Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

1352Re: My MEG replication

Expand Messages
  • softwarelabus
    Apr 29, 2007
      Hi,

      At this very moment you can purchase the Metglas AMCC 320 cores for
      $110 from http://elnamagnetics.com

      There's some very important information MEG researchers should know
      about. I spoke with the engineer at Metglas and he said it's difficult
      to couple the two U-shaped cut cores together tight enough to achieve
      the materials exceptionally high permeability and coercivity. In fact,
      the Metglas engineer said his test, which consisted of taping two
      pressed cores together, resulted in a completely flat BH-curve with
      relatively low permeability. I'm not certain how much pressure one
      needs to apply on the core halves, but one should be very cautious as
      such nanocrystalline and amorphous material is brittle. My suggestion
      is to rub the two cores together thereby creating some micro powder to
      fill in any gaps, and then press the two cores together. To verify the
      two cores are correctly coupled you could apply two static AC signals.
      One signal would be strong low frequency, no higher than 1 Hz. The
      other will be a weak higher frequency signal of a few KHz's. It's
      important the KHz signals peak to peak current remain relatively
      constant. To achieve this you could place a high resistance resistor
      in series with the KHz signal so it's peak to peak current does not
      change much as the 1 Hz signal changes. The 1 Hz signal peak must be
      high enough to saturate the core. Next, view the induced voltage on a
      secondary coil. If the two cores are correctly coupled then the KHz
      signal should mostly be low in amplitude along with a blip high in
      amplitude. On the other hand, an improperly coupled core should
      result in a flat KHz signal with no blip.

      Also you'll want to store such cores stored in a desiccator-- low
      humidity environment. Believe it or not, cheap cat litter that
      contains silica gel works great. You'll want to microwave the cat
      litter to expel the absorbed moisture. Once it cools then place it in
      a seal tight bag or container along with the nanocrystalline core.
      This will prevent the core from oxidizing.

      I learned some very concerning information from the Metglas engineer.
      The AMCC cores are not longitudinally annealed, but no-field annealed.
      I don't know if they were ever longitudinally annealed, but this was a
      shocker since my computer simulations (based on conventional physics)
      shows the "free energy" comes from a coil robbing Magnetic entropy
      away from Lattice entropy, which occurs when the core goes to
      saturation. Present simulations indicate longitudinally annealed cores
      have appreciable magnetic entropy, and non-annealed cores have
      significantly less magnetic entropy, and transversely annealed cores
      have negative entropy when such material is saturated. Actually
      simulations show transversely annealed cores behave erratically
      depending on various situations. Note that two U-shaped cores not
      properly coupled perform just like a transversely annealed core. This
      gap effect is seen in simulations due to the micro gaps between the
      cut core.

      In a nutshell, it's very important to verify your cut AMCC core is
      properly coupled and exhibits the materials natural exceptionally high
      permeability and coercivity. According to simulations the high
      coercivity is very important in achieving magnetic entropy.


      Here's an outline of what the simulation software reveals. With no
      applied field the magnetic dipole moments on such material on average
      are appreciably unaligned because the longitudinally annealing
      discourages domain structure-- lower order, higher magnetic entropy.
      When the core is saturated the magnetic moments are aligned-- high
      order, low magnetic entropy. Normally when magnetic entropy decreases
      there's an increase in lattice entropy. Meaning, magnetic entropy is
      converted to heat. This is a well-understood process known as MCE
      (Magnetocaloric effect). MCE is difficult to notice in typical
      magnetic materials at room temp because the domains are mostly
      saturated with no applied field; i.e., low magnetic entropy. When the
      material is above Curie temp the magnetic moments are in disorder, the
      domains are destroyed; i.e., high magnetic entropy. The problem is
      such materials have hardly any permeability above Curie. Although,
      Superparamagnetic materials have high magnetic entropy well below
      Curie. According to simulations, such material with exceptionally
      high permeability require extraordinarily small amount of energy from
      the coil used as a catalyst to convert magnetic entropy to lattice
      entropy (heat). Last year I witnessed MCE in a Metglas transversely
      annealed core, but at the time I couldn't figure out why the effect
      was so erratic, and even reverse some times. Actually I asked Metglas
      for a longitudinally annealed core, but oddly enough they sent me the
      worst type of core for "free energy," a transversely annealed core.
      Recently, after discovering this, I bought some Metglas MAGAMP cores,
      which are uncut longitudinally annealed 2714A core material. I'm still
      in the process of measuring MCE at room temperature in such cores, but
      so far it appears they definitely exhibit appreciable MCE at room
      temperature. :-)

      How to capture such magnetic entropy away from lattice entropy is
      another story. What occurs is electrons flip, which generates a pulse,
      emits photons. The flip rate depends on the type of atoms, lattice,
      and material electrical resistance. Such Metglas cores have low
      electrical resistance, which can significantly slow down the flip rate
      due to eddy currents. Note that 18 micro tape wound cores reduce macro
      eddy currents, but not nano scale eddy currents around the atomic
      flip. Ideally the coil would collect a percentage of the pulse,
      magnetic entropy. So now the core is saturated-- align magnetic
      moments, low magnetic entropy. According to standard physics it
      requires energy to break such magnetic alignments. Temperature
      (vibrating atoms) breaks such magnetic bonds, which is why such
      magnetic materials cool down when the applied field is removed-- the
      later half of MCE. Therefore, the coil captures energy that is
      normally converted to lattice entropy. When the field is removed the
      material cools slightly more than it stated.

      The end results are a device that moves ambient energy at the output,
      which cools the core. Recent simulations are showing the core domain
      structure can abruptly change when this occurs. If true, then it would
      require a machine that adapts and re-tunes itself continuously and
      dynamically. That could explain why Naudin had trouble closing the
      loop. There seems to be controversy what Naudin failed. All I know is
      that a person who lives in France, was in direct contact with Naudin,
      and claimed that Naudin did indeed closed the loop, but the MEG would
      run for a very brief time. He said Naudin could not figure it out. If
      Naudin was capturing ambient energy from the core, then it's my
      opinion that such a device is finely tuned and highly balanced, and a
      slight change in core temperature would cause significant domain
      structure. I think the Metglas MEG is legitimate, but someone needs to
      spend the time to figure out how to make the circuit adapt to the
      cores changes and/or somehow keep the inner core at a stable temperature.

      My final comment on the MEG is that presently I see no way of capture
      such Magnetic entropy from ferrite cores. In a nutshell, such ferrite
      cores are made of powdered iron. A bonding material separates the iron
      particles. Therefore, with no applied field, each iron particle will
      be appreciably saturated due to strong domains. Furthermore, a
      saturated core would actually have *less* B-field magnetic entropy due
      to the iron particle separations as caused by the bonding material.
      Perhaps an intensely longitudinally annealed ferrite core could work.
      Regardless, it's difficult to beat nanocrystalline and amorphous cores
      that have permeability over 500000, especially if they are
      longitudinally annealed! :-)


      Regards,
      Paul Lowrance






      --- In MEG_builders@yahoogroups.com, Kent Andersen <sci@...> wrote:
      >
      > well I think you could use a smaller secondary coil on it. Most of these
      > guys go for big voltage
      > because they get the idea that big voltage = big power.
      > you might try youtube.com they sometimes have these videos pirated
      there.
      > Bearden is selling the video on his website here.
      > http://www.cheniere.org/sales/buy-e1.htm
      >
      > he has completely moved away from his theories of phase conjugation
      > (junk science stuff)
      > to more practical theories that everyone else in the scientific
      > community is using.
      > I would surely check out that video if you can before you go out
      > spending big wads of cash
      > do your research as it is known that the patents do not contain all of
      > the information required
      > to reproduce what it is claimed to do.
      > some other data you might want to look at is here if you have not
      already
      > http://jnaudin.free.fr/meg/meg.htm
      >
      > I recently purchased 2 of the metglass C cores AMCC500 which I am going
      > to use in some experiments
      > with ferro magnetic resonance. they were 179.00 per pair.. so if you
      > decide to build a meg prepare
      > to go for a ride.
      >
      > Hope that helps
      >
      > Kent
      >
      > lichtrov wrote:
      > >
      > > Thank you for the response. I'm thinking about load matching also.
      > >
      > > Where the video, you're talking about, can be downloaded from?
      > >
      > > And one more question: does anybody have an idea why such a huge
      > > secondary voltage is required (TB in the patent claims that it can be
      > > lowered with smaller secondary windings, but I didn't see anything
      > > done with low secondary voltage)?
      > >
      > > --- In MEG_builders@yahoogroups.com
      > > <mailto:MEG_builders%40yahoogroups.com>, Kent Andersen <sci@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > Sounds like you have done quite a bit of homework. This seems to be
      > > a
      > > > typical result from MEG builders
      > > > In a video that I watched where bearden goes into detail on the
      > > MEG's
      > > > operation it is more of a L/C
      > > > type of circuit. from what he said in that video the input waveform
      > > is
      > > > like /`\ ramp up and ramp down.
      > > > as you can tell there are some sweet spots between pulse width and
      > > > frequency of the drive signal.
      > > > since its a L/C circuit you must design a load match transformer
      > > that
      > > > will allow you to pull power out of it.
      > > > simply putting a resistive load across the output will detune the
      > > > circuit and throw it out of its "balance"
      > > > I have not done this myself yet as I have been short on time but
      > > that is
      > > > my next step to design a, more or
      > > > less a balun or unun to decouple the meg from the effects of the
      > > load.
      > > >
      > > > (Kent)
      > > >
      > > > lichtrov wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > > Hi all!
      > > > >
      > > > > I'm an EE and was intriqued by MEG because of simple circuitry
      > > > > required to operate. I've built my own replication of the MEG -
      > > also
      > > > > unsuccessfully (I mean I didn't obtain COP > 1). In my controller
      > > I
      > > > > can independently change both frequency and duty cycle of the gate
      > > > > driving voltage. My MEG has taps on both primary and secondary
      > > > > windings and I can play with turns ratio. While working without
      > > load,
      > > > > I obtained output voltage with close to sine waveform and
      > > amplitudes
      > > > > around reported by Bearden and Naudin. However, after loading the
      > > > > output (even lightly with 100kOhm resistor), output voltage
      > > decreases
      > > > > significantly to a few volts.
      > > > >
      > > > > It's pretty hard to debug the device since I don't understand how
      > > it
      > > > > should work. I started to dig into Berden's patent and I have a
      > > > > question: does anybody have an idea how Bearden measured the
      > > current
      > > > > in both primary (Fig 6D) and secondary (Figs 6G,H)?
      > > > >
      > > > > The question arised because the primary current he described has
      > > > > extremely small duty cycle - around 1 microsecond for both rise
      > > and
      > > > > fall. It supposes duty cycle with around 500 nanoseconds of active
      > > > > driving voltage - nothing comparable can be seen in Figs 6A,B.
      > > Also I
      > > > > tried to build high side current measurement circuit and (even
      > > with
      > > > > most recent chips!) it has around 500kHz bandwidth and cannot
      > > provide
      > > > > such a sharp waveform. Thus I presume that Tom measured a voltage
      > > on
      > > > > a small low side resistor. The voltage produced by such
      > > measurement
      > > > > can have short spikes as presented in Fig 6D because of capacitive
      > > > > coupling from adjacent circuitry and even from the ground ripple
      > > > > itself.
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      >
    • Show all 11 messages in this topic