
This is not a replication of the Lagace video. There are different components used in the Lagace video.
It would be interesting to see how different makes of capacitors behave.
Different dielectrics or electrolytes make a cap behave differently.

I think that Lagace has been pulsing his caps for such a long time, that he has altered their behavior.
If you want to see the  effect, check out my last video. It works every single time without fail.
I would be interested to see if Itsu's caps experience dielectric absorption.


Aking.21

no replication is ever the same as the original, but in a well documented experiment we can look for the effect which causes the abnormality even with different components IMO.

My super caps show / suffer? from dielectric absorption, soakage, or memory effect, but that is a normal behavior.
It's hard to drain C2 and C3 to zero volts and keep them there before starting the experiment, as they immediately start to increase in voltage.

My super caps are being pulsed during these last tests, so they also should be "conditioned" if that is needed, so we should be able to see that.

Itsu

   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4236
I was yesterday running this above experiment for over 6 hours, and it ended after 6 hours with the shown results.

But it was still running for some hour before shutting it down.

I noted down these last values of the caps being:

C1: 1.272V
C2: 1.1881V
C3: 0.1136V

I then removed the 9V battery which drives the FG and disconnected the lead going from C2 negative to MOSFET drain.

This morning i checked the DMM's in the above state (disconnected C2) and found the values to be:

C1: 1.251V
C2: 1.1226V
C3: 0.1475V

So both C1 and C2 had decreased (what might to be expected through leakage etc.), but C3 had increased.

0.1475V or 147.5mV is not that of a big value, so it probably is due to the earlier mentioned "dielectric absorption, soakage, or memory effect" or there is some charging via picked up signals (50Hz) from the environment here.

I will monitor this voltage the rest of the day to see what will happen.

Itsu

   
Group: Tech Wizard
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1250
Hi Itsu,

Thanks for your efforts on testing this setup.

Regarding the transformer,  you may have a common mode current choke used for mains filtering at the mains input of PC or TV sets switched mode PS, like these for instance
https://www.ebay.com/itm/385519333419     or  https://www.ebay.com/itm/155702287103      https://www.ebay.com/itm/275755671744 

any such choke has 1:1 turns ratio and around 1 Ohm or less DC resistance per winding. Inductance may be any in the range from 5 mH to 20 mH or so.

Gyula
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4236

Hi Gyula,

yes i have such common mode chokes, so i will use one of those.

I also will change the bridge rectifier diodes from the present UF4007 (517mV forward voltage) to 1N5819 (206mV forward voltage).

But first i would like to measure in the present circuit the signals across both the primary and secondary of the transformer.

Itsu
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2782


Buy me a cigar
Hi Guys. I used my private bench to Allow access for Howerd to  members of the Freedom group. This is why there’s only a few participants.

Let me provide a link to a topic that JLG started that provoked the ensuing Kerfuffle here at OUR.

https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4432.msg103537#msg103537

I personally think JLG has a bit of the  Dunning Kruger effect going on but that’s just me….

I’m really pleased that Itsu has picked up the gauntlet as his approach and diligence should give us the answers we’re looking for.  O0

Out of curiosity where did the original claim of <COP 1 originate?

Cheers Grum.


---------------------------
Nanny state ? Left at the gate !! :)
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4236


Hi Grum,

thanks for that info, i had not seen that (short) thread before.

Itsu
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4236
I noted down the last values of my (disconnected) setup, and they are:

C1: 1.241V
C2: 1.1117V
C3: 0.1546V

So C3 voltage was still climbing while C1 and C2 were decreasing.



Then i did reset the device by shorting C2 and C3 so they show 0V, charged C1 to show 2.7V and connected C2 negative to the MOSFET drain to start the process.

I scoped across the 220V side of the transformer and registered the white signal as shown below.
Then i removed the probe and reconnected it to the 8V coil of the transformer showing in yellow:



We see in the yellow trace again the spike (70 - 80V) at MOSFET turn off time.
Oddly enough, we see in the white trace a mere 50% duty cycle signal of 2.187Vpp.

Not sure how this spiky signal (from a 74% duty cycle signal) on the 8V side transforms to this AC square wave like signal of 50% duty cycle.
Probably the inductance and capacitance of the transformer is causing this.

After rectification by the diode bridge, we end up with a marginal DC signal across the C3 cap of 18.3mV DC.
No wonder, there is almost no charging of C3.




Itsu
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4236

I removed my 220V - 8V transformer including the UF4007 diode bridge and replaced it by a common mode choke and a 1N5819 schottky diode bridge.

Data on the common mode choke is:

21.8mH at 10kHz inductance
1 Ohm resistance
6pF capacitance


Initial tests show minor differences in signals, but i need to do a longer run to see how it behaves.

Itsu
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 489


Buy me some coffee
Hi Guys. I used my private bench to Allow access for Howerd to  members of the Freedom group. This is why there’s only a few participants.

Let me provide a link to a topic that JLG started that provoked the ensuing Kerfuffle here at OUR.

https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4432.msg103537#msg103537

I personally think JLG has a bit of the  Dunning Kruger effect going on but that’s just me….

I’m really pleased that Itsu has picked up the gauntlet as his approach and diligence should give us the answers we’re looking for.  O0

Out of curiosity where did the original claim of <COP 1 originate?

Cheers Grum.



In the above post, JL is converting mains to reactive power using the microwave oven capacitor.
This is then rectified to pulsed DC.
He then uses the scr-neon part to create an additional on-off pulsing mechanism to pulse charge the car battery.
The Mains charges up the Microwave oven cap, then the cap discharges this back into the mains every cycle.
Arguably this circuit uses only a slight amount of grid power, ie for the initial AC trigger voltage and system losses.
Where could any excess energy come from?
Not from the mains.
1 The capacitor exhibits super dielectric absorption because it is repeatedly charged and discharged.
2 The battery: this behaves similarly to the capacitor
3 Bedini publicly stated that his excess energy came from the battery in his circuits.
My conclusion is that any excess energy has to come from the static field around the device.

If you look at most circuits there is an onrush of power on switch on.
Most researchers want to ignore this because it is viewed as a nuisance.
Maybe the initial onrush is due to static build-up. (ie "free energy")?

Re your question as to where the cop >1? It originated from my analysis of JL's claims in his video.
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4757.msg114607#msg114607
However, we have not included the power used by the FG-controlled mosfet.
I am busy building several FG-controlled mosfet interrupters as they are a useful module to have around.
As an example, you can extract power from an HF circuit and convert it to mains frequency. A very useful tool in my opinion.
Let us keep experimenting.


---------------------------
Electrostatic induction: Put a 1KV charge on 1 plate of a capacitor. What does the environment do to the 2nd  plate?
   

Group: Mad Scientist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 675
hey aking.

just wondering if you could show us what you have going.  i think you had mentioned that you would

thinking about super caps, with the internal resistance and the vast amount of capacitance, could it be that some redidual charge remains even after apparent complete discharge?  if you have a cap, or caps, that exibit this, wouldnt it be a good idea to have a bunch of them in parallel, or even series, and just take from that, even just a bit at a time to allow it to bounce back?  have you tried dead shorting the cap, a cap exibiting the self recharge, and letting it sit for say a week or more?

and even a step further, apply a smal negative voltage, one that emulates the voltage read from the cap in the recharged condition, to possibly bring the cap to an actual zero charge state. 

i know its a lot to ask.  do have some large super caps on hand that are from a lamboghini avarntador that are used to energize the starter.  if you ever hear one start up, seems almost instantaneous. i do repairs on these modules for a lambo dealer.  the casing takes on water and causes corrosion shorting of the cap chain(6 in series).  sometimes i come across a bank that is too far gone and i keep them for possible later use of the caps that were not damaged.   the ones i can fix, i do a complete discharge of all the caps individually. the reason being is even some of the modules that dont have water damage, the caps tend to not balance out in the chain after many charges and discharges.  the module has voltage sampling wires, red on pos end of pack and black on the neg end, and a purple wire in the middle of the chain.  that wire samples the difference in charge between the first 3 caps and the other 3 caps. if that sample becomes different eventually, the car will not start on purpose, probably to keep the pack from having balance issues that could cause fire hazard and such.

so, the reason for discharging each cap becomes apparent.  if i discharge the pack as a whole, it is possible that the lowest voltage cap could go reverse voltage once it goes to zero and the others still have potential.  that would be an issue. so i do them individually with car stop light bulbs, 2 parallel each cell, and when the lights go out i dead short for the rest of the discharge.

then there is another issue.  supper caps tend to have self discharge leakage, some of these more than others.  in this case, when i charge the pack to say 13v, i can see which ones are leaking more than others. then i use the adjustable supply to push those a bit beyond max voltage and it seems to burn out those leaks and we are very near good again.  the leakage portion of the repair is sometimes a try try again till good.

anyway, these caps have definitely been 'pulsed hard'.  direct charge from the car battery via a high quality solenoid, then the batt disconnects and the cap starts the car alone. the pack is welded with heavy link bars
so if i get to a point that i need them, i can cut good ones from a bad pack. these are very high current, low resistance.

im gathering different value caps, 3 each, to do the orbo test. normal caps.
firstly ill try the toroid winding inductance with a diode and find the right combo that will send most all of capA to capB.  will try it with and without the magnets in place, no connection to the output winding, as the magnets inserted affect the inductance of the toroid coil.

mags
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4236
I started a new run with the new common mode transformer and the schottky diode bridge see diagram:



I shorted C2 and C3 so they read 0V and charged C1 to 2.7V.

The voltage (yellow trace) across the C1 side of the transformer looks like this right after the start (current in green through the MOSFET):



The voltage (again, yellow trace) across the C3 side of the transformer looks like this:



It seems the discharging - charging now is much faster, instead of about 6 hours yesterday it stabilizes now around 1.5 hours when i stopped recording.
I toke measurements every 5 minutes now.



Energy balance of the super caps:

C1 (start) charged to 2.7V has 364.5 Joule
C1 (end) discharged to 1.526V has 122 Joule
C2 (end) charged to 1.324V has 87.66 Joule
C3 (end) charged to 0.1627V has 6.618 Joule


C2 and C3 together have gained 87.66 + 6.618 = 94.278 Joule
C1 was left with 122 Joule of the initial 364.5 Joule

I think if i continue to record the data it would again end up rather equaly again without any abnormal increase in C3.

Itsu
« Last Edit: 2025-02-23, 20:28:22 by Itsu »
   

Group: Mad Scientist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 675
thanks itsu

what it looks like is the spike, seen on the sec of the transformer, is stored on the other side of the rectifier where cap 3 is.  this could be the resistance of the cap is causing that charge to be in only a small portion of the cap at first, and then the so called displacement currents ooze into the rest of the cap over that period of time.

have you tried different freq and duty cycles?   the up slope on the input winding looks like it  ould take on a longer pulse before starting to level out to max current. ;)

being picky, a scope shot of the middle of the 2 diodes of the bridge might be interesting.  maybe not.  also, i wonder what we would see if you put a small normal cap just before cap 3 after the rectifier. one that can hold the voltage of the spike. even a disk cap.

one more thing.  from what you see so far, is a full bridge necessary?   looks like a one direction thing from here. if so, then you could just use 1 diode in place of the bridge, in the propper direction of course.   this will eliminate at least 1 voltage drop.  these small voltages, 1 drop is a lot.

mags
 
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 489


Buy me some coffee
Itsu:

Re cap 3.

This is not what Joel does.
He has 4 caps in series which is a much more efficient way to get to the required result.
I think 4 caps in series instead of a single cap 3 will make a big difference, especially with pre-conditioning by pulsing.


---------------------------
Electrostatic induction: Put a 1KV charge on 1 plate of a capacitor. What does the environment do to the 2nd  plate?
   

Group: Mad Scientist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 675
how exactly should we precondition the caps?  freq, time frame, hv or low v matters?

like do we need to do this for a week, or hours....
.

mags
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 489


Buy me some coffee
how exactly should we precondition the caps?  freq, time frame, hv or low v matters?

like do we need to do this for a week, or hours....
.

mags
One of the main reasons experimenters cannot replicate Staley Meyer is that they are unaware that the water capacitor must be pulsed first. ie conditioned first.
24 hours is enough. Here's a diagram of how I do it. I have not done this with super caps, however, when I
saw Lagace's video, a light bulb went on in my brain. ie "So it works with supercaps too!!"
The principle works with low voltage as Lagace has shown.
In my diagram, if you want to try it, you can use the electrolytic caps salvaged from a dead cfl.
Regarding frequency, obviously, 2.4 khz or thereabouts is fine.
Keep experimenting.
Once you switch my device off and find it keeps on running, you'll be convinced. Have a look at my video. It works every time. Every single time.


---------------------------
Electrostatic induction: Put a 1KV charge on 1 plate of a capacitor. What does the environment do to the 2nd  plate?
   

Group: Mad Scientist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 675
   

Group: Mad Scientist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 675
that circuit above. is it still together and working?  if so, when you turn it on and off, you are disconnecting the input power to the hv module?  how about disconnecting the hv module from the 'cap, spark gap' circuit also when you disconnect power? O0

mags

   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 489


Buy me some coffee
that circuit above. is it still together and working?  if so, when you turn it on and off, you are disconnecting the input power to the hv module?  how about disconnecting the hv module from the 'cap, spark gap' circuit also when you disconnect power? O0

mags
No power at all. I've disconnected the module and the effect is the same.
Just build it and see for yourself.


---------------------------
Electrostatic induction: Put a 1KV charge on 1 plate of a capacitor. What does the environment do to the 2nd  plate?
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4236
thanks itsu

what it looks like is the spike, seen on the sec of the transformer, is stored on the other side of the rectifier where cap 3 is.  this could be the resistance of the cap is causing that charge to be in only a small portion of the cap at first, and then the so called displacement currents ooze into the rest of the cap over that period of time.

have you tried different freq and duty cycles?   the up slope on the input winding looks like it  ould take on a longer pulse before starting to level out to max current. ;)

being picky, a scope shot of the middle of the 2 diodes of the bridge might be interesting.  maybe not.  also, i wonder what we would see if you put a small normal cap just before cap 3 after the rectifier. one that can hold the voltage of the spike. even a disk cap.

one more thing.  from what you see so far, is a full bridge necessary?   looks like a one direction thing from here. if so, then you could just use 1 diode in place of the bridge, in the propper direction of course.   this will eliminate at least 1 voltage drop.  these small voltages, 1 drop is a lot.

mags
 


Mags,

thanks for the suggestions.

What i see is that basically the signals do not really change with changing the transformer.
We still see the large back EMF spike (220V now) at the start (which obscures the real shape of the 26.2kHz 74% duty cycle signal) and the 50% duty cycle AC square wave signal at the other side.
 
I guess we need the diode bridge to rectify the AC signal or else we loose half of the period.

IMO there is no resonance near the 26kHz involved on the AC side of the transformer as the capacitance / inductance there is too high.

Anyway, i will see what i can do.

Itsu
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4236
Itsu:

Re cap 3.

This is not what Joel does.
He has 4 caps in series which is a much more efficient way to get to the required result.
I think 4 caps in series instead of a single cap 3 will make a big difference, especially with pre-conditioning by pulsing.

Yes, i know Joel has 4 super caps in series, but that will lower the C3 value to 25F if i do that with my 100F caps, but i can give it a try.

If it really is "a much more efficient way to get to the required result" i have my doubts as it is not based on any logic IMO.

Itsu
   
Group: Tech Wizard
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1250

Once you switch my device off and find it keeps on running, you'll be convinced. Have a look at my video. It works every time. Every single time.
   


Hi Howerd,

Earlier I wrote to you my explanations on why the setup shown in your video (simplified schematic in your Reply #91 above) is able to keep the 8 neon bulbs lighting.
Please let me quote my text for the others here too to agree or disagree with it. 

In the paper box you have I assume 5 capacitors in series, each is 1 uF, 600V rated.  So if the Chinese HV module charges them up to say 3000 V maximum
(I do not know the actual HV voltage across the caps, do you?), the stored energy in the resulting 200 nF would be 0.9 Joule.
This is a nice amount of energy to feed the 8 series connected neon bulbs.

A single neon bulb NE2 normally takes around 600 uA (data sheet) and has about 65 V operational voltage (starting from 90 V firing voltage), this involves 39 mW power per bulb for
a decent brightness. So 8x 39 mW is 312 mW for the 8 neon bulbs, this would be consumed from the series capacitors that are charged up previously from the HV module.
The 0.9 Joule energy stored in the capacitors means 0.9 W (i.e 900 mW) power when the caps are discharged in 1 second to zero volt from 3000 V.
The 312 mW power for the bulbs would be taken out from the capacitors nearly in 3 seconds (900 mW / 312 mW = 2.88).  Of course, as the capacitors are being discharged,
the 600 uA load current is gradually reducing, this extends the discharge time at a reducing output power.

In the video, you connected the 8 neon bulbs at around video time 4:24 when they flashed up brightly and then they were on with a much lower brightness than the flash
was till the end of the video 5:25. Surely they were on for longer than this 61 seconds I do not doubt it, till the capacitors got discharged below a voltage level of
8x 65V under which the neon bulbs are extinguished.

The bright flash up of the bulbs happened from the fact that the capacitors had much higher stored voltage than the 8x 90V=720V and the caps then discharged to
8x 65V=520V and remained around that level till the cap voltage was drawn down from the around 2000 - 3000V level below say 8x 60V=480V or so i.e. below their
lower threshold voltage. Of course, my estimation may differ from your actual voltage levels in the video but my mistake may range between + / - 15 -20 volts or so.
Only measurements can clarify this if needed, you can use your voltage meter safely across any of the neon bulbs if you wish. 
Such neon bulbs can even have 10 - 20 V difference in firing voltage levels,this is normal.

I understand you believe in "conditioning" the capacitors.
 
Well, the insulating material used in capacitors has a property known as dielectric absorption, see a correct description at wiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dielectric_absorption

This means in your case here that, using this backwards, as described in wiki, the earlier exerted torque on the molecular dipoles (by the HV)  in the insulating material
inside the caps what they received during the "conditioning" do not let the capacitor discharge as quickly as the RC time constant would let it and the capacitor discharge
time may increase by a few percent.  This depends on how quickly or slowly the molecular dipoles are able to return to their original energy levels they had before applying
HV (dielectric material dependent).   You can call this as "conditioning" if you wish or you mean that, no problem, the explanation is given IMHO.

I already wrote to you about electrets and I mention this again in connection with this present video: you could maintain driving even more than 8 neon bulbs
for weeks and probably for months from them.  But the output power from an electret is still low, it may have some hundred volts at some hundred microAmper or a few mA max.
 The main problem is it has very high internal impedance which limits output current (in fact it is a special capacitor with a precharged dielectric material inside). 
This high internal impedance is true for the copper or Alu stripes picking up energy from the plasma field on the surface of the plasma bulb and feeding the Avramenko plug.


All I mean is that you supply energy to the capacitors, they store it and then feed the neon bulbs for a certain time. Towards the end of your video you mentioned looping the
output to the input.  Well, this would certainly be feasable and would be tried IF the capacitors would not get discharged after a certain time.

You may not accept all these, that is fine with me. I think what conventional science can explain (like IMHO in this case) there cannot be ou.

Gyula
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 489


Buy me some coffee
Hi Gyula.
Your reply is very interesting and thank you for your expert input it is much appreciated.

However, I am not claiming ou.
If it has created an electret - then good.
That is getting energy from the environment.
Dielectric absorption is also good. It is getting energy from the environment.
Therefore both Kirchoffs and Ohms laws do not apply.

So the billion-dollar question is: If 1 nanowatt of electricity is recycled back into the input - what is the outcome?
That is why I am interested in Lagace's experiments.
It would be good if he could be invited into this freedom group somehow.
I appreciate everyone's efforts here.  Keep experimenting.


---------------------------
Electrostatic induction: Put a 1KV charge on 1 plate of a capacitor. What does the environment do to the 2nd  plate?
   
Group: Tech Wizard
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1250

If it has created an electret - then good.
That is getting energy from the environment.
Dielectric absorption is also good. It is getting energy from the environment.
Therefore both Kirchoffs and Ohms laws do not apply.



Dear Howerd,

IMHO the energy by which your neon bulbs are lit for a certain time does not come from the enviroment, it came first from the two 1.2 V batteries, then the received HV influenced the dielectric material in the capacitors and after switching off the batteries, the dielectric material released the received energy.
An electret does get energy (it should get) from a high voltage source that must be furnished in for influencing the dielectric material and the latter then can release it till most the charge particles etc reoccupy their original position in the dielectric material.   Then the electret is depleted  like your capacitors in the box.

I agree that Joel could join in here and a civilized conversation could start. However, as I understood him from the videos, he has commited himself to a kind of company forming etc so if this materializes, then he will not share crucial details.  If there is indeed real COP values he claims being much higher than 1.

Gyula
   
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2025-03-31, 22:41:07
Loading...