Overunity Device Using Transformer - Need HELP with theory

[gabeparmley]

Overunity Device Using Transformer -- Need HELP with theory

Ok, so if you had a transformer with a single primary winding and multiple secondary windings - let's just say 10 secondary windings - what could you do with this? Say if all of these windings were 1:1 with the primary to the secondary. In theory, you could charge a battery with 5 of the secondary windings and then switch the original power source of the primary winding to the battery which output the same voltage and current as the original power source. So you'd essentially have a unity circuit already running. Could you use the other 5 secondary windings to power external sources like another battery which could be used for several things? This would be considered overunity I believe. Since you are outputting more power than was originally input into the device. This transformer could be a standard solenoid or a toroid.

Alright, correct me if I'm wrong with any of this theory. It seems possible, but I could be missing a few things or even everything. I'm probably skipping over something completely necessary to electrical engineering. Any input would be very helpful.

 

[berkeman]

Ok, so if you had a transformer with a single primary winding and multiple secondary windings - let's just say 10 secondary windings - what could you do with this? Say if all of these windings were 1:1 with the primary to the secondary. In theory, you could charge a battery with 5 of the secondary windings and then switch the original power source of the primary winding to the battery which output the same voltage and current as the original power source. So you'd essentially have a unity circuit already running. Could you use the other 5 secondary windings to power external sources like another battery which could be used for several things? This would be considered overunity I believe. Since you are outputting more power than was originally input into the device. This transformer could be a standard solenoid or a toroid.

Alright, correct me if I'm wrong with any of this theory. It seems possible, but I could be missing a few things or even everything. I'm probably skipping over something completely necessary to electrical engineering. Any input would be very helpful.

Welcome to the PF.

You don't get energy for free out of nowhere, so the term "over unity" is a misnomer. Energy output is equal to energy input, with some efficiency losses.

Just because you have more output windings doesn't mean you get more output power than you put in. Please learn a bit more about how transformers work:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformer

As you put loads on the secondary windings, that draws more current in the primary winding. This all equalizes out so that the sum of the output powers is a bit lower than the input power (due to efficiency losses).

 

[Averagesupernova]

It always interests me to see the number of ways that people can conceive to come up with an over unity device. Of course they all fail. Gabeparmley, I commend you for asking for input to disprove your theory. If you are in the habit of thinking this way you will likely go farther in life than if you hold fast to some belief that may or may not be silly. Welcome to PF.

 

[metiman]

By 'unity', are you referring to voltage? A 1:1 winding ratio will basically give you an isolation transformer. You can have as many secondary windings as you can fit on the magnetic core. It will give you more outputs. In the scenario you describe you would just end up with 5 outputs with the same voltage as the input. Aside from electrically isolating the output from the input you are basically creating an induction heater. If you wanted to increase this heating effect you could use a solid iron core. That would heat up fast.

Your core losses will depend on the chemistry and physical construction of the core, the number of turns of wire around it, the gauge of the wire, and the amount of current being drawn by the devices attached to the transformer and how often they draw it. The more turns you have the greater your resistive losses will be, but the lower your hysteresis and eddy losses will be in the core because the core will be operating with a lower magnetic flux density. Generally you try to design a transformer so that the core losses and copper losses somewhat balance. With a high current transformer you want to focus more on copper losses and use a larger magnetic core in order to be able to fit thicker windings.

The most efficient mains transformer you could make for 50/60 Hz operation would be something like a nanocrystalline amorphous iron or supermalloy < 1 mil tape wound toroidal core sized appropriately for your current requirements and hand-wound with superconductor windings. The whole transformer would ideally be immersed in liquid helium-3. You might be able to get an efficiency of 98% that way. I am also interested in efficient transformer design. Good luck.

 

[gabeparmley]

It always interests me to see the number of ways that people can conceive to come up with an over unity device. Of course they all fail. Gabeparmley, I commend you for asking for input to disprove your theory. If you are in the habit of thinking this way you will likely go farther in life than if you hold fast to some belief that may or may not be silly. Welcome to PF.

Well thank you. But not all over unity devices fail... It's been proven. I just would like to come up with a theory that doesn't involve moving parts. There has already been plenty of devices built that achieve over unity.

 

[gabeparmley]

By 'unity', are you referring to voltage? A 1:1 winding ratio will basically give you an isolation transformer. You can have as many secondary windings as you can fit on the magnetic core. It will give you more outputs. In the scenario you describe you would just end up with 5 outputs with the same voltage as the input. Aside from electrically isolating the output from the input you are basically creating an induction heater. If you wanted to increase this heating effect you could use a solid iron core. That would heat up fast.

Your core losses will depend on the chemistry and physical construction of the core, the number of turns of wire around it, the gauge of the wire, and the amount of current being drawn by the devices attached to the transformer and how often they draw it. The more turns you have the greater your resistive losses will be, but the lower your hysteresis and eddy losses will be in the core because the core will be operating with a lower magnetic flux density. Generally you try to design a transformer so that the core losses and copper losses somewhat balance. With a high current transformer you want to focus more on copper losses and use a larger magnetic core in order to be able to fit thicker windings.

The most efficient mains transformer you could make for 50/60 Hz operation would be something like a nanocrystalline amorphous iron or supermalloy < 1 mil tape wound toroidal core sized appropriately for your current requirements and hand-wound with superconductor windings. The whole transformer would ideally be immersed in liquid helium-3. You might be able to get an efficiency of 98% that way. I am also interested in efficient transformer design. Good luck.

So you are saying that it is theoretically possible, but that it would eventually fail because of resistance, and in turn a loss of energy? I knew that there would be energy losses, but those losses should be minuscule compared to the time the device would successfully transfer energy efficiently.

 

[gabeparmley]

Welcome to the PF.

You don't get energy for free out of nowhere, so the term "over unity" is a misnomer. Energy output is equal to energy input, with some efficiency losses.

Just because you have more output windings doesn't mean you get more output power than you put in. Please learn a bit more about how transformers work:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformer

As you put loads on the secondary windings, that draws more current in the primary winding. This all equalizes out so that the sum of the output powers is a bit lower than the input power (due to efficiency losses).

Ok I'm probably missing something, so correct me if I am. If there is 5v and 1amp going into the primary winding, wouldn't you get 5v and 1amp out of every secondary winding? Since it is only relying on electromagnetism... Is there something with absorption that affects power output? I am new to these theories and am only trying to understand. I've had this idea for years and would like to just figure out if what I'm considering breaks the laws of physics.

 

[russ_watters]

Well thank you. But not all over unity devices fail... It's been proven... There has already been plenty of devices built that achieve over unity.

That is not correct.

 

[gabeparmley]

That is not correct.

You deny this? Why? It has been done... I'm not saying devices that power up out of thin air with no mechanical action or electricity to start with. What can you say about devices like this:[crackpot link deleted]

 

[TurtleMeister]

Is there something with absorption that affects power output?

Yes, the transformer core, and the wire that makes up the windings. If you want to learn, you need to look somewhere other than youtube. Otherwise your thread will probably get locked.

 

[Antiphon]

Ok I'm probably missing something, so correct me if I am. If there is 5v and 1amp going into the primary winding, wouldn't you get 5v and 1amp out of every secondary winding? Since it is only relying on electromagnetism...

If you have 2 secondaries each delivering 1 amp at 5 volts, then the primary will draw 2+ amps at 5 volts. The + is a small amount extra to account for the transformer losses.

(1+1)/ (2+small_amount) = .99...

Underunity, not Overunity.

 

[gabeparmley]

If you have 2 secondaries each delivering 1 amp at 5 volts, then the primary will draw 2+ amps at 5 volts. The + is a small amount extra to account for the transformer losses.

(1+1)/ (2+small_amount) = .99...

Underunity, not Overunity.

So the secondary windings can only draw an amount of energy from the primary winding that is proportional to how many secondary windings there are? So for instance 1 primary winding and 10 secondary windings of the same size. Each of the secondary windings will only be able to draw 1/10 of the original power put into the primary winding?

 

[berkeman]

So the secondary windings can only draw an amount of energy from the primary winding that is proportional to how many secondary windings there are? So for instance 1 primary winding and 10 secondary windings of the same size. Each of the secondary windings will only be able to draw 1/10 of the original power put into the primary winding?

Correct. There is no free energy.

We generally do not allow discussions of Perpetual Motion Machines and Over-Unity Free Energy schemes here. We have allowed this discussion here to hopefully help you understand that you should not believe everything you see in YouTube videos.

I'll close this thread with a quote from the PF Rules (see the Rules link at the top of the page). You can follow those links to learn more about why such things do not work.

Perpetual motion and "free energy" discussions
Search PF and you will find many threads that have been closed in a number of forums. As for S&D, any claim of this nature would be reproducible and/or testable by the scientific community; hence there is no need for debate.
EDIT by berkeman -- here are some recent locked PMM threads:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=522548
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=520290
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=7735
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=515402
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=403572