Beyond Unity - Fighter's ZPM (Zero Point Module) failed replication by Itsu

Itsu posted this 07 November 2022

Hello all,

i opened this thread to discuss my replication of Fighter's ZPE (Zero Point Module).

I already opened a similar thread on OUR.com (https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4374.msg101654#msg101654 ), but will transfer some data from there to here.

Initially i understood that the below diagram was correct and complete, but it turns out its not.
There is a ground connection somewhere, but i am not sure where it is exactly, hopefully someone can tell me.
The MOSFET is shown wrong as the Drain and Source should be swapped, which was corrected later in Fighter his thread so therefor the mentioning in red.

I have build up a similar circuit and the data is shown here:
(Be aware that the induction measurement was done at 10kHz, but due to the influence of the metglas core it can be (and is) completly different on other frequencies, see my thread on OUR.com for a VNA scan of the coil/core)

I am using a 12V battery for now as my PS (minus NOT grounded) was acting weird due to all the pulses coming back from the ZPE device.
Up till now no special effects or resonance in a 0 to 5MHz range are seen with this setup, but as said the grounding may be the problem here.

Itsu

zpm

Liked by
and 3 others

bigmotherwhale posted this 12 December 2022

All of this can be solved by using a vaccum thermos full of water and a resistor, Use a thermometer and measure the temperature rise over time, its how I calculate my efficiency and i suggest that its as good as your going to get if you want to prove power is present in a load.

First do a few runs at different power levels to see what the calculations come out at, then you can take into account losses.

There is no way a test like this can lie.

Itsu, the reason you are failing in my opinion is that the resistance of the input power supply, filters and measurement resistors are shaping the input pulse, remove all this crap, put a hefy DC link 10,000uF with a film cap across it, and use a a low voltage low rdson mosfet, your 3205 should do if its genuine, with heavy guage wire and put a sharp pulse into the core, the effects will then become visible. That ONE OHM resistor on the input is crazy, just measure DC before the input capacitor.

Liked by

Munny posted this 12 December 2022

Quoting:Itsu

Not sure what you mean by “locate the triangle peak”, you mean with the horizontal cursors of the scope?

You can now already estimate the 138mA by looking at the green vertical setting of 50mA/div.

That's what I was thinking yes.

For now just be consistent in your measuring protocols so that you can compare apples to apples. Once you get to a point where it is trival to see the difference between input and output, you are on your way. Then you can explain how you did it. 😉

By the way, watch out when saying this device is pretty basic, it’s kind of touchy here 😊, just kidding!!

Not my intention to be insensitive. It's just a whole lot less components than some of the Akula or Ruslan devices. This ZPM device when it's constructed correctly and attached in the proper environment strikes at the very heart of what we have been striving for over the last decade or so. If I have the acronym correct, Zero Point Module kind of says it all.

I received a new spool of 0.8mm wire, so i will be starting to redo my coils to be 150 and 300 turns (now 100 and 200) and wind them the same way Fighter has showed us.

There surely will be some differences in measurements, so hopefully for the better.

And if not, go the other direction with say, 90 turns and 180 turns. If all three configurations behave basically the same, then yeah, this thing is touchy, touchy to dial in. At which point you may want to take another look at your switching to ensure it's capable of a truly sharp transition. With a resistive load, you should be able to go from full current to no current and vice versa in about 20 nanoseconds. And keep in mind one nanosecond equates to about 20 centimeters of wire length. I would expect with a standing wave the nodes to be no closer together than the speed at which you can switch the current.

This brings up another line of thought: Turn count may not be the priority factor here. It could be wire length since that is actually what the standing wave uses as a guide to manifest on. Turns ratio might control the intensity of the standing wave and wire length might control the density of the nodes. I'm just guessing here, but it's something to consider when trying to replicate this thing. I can see why Mr. Tesla did so many experiments, it's the only way to really grasp how this all works.

I also like your earlier remark about standing waves and use some copper wire to slide along it with a probe to see how this standing wave manifest.

I will try that too, but i doubt the frequency will be high enough to visualize the standing wave with the limited length of wire (i mean 1m wavelength we are talking 300MHz already).

If you get where your knuckles need some time off, here is some reading material you may find useful:

https://waveguide.blog/brief-history-tesla-hairpin-circuit-stout-copper-bars/

https://waveguide.blog/lecher-lines-translation-original-paper-ernst-lecher/

When I played with the "Stout Bar" experiment, I had a pair of 12 foot copper tubes. First attempt I could only find one node. After hunting tirelessly for some different high voltage capacitors and changing the spark gap a dozen times, I finally got three nodes on the bars. It all seemed a lot like magic because I really didn't know what I was doing other than destroying a lot of static sensitive equipment around me.

I have a hunch the ZPM concept is easier to tune once you start to get the hang of it because the wire in the coils become your stout bars and the capacitance is embedded in your core, bobbins and how you assemble the device.

Liked by

Itsu posted this 12 December 2022

Quoting:Vidura

I also like your earlier remark about standing waves and use some copper wire to slide along it with a probe to see how this standing wave manifest.

I will try that too, but i doubt the frequency will be high enough to visualize the standing wave with the limited length of wire (i mean 1m wavelength we are talking 300MHz already).

This is quite possible, and likely . In Fighters experiments the pattern of standing waves could be clearly observed. It could be attributed to harmonics in the 100rds Mhz range, but I incline more to think that the propagation velocity is greatly reduced due to the core inductanceand distributed capacitance , thus it could happen at much lower frequencies.

Vidura,

i see what you mean, like the velocity factor of a coax cable being typical 0.66, but this could be way less. 👍

Itsu

Liked by

Itsu posted this 12 December 2022

His calculations for Pin are correct.

292mv =292 ma

His output measurements with the multimeters are also correct because they are true rms.

https://www.redcrab-software.com/en/Calculator/Electrics/Saw-Tooth-Voltage-RMS-Value

https://masteringelectronicsdesign.com/how-to-derive-the-rms-value-of-pulse-and-square-waveforms/

√3 or √1/3 is used for sawtooth rms, √(DC) or √1/DC for rectangle rms.

VP = VRMS × √2

Hi Shelfordella,

thanks, i know the output is correct its straight DC, so no need for true rms DMM's.

My doubts are with the input, which are also straight DC (24V) and pulsed (triangle) DC, so no need IMO for rms value calculations, just simple mean (average) multiplication will do.

What do you think about my scope calculation of the input power, are they wrong?

Itsu

Liked by

Itsu posted this 12 December 2022

Quoting:bigmotherwhale

All of this can be solved by using a vaccum thermos full of water and a resistor, Use a thermometer and measure the temperature rise over time, its how I calculate my efficiency and i suggest that its as good as your going to get if you want to prove power is present in a load.

First do a few runs at different power levels to see what the calculations come out at, then you can take into account losses.

There is no way a test like this can lie.

Itsu, the reason you are failing in my opinion is that the resistance of the input power supply, filters and measurement resistors are shaping the input pulse, remove all this crap, put a hefy DC link 10,000uF with a film cap across it, and use a a low voltage low rdson mosfet, your 3205 should do if its genuine, with heavy guage wire and put a sharp pulse into the core, the effects will then become visible. That ONE OHM resistor on the input is crazy, just measure DC before the input capacitor.

Hi BMW,

thanks for your insights,

the "vaccum thermos full of water and a resistor" method is great (but somewhat bothersome) to use, but is only practical on the load (output).
I think we have no problem in measuring the output, the problem is the input, as it seems to be close to zero which will be hard to measure that way.

About my reason for failing, i used several PS's, with and without external filters and the csr is there mostly temporary to double check my current probe which i mostly use.
I also used a 12V battery alone, and then no resonance is seen over a 0 to 5MHz range at all, so no reduction in input current either, so my feeling is that there should be some form of filtering / capacitance in the circuit to create the resonance / standing waves noticed by Fighter.

I started out with the IRFP3205, but also used an IRFP260, a NVH4L160N120SC1 (160mOhm Rds(on)) and a G4PH30KD IGBT, but all show the same results being a decrease in input current during resonance (not with the battery), but also the bulbs go off pointing to some form of parallel resonance (high impedance / decreasing current).

Regards Itsu

Liked by

Itsu posted this 12 December 2022 - Last Edited 12 December 2022

Munny,

thanks again for your input, i won't repeat it all here, but its good to know.

I never played with the "Stout Bar" experiment, so perhaps its time now to do so if my knuckles need a rest from rewinding my coils 👍

By the way, here a screenshot again from my input voltage (yellow), current (green) and calculated power (red) with the current p2p value added (135.1mA) and the green horizontal cursors visible showing the delta p2p current (135mA) :

Itsu

Liked by

Shelfordella posted this 12 December 2022

Quoting:Itsu

His calculations for Pin are correct.

292mv =292 ma

His output measurements with the multimeters are also correct because they are true rms.

https://www.redcrab-software.com/en/Calculator/Electrics/Saw-Tooth-Voltage-RMS-Value

https://masteringelectronicsdesign.com/how-to-derive-the-rms-value-of-pulse-and-square-waveforms/

√3 or √1/3 is used for sawtooth rms, √(DC) or √1/DC for rectangle rms.

VP = VRMS × √2

Hi Shelfordella,

thanks, i know the output is correct its straight DC, so no need for true rms DMM's.

My doubts are with the input, which are also straight DC (24V) and pulsed (triangle) DC, so no need IMO for rms value calculations, just simple mean (average) multiplication will do.

What do you think about my scope calculation of the input power, are they wrong?

Itsu

It looks good if V x I are instantaneous products, or V(t) x I(t), which is the same as Pavg=Vrms x Irms x pf. I guess yellow is the power supply voltage instead of the voltage pulse towards the inductor.

"A little theory and calculation would have saved Edison 90 per cent of the labor." Nikola Tesla

Liked by

bigmotherwhale posted this 12 December 2022

Unfortunately Itsu all that scope shot shows is a rediculously slow charging of an inductor and a normal tranformer action, and looking at your setup its plainly obvious why, the 1 ohm resistor in the supply being a blatantly obvious reason for one.

We are not looking for LC ressonance, of course that will give you lower amp draw, energy is being returned to the supply.

You need to go back to the basics, no ammount of coil winding will help, I can get a sawtooth wave using an off the shelf common mode choke. With a pretty dire switching arangement.

You are attempting to measure something you havent even got by the looks of it.

you have a good switch board, see how much current you can get through a normal resistor in what rise time, your slope should be in the nanoseconds, once you have that move on to driving an inductor, you may need to use a snubber network for a clean pulse.

You want your pulse into the core to kick like a mule, there is no need to get any kind of saturation, not like you could saturate one of these cores in a million years with a setup like this.

Reduce the input duty cycle to a few % the freqency doesnt matter at this stage, only duty cycle, start low 1 - 10khz

I hope this helps, as it seems your trying so hard with these expensive toys, you have missed the key points.

Liked by

Admin

Fighter posted this 12 December 2022

Are you still continuing with that "measurement error" ?..

How many are needed to confirm Jagau's calculation method so you can get over it ? 4 ? 5 ? 6 ? More ?

You got another one here:

His calculations for Pin are correct.

292mv =292 ma

His output measurements with the multimeters are also correct because they are true rms.

https://www.redcrab-software.com/en/Calculator/Electrics/Saw-Tooth-Voltage-RMS-Value

https://masteringelectronicsdesign.com/how-to-derive-the-rms-value-of-pulse-and-square-waveforms/

√3 or √1/3 is used for sawtooth rms, √(DC) or √1/DC for rectangle rms.

VP = VRMS × √2

And another one:

From what Jagau states, the current reading you need is the peak amps (or saturation current), then you can apply the formula:

P= I x V x sqrt(Duty_Cycle) / sqrt(3)

The peak amps is the point/tip of the triangle, the math handles the rest. So you'll need to get that measurement and have another go at it. Just make sure the triangle waveform has a pretty much linear top to it. If it starts to round off, the math won't be quite as accurate.

I told you this calculation method was verified and confirmed by other members of our core team before Jagau came public with it. Including Yoel. Jagau is a very careful researcher. He asked for double-checks here and also the experts in real life before deciding to move the info in our public section. I'm not expert but I also checked his calculation method with the results of the calculator from Vishay site. The results always matched.

So get over it, I know you are against Jagau for other reasons but this obsession with "measurement errors" which are not there is getting ridiculous.

And you're pushing the limits we have here about tolerance and about no personal attacks. Be very careful. Just my advice.

what i do with my time is indeed entirely up to me, and i did not "demand" anyone to come to my thread and waste their time there.

You are perfectly free to ignore me and my thread and do what you have to do with your time.

So you think if you keep continuing those personal issues you have against Jagau in your own thread everything is okay and admins should just ignore that ? I think you don't realize this is not the overunity site, "you're not in Kansas anymore !". Of course admins will react, and when we see toxicity or personal attacks here we mean business, we'll not just watch. Be aware of that else you'll get banned very fast, you'll not even see it coming.

How i approach a replication is also entirely up to me

I saw that and it's a wrong approach.

When I start a replication I follow the inventor's specs very close. If the inventor says he use a DC source for sure I don't start with a battery. If the inventor says he use 150/300 turns I start with that because, I don't know, maybe it's significant for the functionality of the device. Could not be important and the device could work with 100/200 too but if the inventor didn't tried that it's better to go to the safe way and go as close as possible with the details of the prototype.

When the replication is successfully then it's another story, you can start modifying things the way you like and checking the device is still working after every modification you make.

This is the correct approach.

I know what Jagau (and you now apparently) are trying to do by trying to calculate the power in the pulse (square) AFTER the MOSFET switch.

Jagau did that in his Melnichenko thread too, which is fine to do, but that is not the way if you want to know the COP of your device.

Finally you got it.

That is the correct approach. 'Cause maybe my switching circuit for now is not that efficient and it dissipates some energy as heat. That doesn't mean the ZPM is consuming that energy. All what ZPM (or any other DUT) is consuming is the energy contained on the square pulses it is receiving on its input. So you find the real/constant COP of the ZPM/DUT.

Else you can go into a ridiculous situation where with one less efficient switching circuit (wasting energy in a lot of heat) you get a COP of let's say 3 and after you make a more efficient switching circuit (let's say this one is running cold, without wasting energy in heat) to see actually the COP of the ZPM/DUT jumps to let's say 3.5 or maybe 4. That's not how the COP is measured, you want to know exactly the energy on the input of the device (those square pulses) without involving the energy wasted in the switching circuitry or any other energy. Just what the device "see" on its input.

So I'm glad you understood what we're calculating and why for input we're using Jagau's calculation method for square pulses.

Unfortunately Itsu all that scope shot shows is a rediculously slow charging of an inductor and a normal tranformer action, and looking at your setup its plainly obvious why, the 1 ohm resistor in the supply being a blatantly obvious reason for one.

...

You need to go back to the basics

...

You are attempting to measure something you havent even got by the looks of it.

BMW is right, you know. I refered to Don Smith (I don't remember if here or in our initial private messages exchange) that any resistor or capacitor connected to a coil will lower its resonance frequency away from its natural resonance frequency. It will still have a resonance frequency but that will be artificial so to speak because of resistor/capacitor. That's why I never put a shunt resistor on the coils to measure current there. I prefer to let the coils "dance" at their natural resonance frequency. I just used the voltage probes from time to time to get and idea of how the coils are "dancing" and I told you how by checking just the voltage I can get a pretty good idea what the current and magnetic fields are doing inside ZPM.

If you start with modifications or other components connected to it it's hard to guess which of those are modifying ZPM's behavior.

Let the coils free without resistors and stuff, when you'll get the input decreasing effect then you can try to make any modifications you want like place shunt resistors, try to make it run on battery (which from my experience will not work for the reasons I explained already) or anything you want to do.

But until then just follow the data from the previous ZPM presentations. Those made by me or by Atti or by Jagau, doesn't matter which one, all are valid presentations of working ZPM replicas.

And don't get frustrated, ZPM may look simple but what's happening inside it is not simple at all. You're looking at a zero-point / vacuum / aether (however you want to call it) energy pump. Don Smith described his devices like this, Bearden used the same phrase. Classical physisics can't describe it or any other devices like this no matter how hard anyone try to enforce it on these devices. Maybe quantum physiscs (which is now in its infancy but already shocked the scientists many times, see the particles entanglement and their "spooky" as Einstein called it action at distance) could in the future explain with exact details how these devices work. That's what Yoel is studying and is very interested in.

I did came public with the ZPM exactly for that purpose, so other researchers replicate it and then to work together on improvements. Unfortunately all these events in the last years forced me to temporary change my priorities and I don't have time to continue the experiments for now but it's temporary, I'm still here and I'm looking forward to make the things change and to have time again for continuing with ZPM and other projects (like Aharonov Bohm experiment and restarting my replication of Bearden's MEG as now I have more information I didn't had before.

Well, that's it for now, going to sleep for a few hours because tomorrow another week of work starts.

Have a nice day / evening everyone

Fighter

"If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration."
		Nikola Tesla

Liked by

Atti posted this 12 December 2022 - Last Edited 12 December 2022

As mentioned before and showed on one of my video's, i do see a reduction in input current to about 0mA around (parallel) resonance (resonance only with a PS or filter, NOT when using a battery), but also, then the bulbs go out

Itsu.

I bought a 12V car battery and an 18V screwdriver battery. I lined this up. (Chap4. video) The effect occurs in the same way.
What could be the explanation?

If you start with modifications or other components connected to it it's hard to guess which of those are modifying ZPM's behavior.

I have been making the same mistake for several times. Because I didn't perform the tasks according to the specified parameters and not according to the specified material quality (because I didn't have the right material) And I didn't succeed. Of course. Everything takes time and money. But if you have a way to do it (because there is a larger Amcc core!) do it using the original method. Jagau and Chris (published on the other forum) got good results with some modifications. But problems with measurement have been reported. Personally, I therefore do not deal with the importance of measurement. I only take it as information for further fact-finding.

Then I had an idea and tried again. I'm starting all over now to understand.

But as he said: everyone does what they want with their free time.

Atti.

Liked by