ECW Orbo Testing Thread — Week 4 (New Power Pack Arrives)

Today is the start of a new week, and we have a new system to test, so it’s a good time to start a new thread.

For reference:
Week 1 thread
Week 2 thread
Week 3 thread
The Google document started by Ged which summarizes key information from testing so far .
The Spreadsheet with the terminal readings from the ocube
The video posted by Steorn showing some of the inner workings of the Ocube

Today is a start of a new week, and we have a new Orbo system to test which arrived today — courtesy of Steorn. I am told that what I have is the inside of Steorn’s ophone. See the video below to see what they have sent me.

The size of the potted section of the pack is 38 x 98 x 13 mm. The weight of the pack, including the 9 Volt battery is 98.8 grams.

 

Here’s a video showing the setup for the test I have started this evening.

A new spreadsheet for this test has been started here:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1UBIA4JTDb_kBwoytR9LP7OP7tH63yUeiPn2kKye4frY/edit?usp=sharing

Here are some comments from Shaun McCarthy regarding the recharging characteristics of the orbo packs:

“Its really not a linear relationship, the energy contained in it is very non-linear, its more of a step function. It has domains, so it might sit at a voltage for a long time, then make a jump when the domains click into place. Most people who test it expect it to be a cap with a long slow rise, but it tends to go up in steps, that’s because its not actually a capacitor its a domain structure!”

Below is a video of a Skype conversation I had with Shaun McCarthy today — I am sorry about the really poor quality of sound and video. I just pointed my tablet at the screen as we talked and shot the video. The sound is very poor, so please let me know if you have any questions about anything we discussed.

March 4, 2016

With the new Orbo pack showing little sign of life at the moment, I’ve started a new long-term experiment with the Ocube. I charged it up at ports U1-U2 to 4.71 V and put reference voltage circuit on it using two 9V batteries and a 1M Ohm resistor (When setting up I mistakenly put on a 1K Ohm resistor instead of the intended 1M Ohm. I realized my mistake at 9:37 am and replaced it with a 1M Ohm resistor. these changes are now reflected in the spreadsheet). Then I placed a 2.2K Ohm resistor across U1-U2. I’ll be updating the old spreadsheet with the progress of this test here: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1SmmDLw9-g_Mamtk7qloWEeWNacHwEBpXxdwdTXnAZpc/edit#gid=0

New photo by Frank Acland / Google Photos

March 12, 2016

Because the cell on o1-2 had been losing voltage, I decided to try to charge it up using a 5V DC USB power source. After about 3 days with a 2.2k Ohm resistor in the circuit, I noticed that the 5.17 V on o3-4 had returned. I then tried to boost the voltage some more on o1-2 using a 22 Ohm resistor. Below is the video of a test I did this morning. I had to cut it short as I had to leave the house for the day.

A new thread has been started here: http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/03/13/ecw-orbo-week-6-testing-thread-new-life-from-power-pack-new-testing-approach/

  • Anon2012_2014

    PLEASE put some electrical tape around the exposed conductor on the red wire. We don’t need to accidentally short out anything.

    • Xavier Pitz

      Or replace it with a new one that wasn’t nibbled by a sabot-cat ๐Ÿ˜› .
      This is a disaster waiting to happen… But it is maybe one of Frank’s trick to make his video more thrilling… I was stressed out during the whole video focused on the exposed wired hoping that nothing wrong happens ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • Frank Acland

      Ok, I’ve done it.

  • Anon2012_2014

    PLEASE put some electrical tape around the exposed conductor on the red wire. We don’t need to accidentally short out anything.

    • Xavier Pitz

      Or replace it with a new one that wasn’t nibbled by a sabot-cat ๐Ÿ˜› .
      This is a disaster waiting to happen… But it is maybe one of Frank’s trick to make his video more thrilling… I was stressed out during the whole video focused on the exposed wire hoping that nothing wrong happens ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • Frank Acland

      Ok, I’ve done it.

  • SG

    Nice explanation of what you received. So we have B1 B2, O1 O2, and O3 O4 as our points of measurement and discussion. The 220Ohm resistor discharge test is a good place to start. We would have probably determined that to be the initial test ourselves. Make sure the VC97 is in the picture during the complete discharge so we can run some estimations on the energy storage capacity, and how it behaves once you remove the 220Ohm resistor. Did SM give any warning about what level of voltage not to fall below? We don’t want to misalign any of the domains on this unit, if at all possible.

    • Frank Acland

      I asked him that and he said it would cut off automatically, then go into “recharge cycle” before it would kick back in.

  • BillH

    Useful battery info Duracell PP3:-

    individual Battery Details (9V Alkaline Battery)

    Battery Capacity: 550.0mAh

    Battery Technology: Alkaline (Single Use)

    Current: 2.1000A

    Depth: 17.0mm

    Height: 48.5mm

    Voltage: 9.00V

    Weight: 44.0g

    Width: 26.2mm

  • BillH

    I thought the full orbo pack was supposed to polarise the half orbo pack, so the 9V battery is a bit of a surprise?

    • Frank Acland

      Yes it was a surprise to me.

      • Ged

        Steorn is nothing if not a king of surprises.

        • FC

          I personally hope that someday, at least one of those surprises is positive. :-p

  • BillH

    I thought the full orbo pack was supposed to polarise the half orbo pack, so the 9V battery is a bit of a surprise?

    • Frank Acland

      Yes it was a surprise to me.

      • Ged

        Steorn is nothing if not a king of surprises.

        • FC

          I personally hope that someday, at least one of those surprises is positive. :-p

    • Husky

      I think it is just a “backup option” to be able to “revive” the pack if the alignment of the dipoles would get ******. Would also make sense why they said it’s optional

  • Bob Greenyer

    Nice one Frank!

  • Bob Greenyer

    Nice one Frank!

  • FC

    Thanks for the weight and dimensions, Frank.

    The weight and volume of the potted section are 53.8 grams (as a duracell 9V battery weighs 45 grams) and 48.4 milliliters.

    A non-rechargeable lithium-ion battery of similar weight would be able to store 21.5 Wh (see attachment).

    Therefore, we would roughly need to extract 40 mW continuously over the course of 23 days to rule out that possibility.

    • FC

      But, if we run a series of charge/discharge cycles through a 220 Ohm resistor (at a constant 5V, or 113.6 mW), we would roughly need 190 hours of cumulative discharge time to rule out the battery hypothesis. Those 190 hours don’t take into account the recharge time.

      We will know which option is the quickest when we run the first cycle and record the charge/discharge times.

      And in both calculations, I’m considering the energy supplied by the 9V battery (at a rate of 10-20 uW) to be negligible. In this sense, it would be useful to check the voltage across the 1M Ohm resistor.

  • FC

    Thanks for the weight and dimensions, Frank.

    The weight and volume of the potted section are 53.8 grams (as a duracell 9V battery weighs 45 grams) and 48.4 milliliters.

    A non-rechargeable lithium-ion battery of similar weight would be able to store 21.5 Wh (see attachment).

    Therefore, we would roughly need to extract 40 mW continuously over the course of 23 days to rule out that possibility.

    • FC

      But, if we run a series of charge/discharge cycles through a 220 Ohm resistor (at a constant 5V, or 113.6 mW), we would roughly need 190 hours of cumulative discharge time to rule out the battery hypothesis. Those 190 hours don’t take into account the recharge time.

      We will know which option is the quickest when we run the first cycle and record the charge/discharge times.

      And in both calculations, I’m considering the energy supplied by the 9V battery (at a rate of 10-20 uW) to be negligible. In this sense, it would be useful to check the voltage across the 1M Ohm resistor.

  • Ged

    Ah that new thread smell. But also, new device smell! What untold mysteries will a bare Ocore hold for us–a half sized prince, or a pint sized villain? Only science will tell!

    • SG

      Indeed! Glad to be part of this open science effort. Some credit due to MFMP for really forging the live open science concept, which was quite desperately needed IMHO. Tough to get answers to some of the great questions of our day otherwise as they are either obfuscated by conflicts of interest, or simply met with apathy or often times derision.

  • Sanjeev

    Congrats on getting a new toy. Nice black box, unknown invites us ๐Ÿ˜€
    What I don’t understand is that he wants you to use 220 ohm which will draw 113mW while the max power he said was 40mW? Isn’t that risky?

    • FC

      As far as I know, 40 mW is the average recharge rate.

      The maximum output power hasn’t been given to us yet.

    • Frank Acland

      He says this will discharge eventually, but he wants to show how it recharges.

      • Sanjeev

        Lets video the first recharge (self charge) so we can see how fast it does that. (For a comparison with steorn’s demo video).

  • Sanjeev

    Congrats on getting a new toy. Nice black box, unknown invites us ๐Ÿ˜€
    What I don’t understand is that he wants you to use 220 ohm which will draw 113mW while the max power he said was 40mW? Isn’t that risky?

    • FC

      As far as I know, 40 mW is the average recharge rate.

      The maximum output power hasn’t been given to us yet.

    • Frank Acland

      He says this will discharge eventually, but he wants to show how it recharges.

      • Sanjeev

        Lets video the first recharge (self charge) so we can see how fast it does that. (For a comparison with steorn’s demo video).

  • Frank Acland

    A new test has been started — video introducing it is above, along with a new spreadsheet here:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1UBIA4JTDb_kBwoytR9LP7OP7tH63yUeiPn2kKye4frY/edit?usp=sharing

    • FC

      I’m sorry to bother you now, Frank, but the 10 minute interval between voltage readings is not going to give us a very precise indication of the cutoff time (when O3-O4 will supposedly become 0V).

      • Frank Acland

        True, but I don’t know when to expect the cutoff. It could be hours, could be seconds from now. I hope to be able to set up something more automatic. This is just a test test ๐Ÿ™‚

        • FC

          Agreed.

          • FC

            Do you know the cutoff voltage of the controller chip, Frank?

          • Frank Acland

            I don’t know for sure. I will ask, though.

          • FC

            Thank you.

          • FC

            Just for the record, according to my calculations, the 9V battery is supplying energy at a rate of 39 uW (8.9*4.3/1e6), whereas the Orbo core is discharging at a rate of 121 mW ((5.16^2)/220), without considering the losses through the controller chip. This yields a 0.03% contribution from the 9V battery (i.e. negligible, as far as I’m concerned).

          • FC

            Apologies. I just realized that I made a mistake and the contribution from the battery is even more negligible, 0.015%. It’s supplying energy at a 20uW rate ((8.9-4.3)*4.3/1e6), if I’m not mistaken again.

  • Frank Acland

    A new test has been started — video introducing it is above, along with a new spreadsheet here:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1UBIA4JTDb_kBwoytR9LP7OP7tH63yUeiPn2kKye4frY/edit?usp=sharing

    • FC

      I’m sorry to bother you now, Frank, but the 10 minute interval between voltage readings is not going to give us a very precise indication of the cutoff time (when O3-O4 will supposedly become 0V).

      • Frank Acland

        True, but I don’t know when to expect the cutoff. It could be hours, could be seconds from now. I hope to be able to set up something more automatic. This is just a test test ๐Ÿ™‚

        • FC

          Agreed.

          • FC

            Do you know the cutoff voltage of the controller chip, Frank?

          • Frank Acland

            I don’t know for sure. I will ask, though.

          • FC

            Thank you.

          • FC

            Just for the record, according to my calculations, the 9V battery is supplying energy at a rate of 39 uW (8.9*4.3/1e6), whereas the Orbo core is discharging at a rate of 121 mW ((5.16^2)/220), without considering the losses through the controller chip. This yields a 0.03% contribution from the 9V battery (i.e. negligible, as far as I’m concerned).

          • FC

            Apologies. I just realized that I made a mistake and the contribution from the battery is even more negligible, 0.015%. It’s supplying energy at a 20uW rate ((8.9-4.3)*4.3/1e6), if I’m not mistaken again.

  • Frank Acland

    I posted some comments above from Shaun today regarding charging characteristics of the orbo cells.

    • FC

      Thank you, Frank.
      This seems to be in line with some of your previous observations.

      • Frank Acland

        Yes, I told him about what we had seen, and he said it was characteristic of how orbo charges.

        • georgehants

          I am sure there are many of us watching who can say nothing useful and hoping for success. Good luck.

          • FC

            Hi George.

            Humor is always useful, and to me, yours is the one of the best around here.

            Regarding our shared hope for success, at least Shaun already said that this unit is working fine. In fact, we’ve already seen it outputting a decent amount of energy in a relatively short period of time. But I can’t wait for Frank’s first voltage reading of the day, to make sure that it recharges just as well.

            Then, as long as the unit continues to work without problems, it’s just a matter of time before we can reach some solid conclusions. And we always knew that it would take about a month to do so, anyway. But it’s definitely going to feel like a very long month. At least to me.

    • Ged

      Well, his comments really fit well with our model and the data gathered so far. Also implies if the domains start scrambling, the voltage should fall at faster and faster rates, as we have also seen.

  • Frank Acland

    I posted some comments above from Shaun today regarding charging characteristics of the orbo cells.

    • FC

      Thank you, Frank.
      This seems to be in line with some of your previous observations.

      • Frank Acland

        Yes, I told him about what we had seen, and he said it was characteristic of how orbo charges.

    • Ged

      Well, his comments really fit well with our model and the data gathered so far. Also implies if the domains start scrambling, the voltage should fall at faster and faster rates, as we have also seen.

  • SG

    “then make a jump when the domains click into place”

    Well, we certainly observed something like that with the Ocube–twice in fact.

  • SG

    “then make a jump when the domains click into place”

    Well, we certainly observed something like that with the Ocube–twice in fact.

  • FC

    Ok. We have cutoff. After 1 hour and 23-33 minutes.

    • FC

      Energy output in the order of 167-187 mWh.

      • FC

        At an average recharge rate of 40 mW, it will take 5-6 hours to get the core back to a full charge (considering the 167-187 mWh drain plus some losses through the controller chip).

        • FC

          It’s too early to know for sure, especially without knowing the time the core needs to fully recharge, but with the numbers we have so far, it will take around 35 days to complete enough charge/discharge cycles to rule out the battery hypothesis.

          • FC

            And that would be with Frank working 24/7. :-p

          • SG

            Yes, we’ll need to setup the “equilibrium” test so that we are drawing a constant 40mW, or so, and just let it run for the next 23 days. Low maintenance and gets us what we need to make a conclusion.

            Preferably using a resistor as LEDs can play tricks with respect to power consumption.

          • FC

            Agreed.
            And then, if and when the battery hypothesis is ruled out, we can focus on the recharge characteristics.

          • MWerner

            How about a simple constant current source circuit. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_source)
            Three resistors a zener diode and a transistor. For 40mW you won’t need very big components.
            I didn’t read enough yet to see if the output voltage in this new pack is regulated. There is such a thing as a constant power circuit also, but is more involved.

          • SG

            Good suggestion, although might not be needed because the O3/O4 terminals are across a voltage regulator, which appears to output a constant ~5.16 V (so long as the O1/O2 voltage stays above the cutoff voltage). So, if we can strike a “balance” between extracting energy from the unit while not causing the O1/O2 voltage to fall below cutoff, then we can run long term with a simple resistor as the load.

          • FC

            In order to strike a balance, I think that we need to take into account the losses through the controller chip. So, for any given energy output through a load, we should add something like 20% to find the actual energy drain from the core.

            In fact, it would be great if Shaun could tell us the efficiency of the controller chip.

  • FC

    Ok. We have cutoff. After 1 hour and 23-33 minutes.

    • FC

      Energy output in the order of 167-187 mWh.

      • FC

        At an average recharge rate of 40 mW, it will take 5-6 hours to get the core back to a full charge (considering the 167-187 mWh drain plus some losses through the controller chip).

        • FC

          It’s too early to know for sure, especially without knowing the time the core needs to fully recharge, but with the numbers we have so far, it will take around 35 days to complete enough charge/discharge cycles to rule out the battery hypothesis.

          • FC

            And that would be with Frank working 24/7. :-p

          • SG

            Yes, we’ll need to setup the “equilibrium” test so that we are drawing a constant 40mW, or so, and just let it run for the next 23 days. Low maintenance and gets us what we need to make a conclusion.

            Preferably using a resistor as LEDs can play tricks with respect to power consumption.

          • FC

            Agreed.
            And then, if and when the battery hypothesis is ruled out, we can focus on the recharge characteristics.

          • MWerner

            How about a simple constant current source circuit. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_source)
            Three resistors a zener diode and a transistor. For 40mW you won’t need very big components.
            I didn’t read enough yet to see if the output voltage in this new pack is regulated. There is such a thing as a constant power circuit also, but is more involved.

          • SG

            Good suggestion, although might not be needed because the O3/O4 terminals are across a voltage regulator, which appears to output a constant ~5.16 V (so long as the O1/O2 voltage stays above the cutoff voltage). So, if we can strike a “balance” between extracting energy from the unit while not causing the O1/O2 voltage to fall below cutoff, then we can run long term with a simple resistor as the load.

          • FC

            In order to strike a balance, I think that we need to take into account the losses through the controller chip. So, for any given energy output through a load, we should add something like 20% to find the actual energy drain from the core.

            In fact, it would be great if Shaun could tell us the efficiency of the controller chip.

  • FC

    Frank, personally I think it’s better to let it recharge for a while now. We don’t want O1-O2 to drop too low.

    • Frank Acland

      Yes, I’m going to take my last reading at the top of the hour and stop for tonight

      • FC

        Ok. Excellent job, by the way.

        • Frank Acland

          Thanks ๐Ÿ™‚

  • FC

    Frank, personally I think it’s better to let it recharge for a while now. We don’t want O1-O2 to drop too low.

    • Frank Acland

      Yes, I’m going to take my last reading at the top of the hour and stop for tonight

      • FC

        Ok. Excellent job, by the way.

        • Frank Acland

          Thanks ๐Ÿ™‚

          • Bayani

            Hey Mr. Acland. So using 220 ohm, the unit turns off for ~ 90 mins. I think I have an idea. We can do 12 hrs discharging by connecting the unit using a 1760 ohm and then disconnect it for 12 hrs.

            I acquired the 1760 ohms by using (220ohm x 8). I think using 1760 ohms will allow the unit to turn off 8X longer which is 90 mins x 8 = 720 mins which is 12 hrs.

            With this there is a equal amount of charge and discharge every day.

            However, if the whole unit weight 100g, using the density of 400Wh/Kg, the unit will have 40Wh of energy.

            Using 1760 ohms, discharge rate is (5^2/1760) = 14mW. Energy used by discharging for 12 hrs in one day is .014 X 12 hr X 3600 sec = 604 or .167Wh

            Using 1760 ohms, per day, 12 hrs discharging, the unit consumes .167Wh. It’s gonna take (40Wh / .167Wh) = 240 days!!!!! to completely drain this 100g battery. longer than that then we can tell it’s not a battery.

          • FC

            “if the whole unit weight 100g”

            The 9V battery accounts for 45 of the 100 grams.

  • SG

    Interesting to see the O3/O4 voltage snap back to 5.17 V immediately after removing the discharge resistor. This is consistent with what was seen in SM’s video. This also indicates that there is likely no capacitor in this unit.

    • FC

      I think O3-O4 is the reading across the controller chip. So as long as the core’s voltage is above the cutoff value, the controller chip’s output is fixed at around 5V.

      • SG

        Yes, you are right, was about to edit my post. So in fact, we do not appear to be seeing the snap-back effect. Let’s see how quickly O1/O2 rises.

        • FC

          Yes. Even though that’s only the bias, it should give us a hint of what’s going on in the power core.

          • SG

            So, looks like the cutoff voltage is 4.17 V. The O1/O2 is across the Orbo cells (which are in series with the bias circuit). Agree?

          • FC

            Well, there could be a resistor in between. So there could also be a voltage difference.

          • Sanjeev

            The voltage O1O2 dropped so I guess there is a resistor between it and the orbo but a smaller one, not 1M. Now its difficult to see orbo’s behavior, its a black box.

          • FC

            Right.
            According to Frank, Shaun says that the unit consists of a full orbo core acting as the bias and a half orbo core acting as the power source. It would then seem natural to assume the the voltage of the bias core is twice the voltage of the power core. And also that Steorn put a resistor in between them in order to limit the current from the bias core to the power core (so that it acts as a bias, not as a power source, and so that it never gets depleted). Since orbo cores are supposed to have a full-charge voltage of approximately 5V, this is consistent with the O1-O2 readings. But we may never know the voltage range of the power core itself. So we will need to develop a “feeling” for the relationship between O1-O2 and the charge level of the power core.

  • SG

    Interesting to see the O3/O4 voltage snap back to 5.17 V immediately after removing the discharge resistor. This is consistent with what was seen in SM’s video. This also indicates that there is likely no capacitor in this unit.

    • FC

      I think O3-O4 is the reading across the controller chip. So as long as the core’s voltage is above the cutoff value, the controller chip’s output is fixed at around 5V.

      • SG

        Yes, you are right, was about to edit my post. So in fact, we do not appear to be seeing the snap-back effect. Let’s see how quickly O1/O2 rises.

        • FC

          Yes. Even though that’s only the bias, it should give us a hint of what’s going on in the power core.

          • SG

            So, looks like the cutoff voltage is ~4.17 V. The O1/O2 is across the Orbo cells (which are in series with the bias circuit). Agree?

          • FC

            Well, there could be a resistor in between. So there could also be a voltage difference.

          • Sanjeev

            The voltage O1O2 dropped so I guess there is a resistor between it and the orbo but a smaller one, not 1M. Now its difficult to see orbo’s behavior, its a black box.

          • FC

            Right.
            According to Frank, Shaun says that the unit consists of a full orbo core acting as the bias and a half orbo core acting as the power source. It would then seem natural to assume the the voltage of the bias core is twice the voltage of the power core. And also that Steorn put a resistor in between them in order to limit the current from the bias core to the power core (so that it acts as a bias, not as a power source, and so that it never gets depleted). Since orbo cores are supposed to have a full-charge voltage of approximately 5V, this is consistent with the O1-O2 readings. But we may never know the voltage range of the power core itself. So we will need to develop a “feeling” for the relationship between O1-O2 and the charge level of the power core.

  • Bayani

    I’m sorry for double posting. I just want other people to see this.

    Hey Mr. Acland. So using 220 ohm, the unit turns off for ~ 90 mins. I think I have an idea. We can do 12 hrs discharging by connecting the unit using a 1760 ohm and then disconnect it for 12 hrs.
    I’m sorry for double posting. I just want other people to see this.

    I acquired the 1760 ohms by using (220ohm x 8). I think using 1760 ohms will allow the unit to turn off 8X longer which is 90 mins x 8 = 720 mins which is 12 hrs.

    With this there is a equal amount of charge and discharge every day.

    However, if the whole unit weight 100g, using the density of 400Wh/Kg, the unit will have 40Wh of energy.

    Using 1760 ohms, discharge rate is (5^2/1760) = 14mW. Energy used by discharging for 12 hrs in one day is .014 X 12 hr X 3600 sec = 604 or .167Wh

    Using 1760 ohms, per day, 12 hrs discharging, the unit consumes .167Wh. It’s gonna take (40Wh / .167Wh) = 240 days!!!!! to completely drain this 100g battery unit. Longer than that then we can tell it’s not a battery.

    • Sanjeev

      Good idea, but there is no need to wait for 12 hours to discharge it, that job can be done in 90 mins. So a lot of time can be saved. Secondly, from steorn or from hit and trial we can get the self charge time, which is the time in which it charges up to full (to enable next 90 mins discharge). I’m hoping that it will be much less than 12 hours.

      Steorn’s claim is that it can charge one phone battery in 1 day, which is 1500mAh at 5V, so you can estimate the amount of energy it can produce in 1 day. (I’m feeling a bit lazy to calculate it right now). If it does that, we can save more time.

      If we take only 54 grams as its total weight, as estimated by FC below, we further reduce the time.

  • FC

    “if the whole unit weight 100g”

    The 9V battery accounts for 45 of the 100 grams.

  • Sanjeev

    Good idea, but there is no need to wait for 12 hours to discharge it, that job can be done in 90 mins. So a lot of time can be saved. Secondly, from steorn or from hit and trial we can estimate the self charge time, which is the time in which it charges up to full (to enable next 90 mins discharge). I’m hoping that it will be much less than 12 hours.

    Steorn’s claim is that it can charge one phone battery in 1 day, which is 1500mAh at 5V, so you can estimate the amount of energy it can produce in 1 day. (I’m feeling a bit lazy to calculate it right now). If it does that, we can save more time.

    If we take only 54 grams as its total weight, as estimated by FC below, we further reduce the time.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    The automatic cut-off function makes estimates of the released energy very difficult. Frank, is it still possible to give back the new meter? You will need at least one that calculates the average of the voltage over time.

    • FC

      Hi Andreas.
      A consensus is starting to build up around the conviction that the quickest way to rule out the battery hypothesis is by subjecting this orbo pack to a continuous discharge at a rate as close as possible to its claimed recharge rate (40 mW, according to Shaun). In that way, the orbo pack’s voltage would remain stable and never trigger the controller chip’s cutoff function. We only need to make sure that we take into account the losses incurred by the voltage controller chip, so that the pack isn’t drained quicker than it is recharged. If we can strike that balance, we could rule out the battery hypothesis in less than a month.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        However, if the cut-offs would occur occasionally against the expectations, this might result in inconsistent data. You could ensure that this is not the case by using the โ€œminโ€ function of the instrument. But you would have to use it consequently then, and of course the meter would have to stay connected all the time.

        • FC

          Agreed. That’s why it’s so important to strike the right balance, to prevent the cutoff function from being triggered.

          Another concern is that the average recharge rate that Shaun talks about is probably calculated during the recharge phase of the cycle (i.e. without any load). And we don’t know if the recharge rate is the same while driving a load.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    The automatic cut-off function makes estimates of the released energy very difficult. Frank, is it still possible to give back the new meter? You will need at least one that calculates the average of the voltage over time.

    • FC

      Hi Andreas.
      A consensus is starting to build up around the conviction that the quickest way to rule out the battery hypothesis is by subjecting this orbo pack to a continuous discharge at a rate as close as possible to its claimed recharge rate (40 mW, according to Shaun). In that way, the orbo pack’s voltage would remain stable and never trigger the controller chip’s cutoff function. We only need to make sure that we take into account the losses incurred by the voltage controller chip, so that the pack isn’t drained quicker than it is recharged. If we can strike that balance, we could rule out the battery hypothesis in less than a month.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        However, if the cut-offs would occur occasionally against the expectations, this might result in inconsistent data. You could ensure that this is not the case by using the โ€œminโ€ function of the instrument. But you would have to use it consequently then, and of course the meter would have to stay connected all the time.

        • FC

          Agreed. That’s why it’s so important to strike the right balance, to prevent the cutoff function from being triggered.

          Another concern is that the average recharge rate that Shaun talks about is probably calculated during the recharge phase of the cycle (i.e. without any load). And we don’t know if the recharge rate is the same while driving a load.

  • Although the input from the battery is assumed to be next to negligible, its mere presence is muddying the water, as the need to replace the first one indicated.

    I may have missed the answer to this, but has Shaun actually been asked why the 9V battery is needed? I am assuming that the phones don’t have one, so shouldn’t we be looking at the characteristics and behaviour of the potted block on its own first (for instance the ‘native’ bias voltage across O1-O2), before looking at extended tests with the battery attached?

    Apologies if I’ve missed the answers to the above on a quick skim through.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      They said originally that the new unit would not need a battery, since there are two groups of cells, one of which provides the bias voltage for the other. But I guess that this concept did not work as expected, since the first group will also need a bias voltage from time to time.

      A possible solution for Steorn might be a more complex circuitry that allows switching between the groups if necessary. They could use a multiplier to obtain a sufficient bias. But at the moment it looks as if they were still very far from this point.

      • FC

        That’s right.
        I think that the 9V battery just gives this pack some extra recharge power at a very low (almost negligible) power cost that can be easily audited. The way I see it, the 9V battery is the bias for the full orbo cell, and the full orbo cell is the bias for the half orbo cell, which delivers the power through the voltage controller chip at a constant 5.16 V.

    • FC

      Hi Peter.
      I guess that this unit is one of a kind. I reckon that the purpose of the battery is just to turbocharge the pack’s recharging abilities in order to shorten the charge/discharge cycle times and make Frank’s life easier. And as I said below, being unpotted and easily auditable, the battery’s impact can be readily accounted for.

      • Please ignore this post (can’t delete defective image)

        • georgehants

          Morning Peter, I am a little surprised that the Orbo did not come with a complete circuit diagram and instructions to test.
          Would save any confusion of the procedure.

          • Morning George. That does seem to be Shaun McCarthy’s style – I’m not sure why, as it seems to make life unnecessarily difficult.

      • I’m guessing that we are looking at something like the upper sketch below.

        However there is a second possibility as in the lower schematic, which would mean that O1-O2 would be looking at the overall voltage across the output IC. Can we eliminate this possibility based on what we’ve seen so far?

        • FC

          Yes, that’s very close. But according to Frank’s first video (above), there’s only one bias core, and O1-O2 is the voltage across it. So the unknown resistor may be just downstream of the bias core.

          Then, if you really want to be thorough, we also have a 9V battery in parallel with the bias core, and B1-B2 is the voltage across it.

          • FC, thanks. Yes, I should have annotated the sketches to show that each ‘orbo’ is in fact a ‘half-orbo’. I was ignoring the external cct for the moment to try to get the basic phone circuit right first. More like this, then?

            http://www.health-answers.co.uk/phone_cct.jpg

          • FC

            Exactly! Great job.

            Personally, I would have placed the resitor along the top line, instead of the bottom. But it doesn’t make any difference.

          • Will amend!

          • FC

            Ok. ๐Ÿ™‚
            Oh, just one other minor comment. O1 and 02 go the other way around.

          • FC

            There you go. ๐Ÿ™‚

            I know you’re running out of space, but if you think you can fit B1 (on the + side of the battery) and B2 (on the – side), we would be done. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • OK, B1 B2 added.

          • FC

            I can’t see it yet for whatever reason, but I trust you. ๐Ÿ™‚
            Great job, Peter.

          • I seem to be having a few problems with disqus and images at the moment! I can’t even see my own amended uploads unless I open the images in new tabs. Grrrr.

          • FC

            Lol, it’s ok. Maybe you should paste it on Frank’s new spreadsheet.

          • FC

            So there’s no physical connection (or resistor) between the cores. I guess that we could represent them as induction coils, to show that they influence each other via their electric fields.

          • I’ve just added a sort of unspecified electric field and left them as (white) boxes.

            I’ll leave it to the physicists to work out whether the field is electrostatic or magnetic – or something else entirely!

            http://www.health-answers.co.uk/phone_3.jpg

            We seem to be in some rather strange new territory now. Or a load of blarney.

  • Although the input from the battery is assumed to be next to negligible, its mere presence is muddying the water, as the need to replace the first one indicated.

    I may have missed the answer to this, but has Shaun actually explained why the 9V battery is needed? I am assuming that the phones don’t have one, as this is the purpose of one of the orbos, so shouldn’t we be looking at the characteristics and behaviour of the potted block on its own first (for instance the ‘native’ bias voltage across O1-O2), before looking at extended tests with the battery attached?

    Perhaps we should just look initially at some simple functionality tests such as whether or not a phone battery can be repeatedly charged by connecting an empty battery from an old phone across O3-O4 with no external bias battery attached, discharging it through a resistor when charged and repeating the cycle? Or just connecting a small load such as a single LED and resistor across the output and seeing how long it remains lit and whether the Orbo recovers if it becomes exhausted?

    Apologies if I’ve missed the answers to the above on a quick skim through.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      They said originally that the new unit would not need a battery, since there are two groups of cells, one of which provides the bias voltage for the other. But I guess that this concept did not work as expected, since the first group will also need a bias voltage from time to time.

      A possible solution for Steorn might be a more complex circuitry that allows switching between the groups if necessary. They could use a multiplier to obtain a sufficient bias. But at the moment it looks as if they were still very far from this point.

      • FC

        That’s right.
        I think that the 9V battery just gives this pack some extra recharge power at a very low (almost negligible) power cost that can be easily audited. The way I see it, the 9V battery is the bias for the full orbo cell, and the full orbo cell is the bias for the half orbo cell, which delivers the power through the voltage controller chip at a constant 5.16 V.

    • FC

      Hi Peter.
      I guess that this unit is one of a kind. I reckon that the purpose of the battery is just to turbocharge the pack’s recharging abilities in order to shorten the charge/discharge cycle times and make Frank’s life easier. And as I said below, being unpotted and easily auditable, the battery’s impact can be readily accounted for.

      • Please ignore this post (can’t delete defective image)

        • georgehants

          Morning Peter, I am a little surprised that the Orbo did not come with a complete circuit diagram and instructions to test.
          Would save any confusion of the procedure.

          • Morning George. That does seem to be Shaun McCarthy’s style – I’m not sure why, as it seems to make life unnecessarily difficult.

      • I’m guessing that we are looking at something like the upper sketch below.

        However there is a second possibility as in the lower schematic, which would mean that O1-O2 would be looking at the overall voltage across the output IC. Can we eliminate this possibility based on what we’ve seen so far?

        (Images deleted to avoid confusion. See amended version further down)

        • FC

          Yes, that’s very close. But according to Frank’s first video (above), there’s only one bias core, and O1-O2 is the voltage across it. So the unknown resistor may be just downstream of the bias core.

          Then, if you really want to be thorough, we also have a 9V battery in parallel with the bias core, and B1-B2 is the voltage across it.

          • FC, thanks. Yes, I should have annotated the sketches to show that each ‘orbo’ shown is in fact a ‘half-orbo’. I was ignoring the external cct for the moment to try to get the basic phone circuit right first. More like this, then?

            http://www.health-answers.co.uk/phone_cct.jpg

            Edit: Slightly amended, per FC below. External PP3 circuit added in blue.

            Edit 2: Another version below, following SM’s comments.

          • FC

            Exactly! Great job.

            Personally, I would have placed the resitor along the top line, instead of the bottom. But it doesn’t make any difference.

          • Will amend!

          • FC

            Ok. ๐Ÿ™‚
            Oh, just one other minor comment. O1 and 02 go the other way around.

          • FC

            There you go. ๐Ÿ™‚

            I know you’re running out of space, but if you think you can fit B1 (on the + side of the battery) and B2 (on the – side), we would be done. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • OK, B1 B2 added.

          • FC

            I can’t see it yet for whatever reason, but I trust you. ๐Ÿ™‚
            Great job, Peter.

          • I seem to be having a few problems with disqus and images at the moment! I can’t even see my own amended uploads unless I open the images in new tabs. Grrrr.

          • FC

            Lol, it’s ok. Maybe you should paste it on Frank’s new spreadsheet.

          • FC

            So there’s no physical connection (or resistor) between the cores. I guess that we could represent them as induction coils, to show that they influence each other via their electric fields.

          • I’ve just added a sort of unspecified electric field and left them as (white) boxes.

            I’ll leave it to the physicists to work out whether the field is electrostatic – or something else entirely!

            http://www.health-answers.co.uk/phone_3.jpg

            We seem to be in some rather strange new territory now. Or a load of blarney.

  • georgehants

    I am sure there are many of us watching who can say nothing useful and hoping for success. Good luck.

    • FC

      Hi George.

      Humor is always useful, and to me, yours is the one of the best around here.

      Regarding our shared hope for success, at least Shaun already said that this unit is working fine. In fact, we’ve already seen it outputting a decent amount of energy in a relatively short period of time. But I can’t wait for Frank’s first voltage reading of the day, to make sure that it recharges just as well.

      Then, as long as the unit continues to work without problems, it’s just a matter of time before we can reach some solid conclusions. And we always knew that it would take about a month to do so, anyway. But it’s definitely going to feel like a very long month. At least to me.

      • El Mex

        My emotions were like a caroussell. Ordered one, got no delivery yet. Then I saw the potted mess. Considered refund but didnt after I read that people got refunded if warranted by customer. This made me little confident again. Emails by Steorn get sometimes answered, sometimes not. Sometimes personnel, sometimes mass-mail like. Well.. Now I just wait for some data from you and some testing confirmation of steorn, while being patient.

        Hope dies last! As long as there is even mainstream considerations of black energy as the most abundant part of the universe (70%+ of the universe), there is so much room for stuff like this – oCube and e-Cat ๐Ÿ™‚ Lets hope they both come alive!

        • FC

          Thanks for sharing your experience. This is definitely far from being a smooth rollout. I guess there’s nothing we can do, but be patient.

  • Rob King

    Frank, we need to confirm with Shaun the actual connections of O1 and O2, because I think they are connected across the output orbo, not the double reference voltage orbo as shown below.Certainly a voltage of around 4.6V for the output orbo would seem to make sense.
    I recommend the next test to be started is to use the portapow to start monitoring the output power over time. Check the polarity of O3 and O4 using a meter to determine -ve and +ve connections.

    So connect the following:
    O3 and O4 connect to the green input terminal block on the portapow (check polarity)
    Connect a 220 ohm resistor on the output terminal blocks of the portapow.

    Check the mAH when possible and enter the time and value into the spreadsheet.
    Also, check the voltage of O1 and O2.

    • Frank Acland

      Hi Rob, and all.

      I have been in touch with SM regarding the testing we did last evening. He said the results were as he expected — except he is not sure why o1-o2 is dropping. It was shipped at 5V, and now is at 3.9 V. So far, it does not show signs of recovering or stopping its decline. He does say that this is the reference voltage cell.

      • FC

        Hi Frank.
        Yes, O1-O2 was already 4.65 V in your first video. And 4.38 V at the beginning of your second video. So it was already dropping before making any discharge tests.
        Not very promising.

        • FC

          Can you check the polarity of the battery?

          • Frank Acland
          • FC

            I meant if you can make sure that the positive from the battery ends up connected to the positive of the bias core.

          • Frank Acland

            I assume so, but I haven’t broken into the battery cap to tell for sure.

          • FC

            Right. But can you check with the multimeter and follow the wires to make sure that the battery and the core are aligned in the same orientation?

          • Frank Acland

            Yes it seems okay. In the photo above, I have it backwards — but you’ll see that the red lead is on the negative terminal of the battery cap, and the black is on the positive, and the reading is negative, as you’d expect. So I am assuming the polarity is correct.

          • FC

            Ok.
            Then, can you please leave the battery disconnected for a while to see how the O1-O2 reading reacts? Or maybe you have done this already?

        • Dieter_G

          “Not very promising”

          to quote myself from the week3-thread :

          “Hmm, I wonder what we will be presented with on monday. For some reason my stomach says, it’ll be about the same mess.”

          But admitted, its a bit to early to doom it already

          • FC

            Lol. True, Dieter. But we’re still fighting here. Maybe we can reverse our fortune. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • Dieter_G

            Yeah, hopefully ๐Ÿ˜€

            You know, over the years I have learned that my stomach in SOME regards is a lot more clever than my brain ๐Ÿ˜‰

          • FC

            I believe you. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • blanco69

            Agreed. in my case I listen to my stomach too often. Particularly around lunchtime.

        • Rob King

          I think an obvious connection would be to the output powercell.
          This way we could provide our own external ref *if* the internal ref fails – which it appears to have done – and we could monitor its voltage. All possible connection points could be achieved with 4 terminals (using a common ground).
          It will be interesting to see if the output powercell can still recharge without its ref cell being at a lower voltage.
          More testing is needed to see if this unit will still keep charging.

          • FC

            Agreed.
            Unfortunately, Steorn have not provided terminals for the power core. So now we are stuck. We need to keep on thinking about this, but at this moment, the only possibility that comes to my mind is working on the bias core (for which we do have terminals) in order to try and bring things back to normal. But if that fails and we can’t come up with some other solution, I’m afraid this device is another write off.

          • Frank Acland

            I’m on a break right now, hoping to do a video conference in a while.

            To reference some questions below, SM has said that there is no direct electrical connection between the reference core (o1-2) and the primary core (o2-3). The reference core bathes the primary core with an electric field which helps with the recharge. While there is no direct electrical connection, Shaun says there is a “coupling”, which is a connection (and I quote):

            ” but not one thru which the electrons in the secondary cell can move, the voltage will move up and down as a function of a CHANGING primary cell, but settle when the primary field stops changing . . . a changing field on the primary will effect the secondary field, but ONLY while its changing – it would seem that we are pushing the electrons out as we use the system.”

            He thinks we should put a diode on the battery circuit instead of a resistor.

          • FC

            Thank you, Frank.
            So the battery is the prime suspect. Maybe you can make your own bias circuit again and bypass the existing one, to triple check that nothing’s wrong with it.

          • Dieter_G

            “He thinks we should put a diode on the battery circuit instead of a resistor.”
            ????
            Are you talking about replacing the 1M-resitor with a diode ?

          • Frank Acland

            Yes, that’s what he suggests we do to see if we can diagnose the current leakage from the reference cell.

          • Dieter_G

            Well, doing so is about the same then connecting the battery directly to the Orbo-cell.
            The battery will deliver as much current as it can to the o-cell.

            This seems all very strange to me. The whole “bias-circuit”-story makes little sense from an electrotechnical point of view.

          • DrD

            It will be interesting to see what voltages result across the bias components. The current will be limited only by the internal resistances of the battery, orbo and slope resistance of the diode. I would have thought that the battery will be flat very quickly but then we might be surprised at how the orbo cell reacts (it’s the one unknown).

          • Dieter_G

            “The current will be limited only by the internal resistances of the battery, orbo and slope resistance of the diode”

            Yes, you expressed exactly what I wanted to say (but wasn’t able to ;))

          • Frank Acland

            Here’s a bit more: ” to aid (and control) the self charging we put the cell in an electric field. Now there is coupling since the change in the primary cells field (during a charge and discharge) will push back or pull on the field that it is in and hence on the secondary cell hence a diode will stop any energy pushed out of the system and we should see the bleed in the secondary cell stop.”

          • Dieter_G

            However I still doubt that the diode should be placed INSTEAD of the resistor. I think he meant it should be added in series to it.

            Otherwise, as I said, you have kind of a direct connection of the battery and the O-cell. A large current will flow as the system “tries” to balance both voltages to one and the same level.

          • Frank Acland

            Ok, that’s maybe what he means.

          • Frank Acland

            The other way around — he says the primary delivers the power via o3-4.

          • Dieter_G

            ok, thanks

          • DrD

            Frank, that sounds to me, more like he is using the diode as a blocking diode. In which case it would be in series with the 1MEG and that makes more sense. BUT I could easily be wrong.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      In case that O1/O2 are connected to the โ€˜activeโ€™ cell (that is, not as in the drawing below), it might be better to attach the load directly there. O3/O4 are a source of potential problems due to the cut-off function, at least if measurements cannot be made continuously.

      • If so (I agree it seems likely – we should be looking at c. 2.5V across O1-O2 when no external bias applied) we may be doing harm to the ‘output’ orbo by putting 9V across it via a relatively small resistor. Maybe someone at Steorn just connected the red battery wire to the wrong terminal (the insulation break was very sloppy, too).

        • Andreas Moraitis

          What I meant was that the load (i.e. a resistor) could be put there, not a battery.

          • An obvious question for SM then – can he confirm what O1 and O2 connect to?

            Either way, if O1-O2 is not connected as per the sketch, then we would seem to be putting the external bias voltage across the 2.5V output orbo, rather than the bias orbo. Perhaps we should remove it until Shaun gets back to Frank, or at least put a bigger resistor in series?

          • FC

            Guys, the answer to your question is right below this message. Shaun has confirmed that O1-O2 is the bias core.

          • Ah – thanks!

          • FC

            No worries. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • Andreas Moraitis

            Thatโ€™s a bad message.

  • Rob King

    Frank, we need to confirm with Shaun the actual connections of O1 and O2, because I think they are connected across the output orbo, not the double reference voltage orbo as shown below.Certainly a voltage of around 4.6V for the output orbo would seem to make sense.
    I recommend the next test to be started is to use the portapow to start monitoring the output power over time. Check the polarity of O3 and O4 using a meter to determine -ve and +ve connections.

    So connect the following:
    O3 and O4 connect to the green input terminal block on the portapow (check polarity)
    Connect a 220 ohm resistor on the output terminal blocks of the portapow.

    Check the mAH when possible and enter the time and value into the spreadsheet.
    Also, check the voltage of O1 and O2.

    • Frank Acland

      Hi Rob, and all.

      I have been in touch with SM regarding the testing we did last evening. He said the results were as he expected — except he is not sure why o1-o2 is dropping. It was shipped at 5V, and now is at 3.9 V. So far, it does not show signs of recovering or stopping its decline. He does say that this is the reference voltage cell.

      • FC

        Hi Frank.
        Yes, O1-O2 was already 4.65 V in your first video. And 4.38 V at the beginning of your second video. So it was already dropping before making any discharge tests.
        Not very promising.

        • FC

          Can you check the polarity of the battery?

          • Frank Acland
          • FC

            I meant if you can make sure that the positive from the battery ends up connected to the positive of the bias core.

          • Frank Acland

            I assume so, but I haven’t broken into the battery cap to tell for sure.

          • FC

            Right. But can you check with the multimeter and follow the wires to make sure that the battery and the core are aligned in the same orientation?

          • Frank Acland

            Yes it seems okay. In the photo above, I have it backwards — but you’ll see that the red lead is on the negative terminal of the battery cap, and the black is on the positive, and the reading is negative, as you’d expect. So I am assuming the polarity is correct.

          • FC

            Ok.
            Then, can you please leave the battery disconnected for a while to see how the O1-O2 reading reacts? Or maybe you have done this already?

        • Dieter_G

          “Not very promising”

          to quote myself from the week3-thread :

          “Hmm, I wonder what we will be presented with on monday. For some reason my stomach says, it’ll be about the same mess.”

          But admitted, its a bit to early to doom it already

          • FC

            Lol. True, Dieter. But we’re still fighting here. Maybe we can reverse our fortune. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • Dieter_G

            Yeah, hopefully ๐Ÿ˜€

            You know, over the years I have learned that my stomach in SOME regards is a lot more clever than my brain ๐Ÿ˜‰

            The trick is to know to whom of the two you should listen for a particular case.

          • FC

            I believe you. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • blanco69

            Agreed. in my case I listen to my stomach too often. Particularly around lunchtime.

        • Rob King

          I think an obvious connection would be to the output powercell.
          This way we could provide our own external ref *if* the internal ref fails – which it appears to have done – and we could monitor its voltage. All possible connection points could be achieved with 4 terminals (using a common ground).
          It will be interesting to see if the output powercell can still recharge without its ref cell being at a lower voltage.
          More testing is needed to see if this unit will still keep charging.

          • FC

            Agreed.
            Unfortunately, Steorn have not provided terminals for the power core. So now we are stuck. We need to keep on thinking about this, but at this moment, the only possibility that comes to my mind is working on the bias core (for which we do have terminals) in order to try and bring things back to normal. But if that fails and we can’t come up with some other solution, I’m afraid this device is another write off.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      In case that O1/O2 are connected to the โ€˜activeโ€™ cell (that is, not as in the drawing below), it might be better to attach the load directly there. O3/O4 are a source of potential problems due to the cut-off function, at least if measurements cannot be made continuously.

      • If so (I agree it seems likely – we should be looking at c. 2.5V across O1-O2 when no external bias applied) we may be doing harm to the ‘output’ orbo by putting 9V across it via a relatively small resistor. Maybe someone at Steorn just connected the red battery wire to the wrong terminal (the insulation break was very sloppy, too).

        Edit: 4-5V across O1-O2 – as observed!

        • Andreas Moraitis

          What I meant was that the load (i.e. a resistor) could be put there, not a battery.

          • An obvious question for SM then – can he confirm what O1 and O2 connect to?

            Either way, if O1-O2 is not connected as per the sketch, then we would seem to be putting the external bias voltage across the 2.5V output orbo, rather than the bias orbo. Perhaps we should remove it until Shaun gets back to Frank, or at least put a bigger resistor in series?

          • FC

            Guys, the answer to your question is right below this message. Shaun has confirmed that O1-O2 is the bias core.

          • Ah – thanks!

          • FC

            No worries. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • Andreas Moraitis

            Thatโ€™s a bad message.

  • BillH

    Bear in mind what this circuit is supposed to do, minus the 9V battery. In theory it is supposed to allow you to make phone calls 24/7 without needing to recharge. How much energy does it take per minute to make a phone call? Even the reports from the girls testing the Ophones are confusing. They never say how long a call lasts or even how many minutes they get before the phone becomes unusable. Apparently when the Ophone shuts down a few minutes later the Ophone comes back on fully charged, which seems unlikely.Because the regulating circuit is outputting 5V and a normal battery would be sitting at 3.7V the phones circuits is probably just seeing this as an overcharged battery and indicating full charge. I suspect if you tried making a call of more than a few seconds the phone would actually die again quite quickly,

    So, as far as this test goes the resistor on the output is meant to simulate the load provided by the phone, I’m not clear if this is a phone on standby or a phone that is making a call continuously?

    Shaun appears to want to demonstrate the Orbo pack going through a recharge cycle. What I expect to see is a certain amount of current being dissipated through the output resistor for an unspecified time, may be hours could be minutes. Then the Orbo pack drops below the minimum voltage threshold and starts to charge back up. According to what the Ogirls reported this might take anywhere between a few minutes and 2hrs.
    If the latter, the output circuit might be powered for several minutes, before it then powers down again to recharge.

    When I asked about usage figures on the Ogirls Facebook page no information was forthcoming, so I’m not overly optimistic about the Ophone either.

    • It looks very much as if Steorn should have sat out the cries of ‘scam’ for another month, so they could have actually test-run the units they have sent out, and decided on a final circuit. We seem to be doing our best here to verify Steorn’s claims, but it’s an uphill struggle.

    • Cesar Pinheiro
      • BillH

        The table at the bottom of that page might give the most useful information.
        The power levels that are put out by a phone are obviously highly variable.
        In the best case from that table and the details below it with the phone in your pocket and only available to accept incoming calls or texts it appears that 100mW of power will be drained. Making a call will be highly dependant on how far you are from the mast, and the power output from the phone will adjust accordingly to produce a reliable signal to the mast or masts. from what I can see this could require 1W of output from the phone, for the duration of a call.

        Given this info, and the rated output of the Orbo pack, the phone might be able to stay in standby indefinitely. making calls of 10mins or more however
        would obviously deplete the Orbo packs capacity and you’d probably have to wait 2hrs in order to make a call of more than a minute or 2.

  • FC

    Thanks for sharing your experience. This is definitely far from being a smooth rollout. I guess there’s nothing we can do, but be patient.

  • Guy Mann

    Shaun said the phone always shows a full charge because the electronics are off the shelf and meant for a lithium ion battery, not a capacitor, so it has no way of gauging how much charge is left.

  • It looks very much as if Steorn should have sat out the cries of ‘scam’ for another month, so they could have actually test-run the units they have sent out, and decided on a final circuit. We seem to be doing our best here to verify Steorn’s claims, but it’s an uphill struggle.

  • Frank Acland

    In consultations with Steorn atm.

  • Frank Acland

    In consultations with Steorn atm.

  • Frank Acland

    I’m on a break right now, hoping to do a video conference in a while.

    To reference some questions below, SM has said that there is no direct electrical connection between the reference core (o1-2) and the primary core (o2-3). The reference core bathes the primary core with an electric field which helps with the recharge. While there is no direct electrical connection, Shaun says there is a “coupling”, which is a connection (and I quote):

    ” but not one thru which the electrons in the secondary cell can move, the voltage will move up and down as a function of a CHANGING primary cell, but settle when the primary field stops changing . . . a changing field on the primary will effect the secondary field, but ONLY while its changing – it would seem that we are pushing the electrons out as we use the system.”

    He thinks we should put a diode on the battery circuit instead of a resistor.

    • FC

      Thank you, Frank.
      So the battery is the prime suspect. Maybe you can make your own bias circuit again and bypass the existing one, to triple check that nothing’s wrong with it.

    • Dieter_G

      “He thinks we should put a diode on the battery circuit instead of a resistor.”
      ????
      Are you talking about replacing the 1M-resitor with a diode ?

      • Frank Acland

        Yes, that’s what he suggests we do to see if we can diagnose the current leakage from the reference cell.

        • Dieter_G

          Well, doing so is about the same then connecting the battery directly to the Orbo-cell.
          The battery will deliver as much current as it can to the o-cell.

          This seems all very strange to me. The whole “bias-circuit”-story makes little sense from an electrotechnical point of view.

          • DrD

            It will be interesting to see what voltages result across the bias components. The current will be limited only by the internal resistances of the battery, orbo and slope resistance of the diode. I would have thought that the battery will be flat very quickly but then we might be surprised at how the orbo cell reacts (it’s the one unknown).

          • Dieter_G

            “The current will be limited only by the internal resistances of the battery, orbo and slope resistance of the diode”

            Yes, you expressed exactly what I wanted to say (but wasn’t able to ;))

      • Frank Acland

        Here’s a bit more: ” to aid (and control) the self charging we put the cell in an electric field. Now there is coupling since the change in the primary cells field (during a charge and discharge) will push back or pull on the field that it is in and hence on the secondary cell hence a diode will stop any energy pushed out of the system and we should see the bleed in the secondary cell stop.”

        • Dieter_G

          However I still doubt that the diode should be placed INSTEAD of the resistor. I think he meant it should be added in series to it.

          Otherwise, as I said, you have kind of a direct connection of the battery and the O-cell. A large current will flow as the system “tries” to balance both voltages to one and the same level.

          Apart from that, it is not clear to me what he calls the primary and the secondary cell.
          primary = bias call
          secondary = power cell

          or vice versa ?

          • Frank Acland

            Ok, that’s maybe what he means.

          • Frank Acland

            The other way around — he says the primary delivers the power via o3-4.

          • Dieter_G

            ok, thanks

        • DrD

          Frank, that sounds to me, more like he is using the diode as a blocking diode. In which case it would be in series with the 1MEG and that makes more sense. BUT I could easily be wrong.

        • Olof

          Shaun could send the block diagram or some sort of wiring diagram. Then everyone would have understood how to keep proceed.

          • For what it’s worth, here’s a guess, based on various bits and bobs (copied from earlier in the thread):

            http://www.health-answers.co.uk/phone_3.jpg

          • DrD

            the “electrostatic coupling” could also be an inductive coupling or a combination of the two OR ???

          • It’s kinda hard to see how some capacitor-like components might generate an oscillating EM field, but ‘OR ???’ is a distinct possibility!

          • DrD

            It’s phrased like a riddle but bear in mind that he’s trying to help without giving away too much. It’s their livelehood. I am a bit disturbed that they don’t seem to have it all worked out yet.

          • The frequent changes in what are supposed to be actual products are disconcerting – as is this new operating theory (well ‘operating guess’, anyway).

            Ah well, beer time – I’m off!

          • DrD

            That is suggestion I like. Perhaps we should all meet up in Ireland over a beer.”To be sure”,we’d soon have it worked out.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            I thought that these cells had a metal casing. The latter should block any electric field, especially if it is as weak as one might expect in this case. I’m getting more and more the impression that Steorn’s comments provide more questions than answers.

          • I don’t remember seeing a casing in any of Steorn’s videos – but who knows…

            This has all got a bit strange. I think all we can do is try the diode thing and hope for the best, then try a discharge test if we are lucky. Unfortunately Frank seems to have escaped (I’m not too surprised)..

            BTW, SM’s theory somehow reminds me of a friend’s mother’s theory that she had to keep a plug in every socket in the house to stop the electricity leaking out.

          • Olof

            I believe that the electric field is connected to the primary cell through the capacitor (10 – 100 nF). The capacitor is able to transfer electric field.

  • Cesar Pinheiro
  • Barbierir

    Please could someone make a situation recap for us non-techies? It seems testing has been a lot harder than expected for such a small device, and after weeks the jury is still out. Is there any news about other tests beside Frank? My google-fu doesn’t return useful results.

    • Ged

      Recap:

      -Ocube #1: busted internal bias voltage circuit and several shorts made this unit under perform from expectations after the first good performance day 1 post arrival. Internal bias wiring was intentionally cut by Frank and he added a homemade system with two 9V batteries behind a 1 M ohm resistor bridged across the Orbo core. This lead to unexpected revival voltage jumps of the core. Capacitance of the core also increases dramatically to several hundred F after revival (far far beyond any capacitor system there could be inside). However, it will take months to extract enough energy to prove it isn’t a battery.

      -Bare Orbo core (this thread): so far, Frank got an hour and half discharge from the main half core meant to run the phone before controller chip shut down. After that, the reference core, which is an auxillery unit responsible for the bias voltage instead of batteries behind a 1 M ohm resistor, began to lose voltage when it shouldn’t be. It is unknown at this time how it is leaking energy or to where. However, even properly functioning, at this rate it will take months to prove it is different from a battery.

      In both cases, new protocols are being worked on to drastically reduce the time to prove/disprove the device.

      • Barbierir

        thanks!

      • FC

        Ged, just a minor (but I think that very important) note regarding your recap.

        “After that, the reference core […] began to lose voltage when it shouldn’t be.”

        I’m afraid that the reference core was already losing voltage before that. According to Shaun, it was 5V when it left Ireland. In Frank’s first video, it was 4.65V. And in Frank’s second video, it was 4.38V. Both videos were shot before making any discharge test, as I commented below.

        Furthermore, the loss of voltage has continued after the discharge test finished (from 4.15V yesterday at 21:02 to 3.9V this morning), which goes against Shaun’s suggestion that the main core is driving out elctrons from the bias core when it is discharging.

        That’s why, from the beginning, I got the impression that the battery was draining (instead of charging) the bias core, and I asked Frank to make sure that the polarity of the battery circuit was correct.

        Since it seemed to have the right polarity, I asked Frank to leave the battery disconnected. And apparently (and this is my impression), the drain has stopped and the bias core is now stable at 3.8V.

        I also suggested bypassing the battery bias circuit with a new one, to definitely rule out that something is wrong with the original one, but I think that my suggestion got lost in a sea of comments. This is something very simple that can be tried before Thursday (when the diode arrives).

        • Ged

          Very interesting, FC. But why would it drain if polarity is correct? Something mysterious about this.

          • FC

            There may be something wrong with this bias setup, I don’t know exactly what. That’s why I suggested bypassing it with a completely new one (new battery, new cap, new wires, new resistor), to see if there is any change. And if the bias core continues to drain, then the problem is somewhere else.

            But if the problem is that the power core, when being used, causes the bias core to drain, then why does the draining happen independently of whether the core is being discharched or not? And why was the draining happening from the very beginning, when Frank took it from the package?

        • SG

          These are astute observations. I don’t know what to make of them. It does seem that the 9V battery has been problematic. Frank reported that it sometimes showed erratic voltages between 0V and 9V. As a result, Frank then replaced it with a different 9V battery, but also commented that it was somewhat flat but seemed more stable. Given that the bias core stabilized at 3.8V after removing the bias circuit / 9V battery, it would seem to suggest a problem with the bias circuit, the irony of which should not be lost (given that this was suspected to be the first problem encountered with the Ocube).

          It would be worthwhile for Frank to acquire another 9V battery, that is not flat, and does not show erratic voltage variability. Then connect the fresh 9V with the bias circuit in a first polarity configuration and observe O1/O2 for a first period of time. Then connect the fresh 9V with the bias circuit in a second (reversed) polarity configuration and observe O1/O2 for a second period of time. I think this will diagnose the problem faster than using the diode. Maybe this idea can be run past SM first to get his thoughts.

        • Frank Acland

          Good idea, FC — I have done this and will leave this new circuit on overnight.

          • Frank Acland

            And with a new 9V battery.

          • FC

            Thank you, Frank.
            But maybe a whole night is too long, if the drain continues. We don’t want to deplete the bias core either. My suggestion would be to note the trend as soon as one can be observed. If the trend is positive, leave it on. And if it’s negative, take it off.

          • Frank Acland

            It seems to have reached something of an equilibrium. 3.804 V is the latest reading. About 20 minutes ago it was at 3.800, and about an hour ago it was 3.806. Sorry I have not been charting things very well today. So I think it might be worth leaving the circuit on and seeing how it looks in the morning.

          • FC

            Ok. Either that or continue this test tomorrow morning. Whatever you prefer.

          • Julio Ruben Vazquez Turnes

            Hello.

            I want to add my two cents to this.

            As far as we know there are two posibilities so far – The product doesnt work and all is a scam. Or the product should work but something is making them fail.

            Even with all what happened it is easy to stand in the first possibility. We should focus in the second because if it is the first option there is nothing we can do and the tests should be enough to prove if it works as promised or not.

            So if we think in the second option. What may be happening. If Steorn checks the device before shipping.

            It only leaves us a possible explanation. Something during transport is making the units fail.

            What could it be? I see two easy options here (maybe someone could add another one)

            Transport shocks – Then steorn should check their units in a shock test to check if after the shocks a package receives during transport some of the circuits are damaged or so.

            X-Rays check – When there is electronic devices involved in transport, it is easy to check the contents with X-Rays. Steorn should also check if their devices work as intended after a X-Ray scan.

            Just my two cents.

            Kind regards and good luck with the testing.

          • DrD

            copied from lower down
            I’ve been going through the same thought process.
            adding to the
            airport X-rays I have high energy particles or reduced pressure at
            altitude. apart from that — the leprecauns jump ship at the Irish
            border.
            None of them sound very likely to me.

          • Or maybe potting the things damages them in some way? – i.e., they work fine until they are encased in resin, at which point they begin to decline.

          • DrD

            That’s very true indeed.
            I asssume Steorn took that in to account though and I also presume they tested them after potting?????
            I work in an industry where we have to take considerable precautions in chosing and monitoring the encapsulation materials. You can’t use just any old material. They degrade under voltage, temperature and moisture stress and do indeed become leaky (electrical).

          • Andreas Moraitis

            In addition, liquid resin is usually conductive. If the components are not insulated very well one might expect that cells or batteries get damaged within a few minutes.

          • Although we don’t know the nature of the ‘electric field’ link between the orbo packs, it’s also conceivable that the presence of the resin may affect this supposedly interactive connection.

          • Sanjeev

            Its possible that the reference orbo is leaking through the resin via electrostatic conduction.

          • Exactly.

          • Ged

            That would explain a lot. In that case, Steorn has been shooting itself in the foot this whole time without realizing it.

          • FC

            True. More testing seems necessary in that respect.

            Now, going off a little bit on a tangent here, I want to share with you another idea that I just had. Shaun says that the bias core surrounds the power core and bathes it in its electric field. So it appears to me that Steorn is already trying to incorporate the bias into the very architecture of each orbo core, as I suggested on February 15.

            But in that case, wouldn’t it be more practical to use a permanent-type electret for the bias, instead an orbo-type electret (which is designed for variable voltage or “charge”)? By using a permanent electret as the bias, the orbo core would be bathed in an electric field of constant strength. And there would be no need to bias the bias.

          • FC

            Thanks, Peter. ๐Ÿ™‚
            I’m sure that Steorn know quite a bit about electrets in general. They just need to pick a very permanent type and wrap each orbo core with it, so as to provide the electric field bias that orbo cores need. This would make the use of bulky and problematic battery-powered bias circuits unnecessary.

          • DrD

            Yes, and whats more, one of the mechanisms for degradation is due to mobile ionic charges (contaminants like Li+, Na+). Some are mobile at room temperature and others at a few 100 degC. They won’t affect most electronics but we really don’t understand the nature of the beast (well I don’t). They play havoc with exposed chips.

          • I suspect the potting compound may have been chosen more for its opacity than its electrical characteristics!

          • DrD

            I can’t believe they wouldn’t have evaluated it though.
            hmmm?

          • Last minute thing – they happened to have some lying around?

          • Dieter_G

            Well, I can.
            Frank said it’d be very hard. Normally, the resins used for potting electronics are a bit soft, in order to not introduce mechanical stress when curing (and therby also shrinking a litle bit).

          • DrD

            Well, we definitely need Frank to check it out with Shaun (was it monitored before or after potting; if not already known). I have to leave for a while now. At least it will be one more theory bit the dust.

          • Sanjeev

            Funny thing is that the resin won’t prevent reverse engineering. It can be cut and materials can be analyzed. Its an electret sandwiched between two dissimilar metal foils. How much reverse engineering effort will it take? Next to nothing.

          • DrD

            I’m not convinced they do it just to stop reverse engineering but I suppose it will inhibit all but the most determined. It’s fairly common practice.

          • Sanjeev

            May be its effective when there are thousands of components and specialized ICs etc, where destructive method will obviously fail. But here we have just one component of importance. The electret is a common one, and only the metals need identification.

          • Frank Acland

            I asked. SM thinks there’s no chance the potting resin would interfere with the operations. He says they use cold potting resin, nothing at high temperatures.

          • DrD

            It’s worth asking all the same, did they monitor after potting.
            Also, it might just be possible to detect conduction by probing onto the resin as close as possible on highest ohm range.

          • I surely agree that the present effort by Frank is terriffic and it is the “ONLY” work of that kind so it is by definition the best study of the Orbo on earth. I was merely positing in the open that Steorn could easily provide a fantastic study of thier Orbo performance… they could for example likely get Trinity College Dublin EE involved… I am sure there would be lots of enthusiasm amongst the folks there. I am a garage scientist whenever I can be but I also know very well the value of working in a big established lab. Trying to do electronics research more than 30 miles from a Fry’s Electronics store seems like a very frustrating enterprise to me.

          • They work quite happily to pick up the 12 Vdc potential in car wiring, without current flow, and can even be used to find internal breaks in the copper. I assume that they are actually electrometers rather than EM field sensors.

            Given the low cost and widespread availability, I would have thought that using one to explore the potted lump would be worth a try, especially in view of the claim that an electrostatic field surrounds and connects the two orbo units..

          • R V

            For a company that cannot or will not produce a simple spec sheet for a product it sells, I would not make any assumptions.

          • Olof

            McCarthy says: “O-cube splitting the time and convert time into energy.” But people in the USA do not have time nowadays. People are busy and time has running out. So O-cube can not work in the USA!

          • R V

            That’s a rather fancy idea, splitting time. fancy and unnecessary and most likely not true.

            If the Ocube is doing anything at all, it’s probably just converting ambient heat to useful energy. That would certainly be amazing enough since that would violate our understanding of the Second Law but there is now precedent based on Sheehan’s work at university of San Diego.

            http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10701-014-9781-5

            Foundations of Physics
            March 2014, Volume 44, Issue 3, pp 235-247
            First online: 14 March 2014
            Experimental Test of a Thermodynamic Paradox
            D. P. Sheehan , D. J. Mallin, J. T. Garamella, W. F. Sheehan

          • DrD

            In fact the original battery was faulty? I thought that was a bit strange.

    • Sanjeev

      No one else has any devices. Except the sponsored girls. According to steorn some 20 were shipped but the customers are unknown and not public.

  • Barbierir

    Please could someone make a situation recap for us non-techies? It seems testing has been a lot harder than expected for such a small device, and after weeks the jury is still out. Is there any news about other tests beside Frank? My google-fu doesn’t return useful results.

    • Ged

      Recap:

      -Ocube #1: busted internal bias voltage circuit and several shorts made this unit under perform from expectations after the first good performance day 1 post arrival. Internal bias wiring was intentionally cut by Frank and he added a homemade system with two 9V batteries behind a 1 M ohm resistor bridged across the Orbo core. This lead to unexpected revival voltage jumps of the core. Capacitance of the core also increases dramatically to several hundred F after revival (far far beyond any capacitor system there could be inside). However, it will take months to extract enough energy to prove it isn’t a battery.

      -Bare Orbo core (this thread): so far, Frank got an hour and half discharge from the main half core meant to run the phone before controller chip shut down. After that, the reference core, which is an auxillery unit responsible for the bias voltage instead of batteries behind a 1 M ohm resistor, began to lose voltage when it shouldn’t be. It is unknown at this time how it is leaking energy or to where. However, even properly functioning, at this rate it will take months to prove it is different from a battery.

      In both cases, new protocols are being worked on to drastically reduce the time to prove/disprove the device.

      • Barbierir

        thanks!

      • FC

        Ged, just a minor (but I think that very important) note regarding your recap.

        “After that, the reference core […] began to lose voltage when it shouldn’t be.”

        I’m afraid that the reference core was already losing voltage before that. According to Shaun, it was 5V when it left Ireland. In Frank’s first video, it was 4.65V. And in Frank’s second video, it was 4.38V. Both videos were shot before making any discharge test, as I commented below.

        Furthermore, the loss of voltage has continued after the discharge test finished (from 4.15V yesterday at 21:02 to 3.9V this morning), which goes against Shaun’s suggestion that the main core is driving out elctrons from the bias core when it is discharging.

        That’s why, from the beginning, I got the impression that the battery was draining (instead of charging) the bias core, and I asked Frank to make sure that the polarity of the battery circuit was correct.

        Since it seemed to have the right polarity, I asked Frank to leave the battery disconnected. And apparently (and this is my impression), the drain has stopped and the bias core is now stable at 3.8V.

        I also suggested bypassing the battery bias circuit with a new one, to definitely rule out that something is wrong with the original one, but I think that my suggestion got lost in a sea of comments. This is something very simple that can be tried before Thursday (when the diode arrives).

        • Ged

          Very interesting, FC. But why would it drain if polarity is correct? Something mysterious about this.

          • FC

            There may be something wrong with this bias setup, I don’t know exactly what. That’s why I suggested bypassing it with a completely new one (new battery, new cap, new wires, new resistor), to see if there is any change. And if the bias core continues to drain, then the problem is somewhere else.

            But if the problem is that the power core, when being used, causes the bias core to drain, then why does the draining happen independently of whether the core is being discharched or not? And why was the draining happening from the very beginning, when Frank took it from the package?

        • SG

          These are astute observations. I don’t know what to make of them. It does seem that the 9V battery has been problematic. Frank reported that it sometimes showed erratic voltages between 0V and 9V. As a result, Frank then replaced it with a different 9V battery, but also commented that it was somewhat flat but seemed more stable. Given that the bias core stabilized at 3.8V after removing the bias circuit / 9V battery, it would seem to suggest a problem with the bias circuit, the irony of which should not be lost (given that this was suspected to be the first problem encountered with the Ocube).

          It would be worthwhile for Frank to acquire another 9V battery, that is not flat, and does not show erratic voltage variability. Then connect the fresh 9V with the bias circuit in a first polarity configuration and observe O1/O2 for a first period of time. Then connect the fresh 9V with the bias circuit in a second (reversed) polarity configuration and observe O1/O2 for a second period of time. I think this will diagnose the problem faster than using the diode. Maybe this idea can be run past SM first to get his thoughts.

        • Frank Acland

          Good idea, FC — I have done this and will leave this new circuit on overnight.

          • Frank Acland

            And with a new 9V battery.

          • FC

            Thank you, Frank.
            But maybe a whole night is too long, if the drain continues. We don’t want to deplete the bias core either. My suggestion would be to note the trend as soon as one can be observed. If the trend is positive, leave it on. And if it’s negative, take it off.

          • Frank Acland

            It seems to have reached something of an equilibrium. 3.804 V is the latest reading. About 20 minutes ago it was at 3.800, and about an hour ago it was 3.806. Sorry I have not been charting things very well today. So I think it might be worth leaving the circuit on and seeing how it looks in the morning.

          • FC

            Ok. Either that or continue this test tomorrow morning. Whatever you prefer.

          • DrD

            In fact the original battery was faulty? I thought that was a bit strange.

    • Sanjeev

      No one else has any devices. Except the sponsored girls. According to steorn some 20 were shipped but the customers are unknown and not public.

  • wonderboy

    Hi Frank.. Amazing work.

    Would it be prudent for Shaun to send you another unit, so you can run concurrent tests or incase one is damaged again.

    Just a thought!

    Cheers

    • Sanjeev

      He will get another OCube as promised (and a working one hopefully) once they sort out the problems. This can take time.

      • R V

        Didn’t they test the darn things before sending them out?

        • DrD

          yep

          • Julio Ruben Vazquez Turnes

            Hello.

            I want to add my two cents to this.

            As far as we know there are two posibilities so far – The product doesnt work and all is a scam. Or the product should work but something is making them fail.

            Even with all what happened it is easy to stand in the first possibility. We should focus in the second because if it is the first option there is nothing we can do and the tests should be enough to prove if it works as promised or not.

            So if we think in the second option. What may be happening. If Steorn checks the device before shipping.

            It only leaves us a possible explanation. Something during transport is making the units fail.

            What could it be? I see two easy options here (maybe someone could add another one)
            Transport shocks – Then steorn should check their units in a shock test to check if after the shocks a package receives during transport some of the circuits are damaged or so.
            X-Rays check – When there is electronic devices involved in transport, it is easy to check the contents with X-Rays. Steorn should also check if their devices work as intended after a X-Ray scan.

            Just my two cents.

            Kind regards and good luck with the testing.

          • Frank Acland

            Thanks! And good points, and I’ve wondered the same. I actually asked about one of those possibilities:

            Me: Is there any kind of x-ray or scanning equipment the the airlines might use that could mess with the orbos?
            SM: nah, like any bit of electrical equipment it will have a tempary response to an applied field, but the stuff the airlines use will have no effect

          • DrD

            I’ve been going through the same thought process.
            adding to the airport X-rays I have high energy particles or reduced pressure at altitude. apart from that — the leprecauns jump ship at the Irish
            border.
            None of them sound very likely to me.

          • Frank Acland

            The other point that Shaun has made is that these orbos are made in China and shipped to Ireland by air, and they seem to work fine in Dublin.

          • DrD

            Scotches that theory then.
            I see this thread is duplicated at the top where it’s more visible.

        • Sanjeev

          No idea how they test it. Its totally possible that faults develop after wards. Strangely ALL of their devices turned out to be “faulty” so far, including the overcharging OCubes and the Ophone of their female promoters.

          Doesn’t make any sense.

          • cashmemorz

            If Steorn/ Shaun are all excited and in an all out hurry to get things done before their appropriate time then it makes sense. They are acting like schools boys with a new toy and want to show it off without understanding it themselves.

  • Frank Acland

    Excuse my absence on the thread, I’m trying to salvage diodes!

    • Sanjeev

      If you suspect that the external battery circuit is draining the bias orbo, then may be the polarity of the battery is wrong. Please double check.

      • Dieter_G

        Had the same idea.
        Judging from video#1 it is correct. However the wires from the battery-connector aren’t switched in this video, like Frank said they are now somewhere below. That means : the red one is + in the video and the black one is -.

        • DrD

          Yes, it would be easy to get them switched and not realise. The best way is to disconnect one side and check that both disconnected ends have the same polarity (wrt the other terminal of course).

    • From an old AC-DC adaptor?

    • DrD

      No luck Frank? You have no old power supplies?
      THe Video was very useful, I need to improve the sound (too noisy here) and listen again, maybe a few times. Good luck.

  • Frank Acland

    Excuse my absence on the thread, I’m trying to salvage diodes!

    • Sanjeev

      If you suspect that the external battery circuit is draining the reference core, then may be the polarity of the battery is wrong. Please double check.

      • Dieter_G

        Had the same idea.
        Judging from video#1 it is correct. However the wires from the battery-connector aren’t switched in this video, like Frank said they are now somewhere below. That means : the red one is + in the video and the black one is -.

        • DrD

          Yes, it would be easy to get them switched and not realise. The best way is to disconnect one side and check that both disconnected ends have the same polarity (wrt the other (common) terminal of course).

    • From an old AC-DC adaptor? Or a dead mains LED light bulb.

    • DrD

      No luck Frank? You have no old power supplies?
      THe Video was very useful, I need to improve the sound (too noisy here) and listen again, maybe a few times. Good luck.

  • txt29

    Frank, when you go out buying the diodes, you should get also this 9V reference battery. It will allow for a longer and a more stable test:

  • txt29

    Frank, when you go out buying the diodes, you should get also this 9V reference battery. It will allow for a longer and a more stable test:

  • Sanjeev

    He will get another OCube as promised (and a working one hopefully) once they sort out the problems. This can take time.

    • R V

      Didn’t they test the darn things before sending them out?

      • DrD

        yep

        • Cesar Pinheiro

          Dear Frank.
          Sorry for any mistake here, I am not an specialist and any errors here I will apologize.
          What I learned here is that Orbo requires an external 9 volts in order to work properly.
          Why not use an integrated circuit to generate the external 9 volts required by Orbo? you can feed this integrated circuit with the energy generated by Orbo, in this way you will have some amount of the generated energy used to feed the 9 Volts required without an external source of energy, no resistors, only the real voltage.
          If Orbo generates more energy than it consumes, why not avoid the external battery and resistor? you will feed the 9 volts directly without a resistor or diode in series.

          A diode will have the same effect as cut the wire. Probably the 1 mega
          resistor avoided the Orbo to drain the necessary energy from the 9 volts battery.
          Orbo probably needs some energy from the battery in order to work, the diode and the 1 mega resistor is impeding this happens.

          We
          have here 2 resistors in series, we could measure the voltage in the 1
          mega resistor to see what is the remaining voltage in the Orbo cell.
          I
          think the 9 voltage battery with a diode will not work because we will
          have an infinite resistor in series with the battery.

        • Julio Ruben Vazquez Turnes

          Hello.

          I want to add my two cents to this.

          As far as we know there are two posibilities so far – The product doesnt work and all is a scam. Or the product should work but something is making them fail.

          Even with all what happened it is easy to stand in the first possibility. We should focus in the second because if it is the first option there is nothing we can do and the tests should be enough to prove if it works as promised or not.

          So if we think in the second option. What may be happening. If Steorn checks the device before shipping.

          It only leaves us a possible explanation. Something during transport is making the units fail.

          What could it be? I see two easy options here (maybe someone could add another one)
          Transport shocks – Then steorn should check their units in a shock test to check if after the shocks a package receives during transport some of the circuits are damaged or so.
          X-Rays check – When there is electronic devices involved in transport, it is easy to check the contents with X-Rays. Steorn should also check if their devices work as intended after a X-Ray scan.

          Just my two cents.

          Kind regards and good luck with the testing.

          • Frank Acland

            Thanks! And good points, and I’ve wondered the same. I actually asked about one of those possibilities:

            Me: Is there any kind of x-ray or scanning equipment the the airlines might use that could mess with the orbos?
            SM: nah, like any bit of electrical equipment it will have a tempary response to an applied field, but the stuff the airlines use will have no effect

          • DrD

            I’ve been going through the same thought process.
            adding to the airport X-rays I have high energy particles or reduced pressure at altitude. apart from that — the leprecauns jump ship at the Irish
            border.
            None of them sound very likely to me.

          • Frank Acland

            The other point that Shaun has made is that these orbos are made in China and shipped to Ireland by air, and they seem to work fine in Dublin.

          • DrD

            Scotches that theory then.
            I see this thread is duplicated at the top where it’s more visible.

      • Sanjeev

        No idea how they test it. Its totally possible that faults develop after wards. Strangely ALL of their devices turned out to be “faulty” so far, including the overcharging OCubes and the Ophone of their female promoters.

        Doesn’t make any sense.

  • For what it’s worth, here’s a guess, based on bits and bobs (copied from earlier in the thread):

    http://www.health-answers.co.uk/phone_3.jpg

    • DrD

      the “electrostatic coupling” could also be an inductive coupling or a combination of the two OR ???

      • It’s kinda hard to see how some capacitor-like components might generate an EM field, but ‘OR ???’ is a distinct possibility!

        • DrD

          It’s phrased like a riddle but bear in mind that he’s trying to help without giving away too much. It’s their livelehood. I am a bit disturbed that they don’t seem to have it all worked out yet.

          • The frequent changes in what are supposed to be actual products are disconcerting – as is this new operating theory (well ‘operating guess’, anyway).

            Ah well, beer time – I’m off!

          • DrD

            That is suggestion I like. Perhaps we should all meet up in Ireland over a beer.”To be sure”,we’d soon have it worked out.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      I thought that these cells had a metal casing. The latter should block any electric field, especially if it is as weak as one might expect in this case. I’m getting more and more the impression that Steorn’s comments provide more questions than answers.

      • I don’t remember seeing a casing in any of Steorn’s videos – but who knows…

        This has all got a bit strange. I think all we can do is try the diode thing and hope for the best, then try a discharge test if we are lucky. Unfortunately Frank seems to have escaped (I’m not too surprised)..

        BTW, SM’s theory reminds me of a friend’s mother who used to insist on having a plug in every socket in the house to stop the electricity leaking out.

  • Frank Acland

    Out for a while now.

    • Where are the cats? Don’t forget and leave them with the run of the electronics bench!

  • Frank Acland

    Out for a while now.

    • Where are the cats? Don’t forget and leave them with the run of the electronics bench!

  • That comment by Shaun is interesting about it snapping up into a new output range. It reminds me of what Miss HopeGirl and her crew were saying about their QEG “achieving resonance.” I wonder if there is a connection between the two technologies…

    • Whatever happened to the QEG? Is there one claimed with any authority to be working yet?

      • I’m not sure, to be honest. I have not been following Miss HopeGirl for a while, because I can’t stand her, and what I believe to be her hatred of men, and, particularly, male sexuality. As far as I know, her Fix The World group claims to have built and successfully run at least one. I think that some other groups have claimed partial success, but I do not know if any other groups have ever got their QEGs to be self-looped, like HopeGirl’s crew claims to have done. I think that she has the instructions on hopegirlblog.com, if you want to try to build one. There might be some news there, as well, about replications. I dunno…

  • OM

    Guys, I do not want to hurt you, but it is clear that there is only one cell (O1-O2) and a 5V converter (O3-O4). That’s why the 9V battery is needed.
    There’s something fishy about this.
    And do not connect the diodes. Let the unit will have a rest and then measure the voltage. For the beginning, make sure the device is working (or not working) as described.

    • I don’t think we have any direct evidence either way about what is actually in the resin block – unless you have some special information no-one else is aware of?

      However I do agree with your last para, and said as much at the start of this thread. If the device can’t work at all without a battery then it is either another dud, or the technology – which may be very interesting in a lab – is simply not ready for deployment even on a limited scale.

      If that’s the case then we do actually need a plain orbo (potted or otherwise) to play with, i.e., minus the output IC, which is only relevant in the phone context, but which prevents any direct o/p measurements.

  • OM

    Guys, I do not want to hurt you, but it is clear that there is only one cell (O1-O2) and a 5V converter (O3-O4). That’s why the 9V battery is needed.
    There’s something fishy about this.
    And do not connect the diodes. Let the unit will have a rest and then measure the voltage. For the beginning, make sure the device is working (or not working) as described.

    • Matt

      To my knowledge Steorn never had anything that is not fishy, had they?

      • Ged

        Some people just really like seafood.

    • I don’t think we have any direct evidence (beyond what SM says) either way about what is actually in the resin block – unless you have some special information no-one else is aware of?

      However I do agree with your last para, and said as much at the start of this thread. If the device can’t continuously generate a small output without a battery then it’s either another dud, or the technology – which may look very interesting in a lab – is simply not ready for deployment even on a limited scale.

      If that’s the case then we do actually need a plain orbo (potted or otherwise) to play with, i.e., minus the output IC, which is only relevant in the phone context but which prevents any direct o/p measurements.

  • Kevin Evans

    I guess it might be kinda dangerous to cut that first failed Orbo into regular sections – but looking at the cross sections would surely be a way to see if they are just batteries or not – maybe in a vacuum chamber/glove box.

    • Cesar Pinheiro

      How about a x-ray to see the internals before cut?

  • As much as I admire Frank and his e-cats it is a puzzle why Steorn does not provide a professional analysis of thier Orbo’s. A proper electronics lab could for a few thousand Euro’s provide a far more definitive report on the operation and characteristics of Orbo’s. Sure hobbyists learning as they poke at the Orbo’s is of interest but clearly the devices are more demanding of analytical technology than what Frank has on hand and there is no susbstitute for experience. Many top knotch electronics labs would happily provide the service even with the admirable web vids and running dialog to feed the ‘social media’ value.

  • As much as I admire Frank and his e-cats it is a puzzle why Steorn does not provide a professional analysis of thier Orbo’s. A proper electronics lab could for a few thousand Euro’s provide a far more definitive report on the operation and characteristics of Orbo’s. Sure hobbyists learning as they poke at the Orbo’s is of interest but clearly the devices are more demanding of analytical technology than what Frank has on hand and there is no susbstitute for experience. Many top knotch electronics labs would happily provide the service even with the admirable web vids and running dialog to feed the ‘social media’ value.

    • BillH

      I think perhaps you are underestimating the power of enthusiasm and a willingness to investigate. Over the last 3 months I’ve been pointing out issues which for me have been a red flag to say that this Orbo device can’t live up to it’s claims. The way this is progressing I’m still pretty sure about that.

      The real enthusiast have pressed on regardless, but the amount of collaboration, and the amount of ideas that have been generated is somehow infectious. There is clearly an appetite to dust off the old text books and get involved with some practical science again. Perhaps this is the start of a grass roots movement where ordinary citizen can re-engage with science and understand more about the World we now live in. Let’s just leave this project in the hands of the enthusiasts for a while and see how things progress.

      • I surely agree that the present effort by Frank is terriffic and it is the “ONLY” work of that kind so it is by definition the best study of the Orbo on earth. I was merely positing in the open that Steorn could easily provide a fantastic study of thier Orbo performance… they could for example likely get Trinity College Dublin EE involved… I am sure there would be lots of enthusiasm amongst the folks there. I am a garage scientist whenever I can be but I also know very well the value of working in a big established lab. Trying to do electronics research more than 30 miles from a Fry’s Electronics store seems like a very frustrating enterprise to me.

  • Ged

    Some people just really like seafood.

  • Frank Acland

    It hasn’t been a terribly productive day on the orbo testing front. I spent some time trying to find a diode I could use on this kit, but found nothing fit for purpose. Where I live is a lot of space but no electronics stores to speak of. The local Radio Shacks have been closed down, so I had to order my diodes from Amazon which will come in on Thursday.

    I hope that Shaun’s idea for putting a diode on the reference cell works, as I feel that testing will only deplete it further. It has been gradually dropping during the day. Currently standing at 3.8 volts — it should apparently be at around 5.2 Volts.

    I did have a Skype meeting with Steorn today which I recorded in not very high tech video, but hopefully it will be watchable — it should be interesting to people following the Orbo story. I am uploading and rendering at the moment, and will post the videos here when they are ready.

    • FC

      Thanks for all your efforts, Frank.

  • Frank Acland

    A video has been posted above of a Skype conversation I had with Shaun McCarthy today. I apologize for the poor quality, especially the sound. Let me know if you have any questions about what was discussed.

    • FC

      Thank you, Frank.
      I’m going to have to watch it a few times in order to understand everything that Shaun says. But it is very useful information, nonetheless.

  • Frank Acland

    A video has been posted above of a Skype conversation I had with Shaun McCarthy today. I apologize for the poor quality, especially the sound. Let me know if you have any questions about what was discussed.

    • FC

      Thank you, Frank.
      I’m going to have to watch it a few times in order to understand everything that Shaun says. But it is very useful information, nonetheless.

  • Olof

    Perhaps the O-Cube works like this !? ๐Ÿ˜‰

  • Andreas Moraitis

    There are some indications that there are problems with the batteries (the ones which provide the bias voltage). This has already been observed in the old OCube. The prize question is now: How could one drain or damage a battery that is connected in series with a 1M resistor in a relatively short time?

  • Andreas Moraitis

    There are some indications that there are problems with the batteries (the ones which provide the bias voltage). This has already been observed in the old OCube. The prize question is now: How could one drain or damage a battery that is connected in series with a 1M resistor in a relatively short time?

    • Cesar Pinheiro

      A diode will have the same effect as cut the wire. Probably the 1 mega resistor avoided the Orbo to drain energy from the 9 volts battery. we have here 2 resistors in series, we could measure the voltage in the 1 mega resistor to see what is the remaining voltage in the Orbo cell.
      I think the 9 voltage battery with a diode will not work because we will have an infinite resistor in series with the battery, but if you want, plug the battery without the resistor and the energy from battery will go to Orbo and the voltage probably will increase again.

      • FC

        Shaun’s idea is to orient the diode in such a way that the current can only flow from the battery to the bias core, while preventing the current to flow from the bias core to the battery as the bias core’s voltage pulsates above 9V during the discharge of the power core (due to interactions between the power core and the bias core in this phase of the cycle).

        • Periodic surges above 9V could well be the cause of compromised batteries. A rechargable PP3 might be a useful investment as any such surges would be absorbed by it. Meanwhile, the diode seems essential (in series with the resistor) when the battery is reconnected.

          • FC

            What remains unexplained is the reason for the surges, if there really are any, during the recharge phase of the cycle.

            Our observations so far show that the loss of voltage in the bias core happens exclusively when the battery is connected, independently of whether the power core is discharging or recharging.

          • Frank Acland

            Actually, the voltage drop seems to continue even when the bias circuit is disconnected. I left the circuit on overnight and this morning it was measuring 3.780 compared to 3.802 when I went to bed. I then disconnected the battery circuit, and now it is measuring 3.779. I’ll keep an eye on it for a while without the battery circuit attached.

          • FC

            Thanks for the news, Frank.

            Maybe it would be useful to update the spreadsheet with some periodic O1-O2 readings. We’ve been making guesses here for the last day or so.

          • Frank Acland

            No problem, I’ve updated the spreadsheet with the first reading of the day and will update periodically.

          • FC

            Thank you, Frank.

          • SG

            10.1 across B1/B2 seems a little odd. Maybe we really are seeing surges / leakages.

          • Frank Acland

            No, it’s the voltage reading of the new battery.

          • SG

            Oh okay, so that really is a fresh one! Can we try reversing the polarity of the bias circuit? Seems if the bias circuit is draining the core, it is worth a try to see if it reverses such behavior.

          • Frank Acland

            I just tried that and the leak seems to be the same regardless of polarity.

          • SG

            Okay, thanks. So we can rule that out. Electrostatic leakage, possibly by way of the resin, seems like the best failure hypothesis. SM’s setup demonstrated on Skype did not have any potted resin. In fact, all of the working devices demonstrated in SM’s videos along the way have never been shown to be potted in resin. Yet, all of the devices in the wild (that are public) have experienced some kind of failure. The one major difference: the resin.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            I would anyway be surprised if the battery could be damaged that way. You would need fairly high voltages at low impedance to compensate the protective effect of the resistor. But who knowsโ€ฆIt might be an option to try a destructive test with a power supply instead of the unit.

          • From what we’ve seen, the Orbo devices may utilise principles that aren’t fully covered by V=IR etc. We seem to see huge (pseudo) capacitance come and go, so perhaps measured voltages are equally suspect.

            There seems to be more to the devices than that – perhaps something related to electrostatics – that is complicating the usual relationships between electrical values.

          • Adam

            Good shout on the rechargeable PP3.

  • georgehants

    I haven’t failed. I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won’t work.
    Thomas Edison

    • I usually give up at the second attempt. No wonder I’m not rich and famous.

  • georgehants

    I haven’t failed. I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won’t work.
    Thomas Edison

    • I usually give up at the second attempt. No wonder I’m not rich and famous.

  • Whatever happened to the QEG? Is there one claimed with any authority to be working yet?

    • I’m not sure, to be honest. I have not been following Miss HopeGirl for a while, because I can’t stand her, and what I believe to be her hatred of men, and, particularly, male sexuality. As far as I know, her Fix The World group claims to have built and successfully run at least one. I think that some other groups have claimed partial success, but I do not know if any other groups have ever got their QEGs to be self-looped, like HopeGirl’s crew claims to have done. I think that she has the instructions on hopegirlblog.com, if you want to try to build one. There might be some news there, as well, about replications. I dunno…

  • FC

    Shaun’s idea is to orient the diode in such a way that the current can only flow from the battery to the bias core, while preventing the current to flow from the bias core to the battery as the bias core’s voltage pulsates above 9V during the discharge of the power core (due to interactions between the power core and the bias core in this phase of the cycle).

    • Periodic surges above 9V could well be the cause of compromised batteries. A rechargable PP3 might be a useful investment as any such surges would be absorbed by it. Meanwhile, the diode seems essential (in series with the resistor) when the battery is reconnected.

      • FC

        What remains unexplained is the reason for the surges, if there really are any, during the recharge phase of the cycle.

        Our observations so far show that the loss of voltage in the bias core happens exclusively when the battery is connected, independently of whether the power core is discharging or recharging.

        • Frank Acland

          Actually, the voltage drop seems to continue even when the bias circuit is disconnected. I left the circuit on overnight and this morning it was measuring 3.780 compared to 3.802 when I went to bed. I then disconnected the battery circuit, and now it is measuring 3.779. I’ll keep an eye on it for a while without the battery circuit attached.

          • FC

            Thanks for the news, Frank.

            Maybe it would be useful to update the spreadsheet with some periodic O1-O2 readings. We’ve been making guesses here for the last day or so.

          • Frank Acland

            No problem, I’ve updated the spreadsheet with the first reading of the day and will update periodically.

          • FC

            Thank you, Frank.

        • SG

          10.1 across B1/B2 seems a little odd. Maybe we really are seeing surges / leakages.

          • Frank Acland

            No, it’s the voltage reading of the new battery.

          • SG

            Oh okay, so that really is a fresh one! Can we try reversing the polarity of the bias circuit? Seems if the bias circuit is draining the core, it is worth a try to see if it reverses such behavior.

          • Frank Acland

            I just tried that and the leak seems to be the same regardless of polarity.

          • SG

            Okay, thanks. So we can rule that out. Electrostatic leakage, possibly by way of the resin, seems like the best failure hypothesis. SM’s setup demonstrated on Skype did not have any potted resin. In fact, all of the working devices demonstrated in SM’s videos along the way have never been shown to be potted in resin. Yet, all of the devices in the wild (that are public) have experienced some kind of failure. The one major difference is the resin.

          • 3 QUESTIONS

            1) Did you pay money for this device?

            2) If so, how much?

            3) Can you get your money back?

          • Ged

            1) Not for this Ophone core as it was sent free, but for the Ocube, yes.

            2) 1500 for the Ocube I believe.

            3) Dunno if Frank is at the point of wanting to pursue that yet, especially as they are sending him a replacement Ocube for free, and sent him this Ophone core.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        I would anyway be surprised if the battery could be damaged that way. You would need fairly high voltages at low impedance to compensate the protective effect of the resistor. But who knowsโ€ฆIt might be an option to try a destructive test with a power supply instead of the unit.

        • From what we’ve seen, the Orbo devices may utilise principles that aren’t fully covered by V=IR etc. We seem to see huge (pseudo) capacitance come and go, so perhaps measured voltages are equally suspect.

          There seems to be more to the devices than that – perhaps something related to electrostatics – that is complicating the usual relationships between electrical values.

      • Adam

        Good shout on the rechargeable PP3.

  • Cesar Pinheiro

    Dear Frank.
    Sorry for any mistake here, I am not an specialist and any errors here I will apologize.
    What I learned here is that Orbo requires an external 9 volts in order to work properly.
    Why not use an integrated circuit to generate the external 9 volts required by Orbo? you can feed this integrated circuit with the energy generated by Orbo, in this way you will have some amount of the generated energy used to feed the 9 Volts required without an external source of energy, no resistors, only the real voltage.
    If Orbo generates more energy than it consumes, why not avoid the external battery and resistor? you will feed the 9 volts directly without a resistor or diode in series.

    A diode will have the same effect as cut the wire. Probably the 1 mega
    resistor avoided the Orbo to drain the necessary energy from the 9 volts battery.
    Orbo probably needs some energy from the battery in order to work, the diode and the 1 mega resistor is impeding this happens.

    We
    have here 2 resistors in series, we could measure the voltage in the 1
    mega resistor to see what is the remaining voltage in the Orbo cell.
    I
    think the 9 voltage battery with a diode will not work because we will
    have an infinite resistor in series with the battery.

  • ron

    The skype vid. doesn’t work.

  • Adam

    Would it be possible to use a Skype plugin or screen capture software (something like camstudio) to record the Skype sessions. Skype doesn’t have native support.

    That would free you up to potentially do live measurements etc

    • There is a free Camstudio lookalike called Camtasia that a lot of ‘internet marketers’ use to make demos and tutorials:

      https://www.techsmith.com/camtasia.html

      I’ve never used it so I don’t know what the learning curve looks like.

  • Adam

    Would it be possible to use a Skype plugin or screen capture software (something like camstudio) to record the Skype sessions. Skype doesn’t have native support.

    That would free you up to potentially do live measurements etc

    • There is a free Camstudio lookalike called Camtasia that a lot of ‘internet marketers’ use to make demos and tutorials:

      https://www.techsmith.com/camtasia.html

      I’ve never used it so I don’t know what the learning curve looks like.

  • Julio Ruben Vazquez Turnes

    Hello.

    I want to add my two cents to this.

    As far as we know there are two posibilities so far – The product doesnt work and all is a scam. Or the product should work but something is making them fail.

    Even with all what happened it is easy to stand in the first possibility. We should focus in the second because if it is the first option there is nothing we can do and the tests should be enough to prove if it works as promised or not.

    So if we think in the second option. What may be happening. If Steorn checks the device before shipping.

    It only leaves us a possible explanation. Something during transport is making the units fail.

    What could it be? I see two easy options here (maybe someone could add another one)

    Transport shocks – Then steorn should check their units in a shock test to check if after the shocks a package receives during transport some of the circuits are damaged or so.

    X-Rays check – When there is electronic devices involved in transport, it is easy to check the contents with X-Rays. Steorn should also check if their devices work as intended after a X-Ray scan.

    Just my two cents.

    Kind regards and good luck with the testing.

    • DrD

      copied from lower down
      I’ve been going through the same thought process.
      adding to the
      airport X-rays I have high energy particles or reduced pressure at
      altitude. apart from that — the leprecauns jump ship at the Irish
      border.
      None of them sound very likely to me.

      • Or maybe potting the things damages them in some way? – i.e., they work fine until they are encased in resin, at which point they begin to decline.

        • DrD

          That’s very true indeed.
          I asssume Steorn took that in to account though and I also presume they tested them after potting?????
          I work in an industry where we have to take considerable precautions in chosing and monitoring the encapsulation materials. You can’t use just any old material. They degrade under voltage, temperature and moisture stress and do indeed become leaky (electrical).

          • Andreas Moraitis

            In addition, liquid resin is usually conductive. If the components are not insulated very well one might expect that cells or batteries get damaged within a few minutes.

          • Although we don’t know the nature of the ‘electric field’ link between the orbo packs, it’s also conceivable that the presence of the resin may affect this supposedly interactive connection.

          • Sanjeev

            Its possible that the reference orbo is leaking through the resin via electrostatic conduction.

          • Exactly.

          • Ged

            That would explain a lot. In that case, Steorn has been shooting itself in the foot this whole time without realizing it.

          • FC

            True. More testing seems necessary in that respect.

            Now, going off a little bit on a tangent here, I want to share with you another idea that I just had. Shaun says that the bias core surrounds the power core and bathes it in its electric field. So it appears to me that Steorn is already trying to incorporate the bias into the very architecture of each orbo core, as I suggested on February 15.

            But in that case, wouldn’t it be more practical to use a permanent-type electret for the bias, instead an orbo-type electret (which is designed for variable voltage or “charge”)? By using a permanent electret as the bias, the orbo core would be bathed in an electric field of constant strength. And there would be no need to bias the bias.

          • FC

            Thanks, Peter. ๐Ÿ™‚
            I’m sure that Steorn know quite a bit about electrets in general. They just need to pick a very permanent type and wrap each orbo core with it, so as to provide the electric field bias that orbo cores need. This would make the use of bulky and problematic battery-powered bias circuits unnecessary.

          • DrD

            Yes, and whats more, one of the mechanisms for degradation is due to mobile ionic charges (contaminants like Li+, Na+). Some are mobile at room temperature and others at a few 100 degC. They won’t affect most electronics but we really don’t understand the nature of the beast (well I don’t). They play havoc with exposed chips.

          • I suspect the potting compound may have been chosen more for its opacity than its electrical characteristics!

          • DrD

            I can’t believe they wouldn’t have evaluated it though.
            hmmm?

          • Last minute thing – they happened to have some lying around?

          • Dieter_G

            Well, I can.
            Frank said it’d be very hard. Normally, the resins used for potting electronics are a bit soft, in order to not introduce mechanical stress when curing (and therby also shrinking a litle bit).

          • DrD

            Well, we definitely need Frank to check it out with Shaun (was it monitored before or after potting; if not already known). I have to leave for a while now. At least it will be one more theory bit the dust.

          • Sanjeev

            Funny thing is that the resin won’t prevent reverse engineering. It can be cut and materials can be analyzed. Its an electret sandwiched between two dissimilar metal foils. How much reverse engineering effort will it take? Next to nothing.

          • DrD

            I’m not convinced they do it just to stop reverse engineering but I suppose it will inhibit all but the most determined. It’s fairly common practice.

          • Sanjeev

            May be its effective when there are thousands of components and specialized ICs etc, where destructive method will obviously fail. But here we have just one component of importance. The electret is a common one, and only the metals need identification.

          • Frank Acland

            I asked. SM thinks there’s no chance the potting resin would interfere with the operations. He says they use cold potting resin, nothing at high temperatures.

          • DrD

            It’s worth asking all the same, did they monitor after potting.
            Also, it might just be possible to detect conduction by probing onto the resin as close as possible on highest ohm range.

          • R V

            For a company that cannot or will not produce a simple spec sheet for a product it sells, I would not make any assumptions.

    • Olof

      McCarthy says: “O-cube splitting the time and convert time into energy.” But people in the USA do not have time nowadays. People are busy and time has running out. So O-cube can not work in the USA!

      • R V

        That’s a rather fancy idea, splitting time. fancy and unnecessary and most likely not true.

        If the Ocube is doing anything at all, it’s probably just converting ambient heat to useful energy. That would certainly be amazing enough since that would violate our understanding of the Second Law but there is now precedent based on Sheehan’s work at university of San Diego.

        http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10701-014-9781-5

        Foundations of Physics
        March 2014, Volume 44, Issue 3, pp 235-247
        First online: 14 March 2014
        Experimental Test of a Thermodynamic Paradox
        D. P. Sheehan , D. J. Mallin, J. T. Garamella, W. F. Sheehan

        • Olof

          I’m just kidding. But Steorn has probably serious problems, when the o-cube shipments are badly behind schedule.

          • R V

            I got your humor and was critiquing Steorn’s theory, not you.

  • Frank – do you have one of these voltage testers knocking around, maybe among your car tools?

    http://i01.i.aliimg.com/img/pb/399/200/834/834200399_755.jpg

    It would be interesting to see if it can pick up the ‘electric field’ that supposedly connects the two orbo cores in the resin block.

    • Frank Acland

      Not at home, but they don’t look too hard to get hold of. They are just screwdriver probe voltage testers, right?

      • Yep. Here (UK) you can find them in most hardware outlets. They’re good for picking up the fields surrounding anything from AC mains to car wiring (a useful tool to have around actually). I bought my daughter one a couple of weeks back for the princely sum of ยฃ1! (Poundstore)

        • The black type have a sort of LCD scale that indicates field intensity. They only work at very short range, but might yield some clues about the layout inside the resin block.

  • Frank – do you have one of these proximity voltage testers knocking around, maybe among your car tools?

    http://i01.i.aliimg.com/img/pb/399/200/834/834200399_755.jpg

    It would be interesting to see if it can pick up the ‘electric field’ that supposedly connects the two orbo cores in the resin block.

    • Frank Acland

      Not at home, but they don’t look too hard to get hold of. They are just screwdriver probe voltage testers, right?

      • Yep. Here (UK) you can find them in most hardware outlets. They’re good for picking up the fields surrounding anything from AC mains to car wiring (a useful tool to have around actually). I bought my daughter one a couple of weeks back for the princely sum of ยฃ1! (Poundstore)

        • The black type have a sort of LCD scale that indicates field intensity. They only work at very short range, but might yield some clues about the layout inside the resin block.

          • snowvoardphil

            A quick search into how these work seem to tell me that they would only work with AC voltage. I think DC sensing would not be accurate.

          • DrD

            There is an ac (triangular) component. It’ can be seen on the latest video

          • They work quite happily to pick up the 12 Vdc potential in car wiring, through the insulation, and can even be used to find internal breaks in the copper conductors. I assume that they are actually electrometers rather than EM field sensors.

            Given the low cost and widespread availability, I would have thought that using one to explore the potted lump would be worth a try, especially in view of the claim that an electrostatic field surrounds and connects the two orbo units.

            Even better, perhaps someone could construct a simple electrometer and post it to Frank, as I suggested earlier:

            http://amasci.com/electrom/e-field2.gif

            http://amasci.com/emotor/chargdet.html

  • DrD

    Hello Frank,
    Peter (Agaricus) made a very good point a few posts down.
    Do you happen to know if Shaun tested (rather monitored) your latest Obo cells after potting or only before. I have decades of experience in this field so I know it’s a definite if very slight possibilty. It’s worth asking him if you don’t know for certain.

    • Frank Acland

      They said they tested it before shipping when it was potted, but not sure if they monitored it after it was potted.

      • DrD

        I note it was 4.37V when you first tested it. I suppose we could extrapolate back wards to estimate when the degradation commenced. Also, it’s worth trying to measure if the resin has any conductivity.

  • DrD

    Hello Frank,
    Peter (Agaricus) made a very good point a few posts down.
    Do you happen to know if Shaun tested (rather monitored) your latest Orbo cells after potting or only before. I have decades of experience in this field so I know it’s a definite if very slight possibilty. It’s worth asking him if you don’t know for certain.

    • Frank Acland

      They said they tested it before shipping when it was potted, but not sure if they monitored it after it was potted.

      • DrD

        I note it was 4.37V when you first tested it. I suppose we could extrapolate back wards to estimate when the degradation commenced. Also, it’s worth trying to measure if the resin has any conductivity.

  • gdaigle

    Very interesting. SMโ€™s reference to the jumping up in steps due to a domain structure suggests that this behavior may be closer to that of Landau levels than the behavior of super capacitors. Landau quantizations are discrete energy values with the number of electrons per level proportional to the strength of the applied magnetic fields. This could explain the reference to domain structures (presumably) within the material, and how aligning those domains increases the output.

    In two dimensional materials (i.e., thin films or sheets) when electrons are subjected to a magnetic field they follow circular cyclotron orbits. These orbitals are known as Landau levels and are observed in the integer and fractional quantum Hall effects. The fractional quantum Hall effect is found at extremly low temperatures and is influential in theories about topological order.

    As I posted earlier, a team of researchers in Japan and China has identified a way to produce an electrical current at room temperature, without the need for external energy using new materials called โ€œtopological insulatorsโ€ (see http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3379204/Are-phones-NEVER-need-charge-coming-Groundbreaking-Japanese-experiment-generates-electric-current-without-energy-consumption.html).

    Has Steorn not only beat those researchers to development of such a room temperature insulator capable of outputting a continuous current, but already deployed it in their Orbo products?

  • gdaigle

    Very interesting. SMโ€™s reference to the jumping up in steps due to a domain structure suggests that this behavior may be closer to that of Landau levels than the behavior of super capacitors. Landau quantizations are discrete energy values with the number of electrons per level proportional to the strength of the applied magnetic fields. This could explain the reference to domain structures (presumably) within the material, and how aligning those domains increases the output.

    In two dimensional materials (i.e., thin films or sheets) when electrons are subjected to a magnetic field they follow circular cyclotron orbits. These orbitals are known as Landau levels and are observed in the integer and fractional quantum Hall effects. The fractional quantum Hall effect is found at extremly low temperatures and is influential in theories about topological order.

    As I posted earlier, a team of researchers in Japan and China has identified a way to produce an electrical current at room temperature, without the need for external energy using new materials called โ€œtopological insulatorsโ€ (see http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3379204/Are-phones-NEVER-need-charge-coming-Groundbreaking-Japanese-experiment-generates-electric-current-without-energy-consumption.html).

    Has Steorn not only beat those researchers to development of such a room temperature insulator capable of outputting a continuous current, but already deployed it in their Orbo products?

  • Private Citizen

    Frank, your video recording app probably has a “Normalize Audio” feature that would attempt to make your voice volume match Shaun’s. If not, plenty of freeware can do so.

  • Private Citizen

    Frank, your video recording app probably has a “Normalize Audio” feature that would attempt to make your voice volume match Shaun’s. If not, plenty of freeware can do so.

    • The Heed

      Normalize Audio only adjusts the loudest peak in the audio to 0db. You are thinking of compression, which ‘squashes’ the audio, lowering the loud peaks and boosting the quiet sections.

  • FC

    Frank,
    Was the 9V battery reading 10.1V before connecting it to the bias core today at 8:32 a.m.?
    I can’t get rid of the feeling that something strange is happening with the battery bias circuit. O1-O2 seems to fall quicker when the circuit is connected.

  • R V

    Does the resin act as a thermal insulator? If so, that might fit with my speculation below that this functions as a Second Law device, converting ambient heat to useful work. If the resin interfered with the heat flow that would show up as power loss.

    • SG

      None of the working devices shown by SM in the series of videos over time are potted in resin. So I do not think the resin assists the function of the Orbo cores. In fact, it might be the cause of the problems in the field.

      • R V

        My point is that the resin might interfere, not help, the function. But I don’t know. Probably not.

        • SG

          Yes, I edited my original post shortly after posting. You might need to refresh to see the edit, I don’t know.

  • R V

    Does the resin act as a thermal insulator? If so, that might fit with my speculation below that this functions as a Second Law device, converting ambient heat to useful work. If the resin interfered with the heat flow that would show up as power loss.

    • SG

      None of the working devices shown by SM in the series of videos over time are potted in resin. So I do not think the resin assists the function of the Orbo cores (but might inhibit it as you point out). In fact, it might be the cause of the problems in the field for either the reason you speculate or other reasons such as Sanjeev’s hypothesis of electrostatic conduction leakage.

      • R V

        My point is that the resin might interfere, not help, the function. But I don’t know. Probably not.

        • SG

          Yes, I edited my original post shortly after posting. You might need to refresh to see the edit, I don’t know.

  • R V

    My recommendation is that a team goes to Steorn and spends a few days there testing products. Otherwise there will be an endless cycle of products acting differently than they supposedly do at Steorn and Steorn endlessly giving excuses.

  • R V

    My recommendation is that a team goes to Steorn and spends a few days there testing products. Otherwise there will be an endless cycle of products acting differently than they supposedly do at Steorn and Steorn endlessly giving excuses.

  • georgehants

    Well, I do hope that in approx 15 days Mr. Rossi (IH) give a presentation a little more convincing than Mr. Steorn, so far.
    For the important demonstration of his device and in agreement with R V below, but I think he should fly over to ECW with half a dozen Orbo’s and stay until a successful test is shown.
    This is not good publicity for his device, that needs to be fairly assessed as ECW is trying very hard to do.

    • DrD

      unfortunately Dr Rossi is now talking about end of March just for the independant report but I suppose it’s not inhis control. It will come when it comes,we can but wait and maybe we will be surprised if it’s next week

  • georgehants

    Well, I do hope that in approx 15 days Mr. Rossi (IH) give a presentation a little more convincing than Mr. Steorn, so far.
    For the important demonstration of his device and in agreement with R V below, but I think he should fly over to ECW with half a dozen Orbo’s and stay until a successful test is shown.
    This is not good publicity for his device, that needs to be fairly assessed as ECW is trying very hard to do.

    • DrD

      unfortunately Dr Rossi is now talking about end of March just for the independant report but I suppose it’s not inhis control. It will come when it comes,we can but wait and maybe we will be surprised if it’s next week

  • DrD

    There is an ac (triangular) component. It’ can be seen on the latest video

  • R V

    I got your humor and was critiquing Steorn’s theory, not you.

  • ron

    Thank you Frank the link u sent works.

  • OM

    Of course, X-ray can affect electrets. The new unexplored devices really can have unexpected properties. And it can really be a problem. But this is not the biggest problem.

    The biggest problem lies in the fact that Shaun provides inconsistent information about the device.

    First, he speaks of two Orbo Packs providing reference voltage and one powerful Orbo Pack, and without any batteries. Next, we get the device and see the battery. Why?

    Shaun says that 03-04 is an output of the Orbo Pack. But we see a stable 5.17V and with a clear cut-off. Obviously, it is the same DC-DC converter that was in the previous device. Why this discrepancy?

    Now, Shaun speaks about some electric field communication in the device and without a direct electrical connection. Why did he say differently before now?

    Also note:
    We saw a discharge chart of Orbo Pack. This is a typical chart for chemical current sources.
    We know the voltage of the charged Orbo Pack – 5.2V.
    It mysteriously coincides with the voltage of four charged batteries 1.2-1.3v.

    • SG

      I agree with all of your points up to the last one. I don’t think we are observing four 1.2 to 1.3V batteries. The behaviors we have observed don’t correlate well to that hypothesis.

      I believe the most probably explanation is that Steorn did not test well enough with the resin potting in place. This seemed almost like a last-minute decision based on when we first saw an image of the potting (on SM’s facebook page). We suspected early on with the Ocube that it had likely not been thoroughly tested with the potting. Some here who are experts in this area have talked about the problems that can arise if you completely pot a device.

      The X-ray hypothesis is also interesting, although they seemed to make it from China to Ireland in working condition, so that one doesn’t hold as much weight in my mind.

      • OM

        It seems that they lead us by the nose.
        The device can not work basically, so the artificial faults are created to hide this fact.
        Of course, it is my guess.

        • SG

          It is possible. But there is at least some evidence to suggest otherwise.

          • OM

            Well, we can tinker with it a little bit more…

    • Ged

      5 +- 0.25 V is the voltage of the controller chip -required- for compatibility to run the USB port or for internal running of the Ophone. There is nothing suspicious about that particular voltage, as it is an electronics industry standard that must be met. But the cores always seem to cap around 4.7 V in our actual experience, from Frank’s personal data, and then that gets stepped up to 5+-0.25 V. Maybe Shaun sometimes misstates what the engineers tell him?

      • OM

        I talked about the core voltage – 5.2V when fully charged.

        quote:
        ————————
        Frank Acland
        ECW Admin
        a day ago

        I hope that Shaun’s idea for putting a diode on the
        reference cell works, as I feel that testing will only deplete it
        further. It has been gradually dropping during the day. Currently
        standing at 3.8 volts — it should apparently be at around 5.2 Volts.

        ————————

        • Ged

          That’s also what I am referring to when I wonder if Shaun innocently miscommunicates the specs. No matter how Frank forces the ocube core, it always caps around 4.7V. What we have seen of the Ophone core agrees with that, and not the 5.2V needed for electronics. Who knows, though!

          • DrD

            Certainly somethings wrong. In fact the faults as you say, seem more reproducible than what should be there. Is there a common factor (other than Steorn themselves) or are all the problems unrelated. Could it be that potting compound, I wouldn’t be at all surprised.
            Any way it’s not looking good.

      • OM

        I agree. Coincidence is not proof.

    • Dieter_G

      Yes, what you decribe here is what I meant some time ago, when I said it starts to feel like in a dream, where everything is constantly morphing and changing, because so are now their “technical” explanations. It all started with this suspicious bias-circuit. Then, all of a sudden their “tech” alledgedly has a significant capacitance, outperforming every state of the art supercap easily. This comes just as a byproduct. Beeing a sensation alone, it wasn’t mentioned ever before
      … and so on.
      This terribly resembles esoteric techno-babble.
      It was the fact that some time ago all their claims were plausible to some degree from an engineers point of view that made me follow their story.
      Now they pretty much scattered their reputation in my eyes.

      • Blue Energy

        It looks more and more like the same old nail soup to me: “Yes, it will
        work just fine as it is, but it would taste even better if you put a few
        9 volt batteries into the pot. Just for flavor, you understand: this is an old nail.”

  • OM

    Of course, X-ray can affect electrets. The new unexplored devices really can have unexpected properties. And it can really be a problem. But this is not the biggest problem.

    The biggest problem lies in the fact that Shaun provides inconsistent information about the device.

    First, he speaks of two Orbo Packs providing reference voltage and one powerful Orbo Pack, and without any batteries. Next, we get the device and see the battery. Why?

    Shaun says that 03-04 is an output of the Orbo Pack. But we see a stable 5.17V and with a clear cut-off. Obviously, it is the same DC-DC converter that was in the previous device. Why this discrepancy?

    Now, Shaun speaks about some electric field communication in the device and without a direct electrical connection. Why did he say differently before now?

    Also note:
    We saw a discharge chart of Orbo Pack. This is a typical chart for chemical current sources.
    We know the voltage of the charged Orbo Pack – 5.2V.
    It mysteriously coincides with the voltage of four charged batteries 1.2-1.3v.

    • SG

      I agree with all of your points up to the last one. I don’t think we are observing four 1.2 to 1.3V batteries. The behaviors we have observed don’t correlate well to that hypothesis.

      I believe the most probable explanation is that Steorn did not test well enough with the resin potting in place. This seemed almost like a last-minute decision based on when we first saw an image of the potting (on SM’s facebook page). We suspected early on with the Ocube that it had likely not been thoroughly tested with the potting. Some here who are experts in this area have talked about the problems that can arise if you completely pot a device.

      The X-ray hypothesis is also interesting, although they seemed to make it from China to Ireland in working condition, so that one doesn’t hold as much weight in my mind.

      • OM

        It seems that they lead us by the nose.
        The device can not work basically, so the artificial faults are created to hide this fact.
        Of course, it is my guess.

        • SG

          It is possible. But there is at least some evidence to suggest otherwise.

          • OM

            Well, we can tinker with it a little bit more…

    • Ged

      5 +- 0.25 V is the voltage of the controller chip -required- for compatibility to run the USB port or for internal running of the Ophone. There is nothing suspicious about that particular voltage, as it is an electronics industry standard that must be met. But the cores always seem to cap around 4.7 V in our actual experience, from Frank’s personal data, and then that gets stepped up to 5+-0.25 V. Maybe Shaun sometimes misstates what the engineers tell him?

      • OM

        I talked about the core voltage – 5.2V when fully charged.

        quote:
        ————————
        Frank Acland
        ECW Admin
        a day ago

        I hope that Shaun’s idea for putting a diode on the
        reference cell works, as I feel that testing will only deplete it
        further. It has been gradually dropping during the day. Currently
        standing at 3.8 volts — it should apparently be at around 5.2 Volts.

        ————————

        • Ged

          That’s also what I am referring to when I wonder if Shaun innocently miscommunicates the specs. No matter how Frank forces the ocube core, it always caps around 4.7V. What we have seen of the Ophone core agrees with that, and not the 5.2V needed for electronics. Who knows, though!

          • DrD

            Certainly somethings wrong. In fact the faults as you say, seem more reproducible than what should be there. Is there a common factor (other than Steorn themselves) or are all the problems unrelated. Could it be that potting compound, I wouldn’t be at all surprised.
            Any way it’s not looking good.

      • OM

        I agree. Coincidence is not proof.

    • Dieter_G

      Yes, what you decribe here is what I meant some time ago, when I said it starts to feel like in a dream, where everything is constantly morphing and changing, because so are now their “technical” explanations. It all started with this suspicious bias-circuit. Then, all of a sudden their “tech” alledgedly has a significant capacitance, outperforming every state of the art supercap easily. This comes just as a byproduct. Beeing a sensation alone, it wasn’t mentioned ever before
      … and so on.
      This terribly resembles esoteric techno-babble.
      It was the fact that some time ago all their claims were plausible to some degree from an engineers point of view that made me follow their story.
      Now they pretty much scattered their reputation in my eyes.

      • Blue Energy

        It looks more and more like the same old nail soup to me: “Yes, it will
        work just fine as it is, but it would taste even better if you put a few
        9 volt batteries into the pot. Just for flavor, you understand: this is an old nail.”

  • OM

    The information is supplied in such a way as to confuse us.
    The device is not working properly.
    How should we understand this?

  • OM

    The information is supplied in such a way as to confuse us.
    The device is not working properly.
    How should we understand this?

  • THREE QUESTIONS

    1) Did you pay money for this device?

    2) If so, how much?

    3) Can you get your money back?

    PS I recommend the movie, *Shattered Glass*.

    See description on IMDB – http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0323944/

    • Ged

      1) Not for this Ophone core as it was sent free, but for the Ocube, yes.

      2) 1500 for the Ocube I believe.

      3) Dunno if Frank is at the point of wanting to pursue that yet, especially as they are sending him a replacement Ocube for free, and sent him this Ophone core.

    • wonderboy

      I think we should chill and let Frank do his testing. The truth will come out, so we should reserve judgement till then.

  • Stephen

    It seems, if not clear, at least likely that this device is either 1. a fraud or 2. some sort of heat engine that generates power from the environment. It’s been suggested that the pottage might be acting as an insulator damping this effect. Depending on efficiency, this might still be a useful product. I’d suggest Steon get their act together and conclude that whatever trade secrets they are attempting to protect by potting the device simply is not worth the bad PR these tests are generating. They need to ship out a non-potted device ASAP or I fail to see how any potential liscensors will take them seriously.

    • Stephen

      Another Stephen I guess ๐Ÿ˜‰

      I’m also wondering of the potting plays a part in the device or if it is only holding things in place.

  • georgehants

    I think one must hold out hope on the basis that Mr. Steorn is acting like somebody who believes that his device works.
    Sending new units, giving refunds, helping on-line etc.
    The only other explanation moves in to the psychological, that these days is a factor to seriously take into account with most members of the establishment, science, politics, business, etc.

    • FC

      Totally agreed, George.

      Personally, I think that Steorn have a valid technology. But that technology still needs some R&D to bring it to market. Perhaps they were so eager to show the world what they have (or they were so pressed by their investors to get a return on their money) that they pulled the trigger too early.

      I may end up being totally wrong, but that’s what I believe at present. The other options just don’t make any sense to me.

      • georgehants

        FC, if it has any basis in Fact we do not want it facing the same 30 year delay as Cold Fusion because it was abandoned to easily.
        Mr. Steorn must put maximum effort into making sure that ECW receive everything they need to demonstrate an effect.

        • FC

          Totally agreed.

          • DrD

            Well, that’s three of that totally agree on those points.

          • Four!

        • SG

          Five!

        • Frank Acland

          Six! I can’t fault them on that count so far. They have been easy to work with and available to help day and night, and will be sending more products when available apparently.

          • georgehants

            Frank all goes to show that there would seem to be some genuine effect to be found.
            I think it is now, with so many watching, very much in Mr Steorn’s interest to follow through with earnest until ECW is hopefully able to confidently show a good result and then send you a few bottles of Red to celebrate, ha.

          • DrD

            Haha, and when we prove it works we should meet up and crack a bottle of champers over an Ocube in Ireland. If it doesn’t, who should we crack it over?

          • georgehants

            DrD, ha just drink it to drown a few sorrows.
            Worse things happen at sea.

      • davidbyrden

        Here’s a purely hypothetical option that makes sense to me. I present it as a mental exercise only:

        1. The device does not work, so our knowledge of the basic laws of physics is correct.

        2. The makers are engaged in a fraud.

        3. The makers have pulled in a great deal of money from investors, and wish to walk away with some portion that they have concealed.

        4. To avoid legal action, they must behave AS IF they truly believe in their device and are merely incompetent (there is no law against incompetence). They must refund and support their customers in full compliance with the law. The customers’ money is, in any case, peanuts when compared to the investors’ money.

        5. Having made a lot of money from this scam, they wish to end it and live happily. But they cannot close down the firm without the agreement of the shareholders. They cannot quit the firm without their fraud being exposed by their “clean hands” replacements. A legal way out is needed.
        6. THEREFORE they launch terrible products (a feature-poor “brick” phone, a large charger that weighs almost a kilogram) at non-competitive prices. Products that are doomed to fail and do financial damage to the company.

        7. While the products are being examined by the (very few) buyers, they maintain the fiction that the products can eventually work, and all of their failures are due to teething problems. The provision of replacements and refunds not only keeps the makers in compliance with the law, but it adds to the financial damage they are causing their company.

        8. Eventually they announce that they are unfortunately forced to cease operations because they have lost so much money with these products and their teething problems. They present the appearance of innocence and incompetence rather than fraud. The investors are unable to sue them.

        The above is a purely imaginary hypothetical scenario! However I would be interested to know if Steorn have done anything that does NOT comply with it.

        I also draw your attention to a statement which was reportedly contained in Steorn’s published accounts:
        “….in the event that the company is unsuccessful, the going concern principle may cease to apply with consequent impact on the future viability of its activities.”
        In plain English, it means: “if these products fail, we will shut down”.

        • FC

          Thank for your opinion and for taking the time to explain it so well.

    • Brent Buckner

      I can imagine another scenario, not to imply that it is in effect here, just as a consideration for some other product and set of people.

      The scenario is that someone has set up a company that has sold shares to investors. That someone has received a salary from the company. That someone learns that the company’s technology does not work. That someone then chooses to continue acting as though believing that the company’s technology does work in order to keep drawing a salary for as long as possible while not leaving evidence of fraud.

      Might work as a subplot in a work of fiction.

    • Stephen

      Another Stephen I guess ๐Ÿ˜‰

      • Sanjeev

        The O3O4 hasn’t recovered even after 12 hours, usually it does that in few minutes. I wonder if its totally dead now.
        I also wonder what’s going on with the other OCube.

        • Frank Acland

          I started a new long-term test with the Ocube this morning. See in the post above.

        • Dutch Delft University of Technology 2010, demonstration Yildiz Magnet motor.
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI3227d5Css&feature=share

          • OM

            Almost 6 years ago…

            If I had made this remarkable discovery, I would spread the most accurate description immediately, so that everyone could assemble the device.
            Yes, I would send a registered letter to the Patent Office in the same time, just to fix the fact. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • Yes, 6 years ago, how long did Rossi tried to get just 1 patent? At least he did, but
            only with the millions of IH and a lot of experts who know to avoid the dogmaโ€™s
            regarding โ€˜impossibleโ€™ devices. Yildiz put all his money in his invention, just as Rossi did, and want it to be yielding.

          • OM

            He does not understand that he will succeed, if he let go of his invention.
            And he will not get anything, if he is chasing for profits.

          • Maybe you are right, but how about Rossi?

          • OM

            I believe that Rossi has a working device.
            When it will be sold, it will be copied by anyone who wishes.

          • Yes, the E-Cat is a working device, but it was (and still is) a long and winding road. Maybe Yildizโ€™s permanent magnet motor is a working device too, but he is โ€˜still on the roadโ€™ and miles behind Rossi. Who knows, some day there will be an โ€˜Industrial Heat’ for Yildiz as well.

          • FC

            True. I don’t know the precision of this multimeter, but from our previous experience, we believe that it can be trusted to read voltage drops of this magnitude. In fact, we are thinking about setting it to display an extra digit.

            I don’t know if DrD and Frank will read this comment, but maybe this is the best time to change the multimeter’s settings, before we start a new discharge test.

          • DrD

            Sorry I was out most of the day.
            YES, I think we should —– it’s it’s up to Frank.
            The procedure is simple, as follows:
            I think it was Rob told us that the meters range changes at 4V. So Frank just splits the load resistor into two series resistors that add up to the value he wants to use next. They should be in the ratio of approximately 1:4 (not critical). We continue to monitor U1U2 exactly as before, (no change there). In addition we add another column which records the voltage between the two resistors (across the larger one). If U1U2 is 4.7V we will see (4/5) X 4.7 = 3.760V, i.e. 3 decimals.
            It’s true what Bill says that there will always be errors but for the purposes of detecting whether it’s rising OR falling, the absolute error doesn’t matter. We will however need to see it change by more that one digit to be confident it isn’t noise or temperature. Once Frank finds the equilibrium point, then noise will indeed dominate.

          • FC

            Ok, sounds good to me.
            Now let’s wait for Frank to come back.

          • DrD

            just checked Frank’s record and it looks like the range changes at 2V, not 4V. In which case the ratio needs to be more like 1:2 and won’t be so accurate.

          • Frank Acland

            So after leaving the ocube without a resistor over u1-u2 for 5 hours there was no increase in voltage — which makes me doubt that any level of resistance at this voltage would register anything interesting.

          • FC

            Hmm. Doesn’t look good, does it? Let’s see where it stands tomorrow morning, then.

            From our previous observations, this ocube does self-recharge to a certain extent without a load (especially at lower voltages). But apparently, it can’t recharge at higher voltages, let alone while driving a load.

          • Sanjeev

            Then the only option is to let it discharge to, say 3V, and again check if it wants to self charge from there. If it does not then we are done with the tests.

          • FC

            Agreed.

            Perhaps we could let it discharge relatively quickly (e.g. through a 220 or 470 Ohm resistor) to around 3V, as you say, and then let it self-recharge with the only help of the bias circuit, to see how long it takes and how far it goes.

            If and when it recovers and stabilizes at a higher voltage, we can discharge it again in order to do an output vs input analysis.

            Is that similar to what you had in mind?

          • Sanjeev

            Yes. Can be done with the same R as now, but the low R can save time. Frank may decide or perhaps he has better ideas.

          • FC

            Ok. Let’s wait for Frank then, and see what he thinks.

          • DrD

            There is an alternative:-
            Boost the cells back closer to their intended 5V using the methods that worked before.
            That is a combination of lower bias resistor and “arcing” the 18V direct to the Orbo.
            The reason I favour this is because it seems to be generating better when it’s closer to the 5V and vice versa.

          • DrD

            In fact I suppose we could record how much energy goes into forcing it back up to where ever it goes and then compare it with how much we get out of it when we discharge it back to where it is now. Or maybe it will not drop back (hopeful thinking).

          • FC

            Yes, that’s also an option. I wonder if we’ll be able to push it past 4.72V. Ged thinks that we won’t. But of course we weren’t talking about arcing before, which may revive some of the “dead” cores.

            The reason why the lower voltage option was suggested is because we know from experience that the ocube recovers from around 3V by itself, with the only help of the bias circuit. Whereas we’re seeing now that it doesn’t recover as easily from 4.68V to 4.7V under the same conditions. But you’re also right that it appears as if the energy delivered for every 0.01V drop is greater at higher voltages than at lower ones.

          • DrD

            I agree, it’s so badly damaged that it might not go as high as before but there’s no harm in trying. I think the key was shocking it with high power (arcing) and then maintaining the bias at a much higher level for a while (much higher V or much lower R or both).
            It doesn’t seem to like the lower voltages.

          • OM

            Preparation of 4.7 V cathode material LiNi0.5Mn1.5O4 by an oxalic acid-pretreated solid-state method for lithium-ion secondary battery
            http://www.scholarmate.com/scmwebsns/publication/view?des3Id=XoZy2GosiBw4bohQn4mkbQ%253D%253D

            Research Article
            http://www.hindawi.com/journals/amse/2011/768143/
            Figure 5: Discharge curves of LiNi0.5Mn1.5O4 cathode at rate indicated.
            http://www.hindawi.com/journals/amse/2011/768143.fig.005.jpg

          • OM

            If it is assumed that we have a battery, you may continue to charge it. The voltage will remain constant and will begin to rise at the end of the charge cycle.

          • OM

            If I have understood correctly, the solid curve is for the charging cycle and the dashed curve is for discharging.

          • Sanjeev

            The voltage is dropping even with 4.7k, that means there is no self charge at all.
            The situation is made complicated by the 5F, 5V cap. May be there is a built in over voltage protection in the cap (such as a zener), which prevents it from going above 4.7V. There is also a possibility that the cap is leaking the energy from the orbo cell, so we never see a steady voltage or rising voltage.
            But so far 3 orbo packs have failed tests (1 from ocube and 2 from ophone brick), if its just bad luck then it can’t be worse for steorn.
            Anyway, I’m ready to participate in testing anything that steorn keeps throwing at us.

          • DrD

            It actually means that if there is any self charging effect remaining it’s less than 4.7mW which would certianly include zero.
            As for the 4.7V clamp, I have a suspucion that with a bit more agression we could force it up above 5V! I wouldn’t suggest trying just yet in case it causes more damage.
            Despite that hint of optimism I can’t help but feel we’re running out of hope on this but I still like the idea of continuing.

          • Sanjeev

            We didn’t see any voltage rise when the load was removed. So I guess if its generating anything, its beyond the resolution of instruments.
            The only test remaining (IMO) is to see if it rises up when discharged to a low voltage. This should show if there is a clamping circuit somewhere.

          • Ged

            If it is forced above its max order state, it may simply relax back down and not “self charge” till it gets back to where it wants. If so, self charging would kick back in around 4.67-4.7 V, and be absent at voltages above that.

          • Sanjeev

            How do you find out which is the max order state and the voltage there?

          • Ged

            By doing exactly what Frank has been doing :).

          • DrD

            So according to your theory, the internal generation will start once it drops below 4.67V and the rate will increase asympotically from about 4.67?
            It’s certainly not generating much if anything right.
            I see it just hit 4.7V last night.

          • Ged

            Sort of. Generation will start from our view after it falls back to its “set point”, but should be maximal near that point where the highest alignment is achieved (pushing past that point probably just puts energy in between the plates as a charge sep just like a cap and no longer directly via the dipole polymer, but with a very small amount of head room as we have seen). Self recharging should actually decrease very slightly as more disorder is put in via net energy losing power load, but then really fall once it passes that tipping point alignment threshold. Not enough data to quantitate all this yet.

            But, that should be a good test of the model, to see if it is wrong or not (so far). At its “set point” range, I would guess capacitance, as we see it, would be at its relative max too, so it should be quite a bit more resistant to change in that area (seems to be a few hundredths of a volt wide?).

          • Frank Acland

            Force charging doesn’t seem to hold above about 4.73. From what we have seen, “self charging” seems to happen rapidly if shorted out to below a volt, and then decreases as it approaches 3 Volts (see March 3 on the spreadsheet). But it also seems like the rate of self-charge is not uniform. Maybe it depends how quickly the packs are discharged, or how long the short is held for. We can do some testing on this at some point.

          • Xavier Pitz

            If I remember correct Shaun said that the “recovery rate” from an orbo cell is supposed to be variable & unpredictable. Only an average integrated over a day could be expected…

          • Ged

            All that data strongly supports the model of how it works, so far.

            The model suggests that self charging is a function of two terms: energy/power density of wherever it pulls energy from, and the physical percentage state of dipole alignment (dead and self nullifying disordered -> partly aligned to magnetic field produced by metal plates by bias voltage allowing further alignment -> high alignment percentage allowing self magnetic field generation and forcing on the material, and high charge separation/capacitance induced on the metal plates). This also means energy storage is a function of two factors: energy stored as capacitance induced on the plates, and energy stored as order in the dipole alignment of the material itself. The former doesn’t store much, but a short time span discharge will pull from that without tapping into the slower and larger energy release caused by physical disordering of the material.

            So, discharge length and intensity would be indeed an important factor in impacting recharge, as recharge is entirely dependent on the alignment of the material and the x variable of the harvest source. We can’t track x yet, but the -rate- of disordering for a given starting order percentage and power draw, will be directly tied to x.

            Thus, the variability in self charging is explained by the model, but the model predicts that self charging (and capacitance) will always follow general trends of being highest when most ordered, and will fall off a cliff once the disorder increases enough to trip a mode change transition (e.g. From ordered to semiordered modes). If we don’t see that, then the model will be in question or falsified.

            Once max order is obtained, you can’t physically align anything more, so over charging doesn’t change the material, but just stuffs whatever extra charge difference the plates can take based on the internal resistance of the material (which is highest at full order, this so is capacitance across the dipole polymer material).

            Anyways, so far your data is surprisingly supportive of this model, but as all models it takes only one contrary piece of evidence to disprove.

            Thank you again for all your work and data!

          • Frank Acland

            Ok, so based on that analysis, what tests do you thing should be done to effectively test your hypothesis?

          • Ged

            Basically exactly what you have already been doing. Testing the power output at different voltages via discharge (and capacitance by both discharge and recharge, but you already did that). The rate of voltage drop should increase as voltage decreases after a point for the same given load (when starting at or below the voltage rest state of course; which 4.73 V seems to be above, in which case the inverse will be true till that natural rest point is passed).

            Edit: also, the need for the bias circuit for recharging should appear and disappear bases on the semiordered-ordered threshold, respectively.

            If this baby is just a fancy battery, the model should be quickly disproven by the voltage-load rate of change relationship.

          • DrD

            To prove it Frank needs to remove the load and it will continue to fall.

          • Ged

            Exactly. It may just be slow to fall on its own, but I believe we have already seen that happen in the data.

          • Ged

            Obviously the community who mapped it disagree. But, if you watch Frank’s video of him taking measurements, which is linked in the doc, by the way, you see he reverses his electrodes on purpose to keep readings positive so that we are dealing with absolute numbers for energy considerstions. Easy enough to understand and not a problem at all to anyone willing to think.

          • FC

            L1-L2 reads 0V because that side of the circuit is open (damaged). Therefore, the voltages can never add up. But since the damaged side contains two 9V batteries, that’s why the cross readings give funny values.

          • Ged

            Exactly. And any issues with sign are non issues. It’s all easy enough to follow, and I don’t mean to sound cross, but I have a short patience for people obviously trying to start trouble and attacking Frank (not calmly asking questions, just proclamating judgements from ignorance); especially when all this info was readily available.

            Thanks for your cool head, FC.

          • FC

            No worries, Ged.

          • Sanjeev

            I’d like to tell the new comers and non-followers who are asking questions etc to not to worry too much about it for now. It does not work as expected, there are certain strange behaviors, but nothing serious.
            Making more measurements or diagrams are not going to make any difference. No gain in fighting about it. First requirement is that it should generate energy reliably, the questions of method of test, circuits and all comes later.

          • davidbyrden

            I disagree. I think that issues with signs are huge issues.
            For example, if we discover that power is flowing, we will be VERY interested to know if it’s flowing into, or out of, the Ocube.

          • Ged

            Sure, if you mean verifying the polarity of the homemade bias circuit so that the batteries are giving microwatts rather than taking from the core, as has been done. But all the tests and measurements of power have been with shorting of the Orbo core via resistors across U1-U2. Direction doesn’t matter there as this is direct shorting, and collapse of the voltage in the core. That is the power flow going on here, so again these objections are irrelevant for this work.

          • DrD

            Correct Ged, they’re confusing direction of current flow with direction of power flow, just one of many fundamental errors.

          • davidbyrden

            If L1-L2 is open, then it should not be reported as a “zero volt” bias. It should be listed as “open”.

          • FC

            Do you think that anybody here is going to listen to your irrelevant suggestions after seeing how arrogantly and disrespectfully you treat the members of this community?

            You are lucky that Frank is such a nice person. If I was him, I wouldn’t even respond to your demands for information. Especially when ALL of your questions have been answered many times before in these threads.

          • Dieter_G

            “Perhaps we could let it discharge relatively quickly (e.g. through a 220 or 470 Ohm resistor) to around 3V…”
            That is exactly the way to create a whopping rebounce-effect. The pack -whose behavior resembles that of batteries- is now at 4.7V and it will “remember” this old voltage level and partly bounce back to it when discharged. The quicker the discharge (that is : the shorter the time you hold it at its “new” level of 3V), the more pronounced the effect will be. So there will definitely be a rise in voltage if you do this, however it still hasn’t to do with generating energy.

          • FC

            You’re absolutely right, Dieter. So maybe we should use the 2.2k Ohm resistor again, or the 1k Ohm resistor. What do you think?

          • Jonas Matuzas
          • FC

            Thanks, Jonas. I believe this isn’t the first award he receives, right?

          • Jonas Matuzas

            on 2013 he was in similar exhibition in Geneva. But his motor was working for the while and something stuck inside and it was broken. Allan Sterling (I think this is good example how you become crasy then you involved in free energy topic ๐Ÿ™‚ ) was there with great expectation but finally he rote such essay: http://peswiki.com/index.php/Article:_35%2B_Reasons_Why_I_Think_Yildiz%27_Magnet_Motor_Really_Works (Actualy now I think somthing serios is happaning in this topic … (like with Steorn ha ha ha …. sorry I am getting mad too))

          • georgehants

            โ€œMen have called me mad; but the question is not yet settled, whether madness is or is not the loftiest intelligenceโ€“ whether much that is gloriousโ€“ whether all that is profoundโ€“ does not spring from disease of thoughtโ€“ from moods of mind exalted at the expense of the general intellect.โ€
            Edgar Allan Poe

    • PT

      I would at this point advice the greatest caution and sceptisim.

      Prior to this, the latest incarnation of the orbo, there have been multiple failed launches over the last ten years. Frankly, from a rational business point of view, Steorn could hardly have handled it in a worse manner. The only thing that keeps some interested is the importance of a successful product and it’s benefits.

      What is very worrying, is that there are repeated common occurances: never the full information; implying one thing and delivering something else; a big splash with big words and up to now never complete follow thru.

      The only rational conclusion is that the likelihood that they have what they claim is extremly small, practically negligable.

      (Why, if that is indeed the case, is a very interesting question, but perhaps better left to another forum.)

      • georgehants

        PT, if it is OK with you I will be professionally scientific and keep a very open-mind until the Evidence shows conclusively that this venture is not genuine.

        • Frank Acland

          As long as Steorn is willing to share products to test and and is willing to stay in communication and provide help, I’m happy to keep working at this and see where it ends up.

  • georgehants

    I think one must hold out hope on the basis that Mr. Steorn is acting like somebody who believes that his device works.
    Sending new units, giving refunds, helping on-line etc.
    The only other explanation moves in to the psychological, that these days is a factor to seriously take into account with most members of the establishment, science, politics, business, etc.

    • FC

      Totally agreed, George.

      Personally, I think that Steorn have a valid technology. But that technology still needs some R&D to bring it to market. Perhaps they were so eager to show the world what they have (or they were so pressed by their investors to get a return on their money) that they pulled the trigger too early.

      I may end up being totally wrong, but that’s what I believe at present. The other options just don’t make any sense to me.

      • georgehants

        FC, if it has any basis in Fact we do not want it facing the same 30 year delay as Cold Fusion because it was abandoned to easily.
        Mr. Steorn must put maximum effort into making sure that ECW receive everything they need to demonstrate an effect.

        • FC

          Totally agreed.

          • DrD

            Well, that’s three of us that totally agree on those points.

          • Four!

        • SG

          Five!

        • Frank Acland

          Six! I can’t fault them on that count so far. They have been easy to work with and available to help day and night, and will be sending more products when available apparently.

          • georgehants

            Frank all goes to show that there would seem to be some genuine effect to be found.
            I think it is now, with so many watching, very much in Mr Steorn’s interest to follow through with earnest until ECW is hopefully able to confidently show a good result and then send you a few bottles of Red to celebrate, ha.

          • DrD

            Haha, and when we prove it works we should meet up and crack a bottle of champers over an Ocube in Ireland. If it doesn’t, who should we crack it over?

          • georgehants

            DrD, ha just drink it to drown a few sorrows.
            Worse things happen at sea.

      • davidbyrden

        Here’s a purely hypothetical option that makes sense to me. I present it as a mental exercise only:

        1. The device does not work, so our knowledge of the basic laws of physics is correct.

        2. The makers are engaged in a fraud.

        3. The makers have pulled in a great deal of money from investors, and wish to walk away with some portion that they have concealed.

        4. To avoid legal action, they must behave AS IF they truly believe in their device and are merely incompetent (there is no law against incompetence). They must refund and support their customers in full compliance with the law. The customers’ money is, in any case, peanuts when compared to the investors’ money.

        5. Having made a lot of money from this scam, they wish to end it and live happily. But they cannot close down the firm without the agreement of the shareholders. They cannot quit the firm without their fraud being exposed by their “clean hands” replacements. A legal way out is needed.
        6. THEREFORE they launch terrible products (a feature-poor “brick” phone, a large charger that weighs almost a kilogram) at non-competitive prices. Products that are doomed to fail and do financial damage to the company.

        7. While the products are being examined by the (very few) buyers, they maintain the fiction that the products can eventually work, and all of their failures are due to teething problems. The provision of replacements and refunds not only keeps the makers in compliance with the law, but it adds to the financial damage they are causing their company.

        8. Eventually they announce that they are unfortunately forced to cease operations because they have lost so much money with these products and their teething problems. They present the appearance of innocence and incompetence rather than fraud. The investors are unable to sue them.

        The above is a purely imaginary hypothetical scenario! However I would be interested to know if Steorn have done anything that does NOT comply with it.

        I also draw your attention to a statement which was reportedly contained in Steorn’s published accounts:
        “….in the event that the company is unsuccessful, the going concern principle may cease to apply with consequent impact on the future viability of its activities.”
        In plain English, it means: “if these products fail, we will shut down”.

        • FC

          Thank for your opinion and for taking the time to explain it so well.

    • Brent Buckner

      I can imagine another scenario, not to imply that it is in effect here, just as a consideration for some other product and set of people.

      The scenario is that someone has set up a company that has sold shares to investors. That someone has received a salary from the company. That someone learns that the company’s technology does not work. That someone then chooses to continue acting as though believing that the company’s technology does work in order to keep drawing a salary for as long as possible while not leaving evidence of fraud.

      Might work as a subplot in a work of fiction.

    • PT

      I would at this point advice the greatest caution and sceptisim.

      Prior to this, the latest incarnation of the orbo, there have been multiple failed launches over the last ten years. Frankly, from a rational business point of view, Steorn could hardly have handled it in a worse manner. The only thing that keeps some interested is the importance of a successful product and it’s benefits.

      What is very worrying, is that there are repeated common occurances: never the full information; implying one thing and delivering something else; a big splash with big words and up to now never complete follow thru.

      The only rational conclusion is that the likelihood that they have what they claim is extremly small, practically negligable.

      (Why, if that is indeed the case, is a very interesting question, but perhaps better left to another forum.)

      • georgehants

        PT, if it is OK with you I will be professionally scientific and keep a very open-mind until the Evidence shows conclusively that this venture is not genuine.

        • Frank Acland

          As long as Steorn is willing to share products to test and and is willing to stay in communication and provide help, I’m happy to keep working at this and see where it ends up.

          • jokuvaan

            At some point you have to make hard rational conclusions, otherwise you end up being just their marketing department. They can skype-talk and send devices for years to come, that is very cost effective for them.

  • DrD

    Question:
    At what time did the latest Orbo’s Bias begin to fail (fall).
    Possible answers:
    1) Using the measured discharge rate from 2nd Mar it works out at approximately 110 hours prior to Franks first test. That takes us back to about mid day on Thursday 25th Feb.
    2) Using the measured discharge rate from 21:00 29th to 07.30 on 2nd Mar only takes us back to Sun morning 28th Feb.
    (Was the latter with/without bias?)
    Clearly, both can not be correct and both could be wrong. The reason for the big diffference is due to the different discharge rates. On the 3rd there are periods with and without bias. The rate with bias is 20% slower than without (3 vs 3.6 mV/hr). The unmonitored period spanning the 1st Mar showed an average rate of 11 mV/hr. Why such a big change, is it recovering?
    Note:
    I assumed the Ref voltage started at 5V?? and was stable until it started to fail (fall). I wasn’t able to find any confirmation of this.
    I extrapolated backwards starting from Franks first measurement of 4.65V on 29th Feb (late afternoon I assumed?).
    The discharge rates were calculated at times when no load was attached.
    The unit had already been substantially discharged before any of the rate measurements were taken. This of course could completely invalidate my technique as the rate before and after dischrge are probably very different (but maybe not?).

    • FC

      If I remember correctly, the voltage was 3.9V in the morning of 1st March. Then, the battery was disconnected. And in the evening, the voltage was 3.8V.

      But perhaps Frank can fill in some blanks in the spreadsheet either from memory or from the readings he shared with us in his comments.

      • DrD

        I used the actual first reading (4.65V) from his very first video on 29th. It’s still there at the top. (I didn’t try to use that to calculate any rates because he followed it by adding the load). The rest I got from his SS, I assume they are correct. I see he didn’t record that result? If your confident it might give a cross check. I just wasn’t sure if the long “unmonitored period had bias on. It reads as if it had but in any case, it seems the bias only slows it about 20%. Allowing for the bias would take estimate 2) back to some time late on Sat

        • FC

          Actually, there is another reading prior to the test: 4.38V. It’s in Frank’s second video. But then again, it’s pretty much the same reading as the one at the start of the test.

          I think that the bias was off only from the morning to the evening of 1st Mar. The rest of the time, it was on.

          But I would rather have Frank confirm this end.

          • DrD

            Yes, I noticed that. Actually, that would be the most valuable pair of data points of all (4.65-4.38V), if only we had exact times for them. They preceed any damage inflicted by the load and are closest in time to the pre-delivery discharge period if you get what I mean.

          • FC

            Absolutely. Although according to Frank, the original battery was already giving strange readings (from 0 to 9 V) at the time of the second video.

            I guess we need Frank to fill in some blanks here (times and readings). But I’m pretty sure about the 3.9V in the morning and 3.8V in the evening of 1st Mar.

          • Frank Acland

            To the best of my recollection the package arrived around 2:00 pm on Feb 29th. That first video would have been made around 3:00 p.m. that afternoon.

          • Frank Acland

            I checked my Youtube History. The video was posted on 4:15 pm on Feb 29th — so it would have been made probably about 1/2 hour earlier than that.

          • FC

            Ok, thank you. And can you confirm what I said before about 1st Mar? Morning reading: 3.9V. Battery subsequently disconnected. Evening reading: 3.8V. New bias circuit subsequently connected.

          • Frank Acland

            Yes, that sounds right, but I can’t be sure that the bias was disconnected all that time. I did some troubleshooting with Shaun during that day and we were taking various measurements.

          • FC

            Ok. Thank you very much, Frank.

          • DrD

            Thanks, I’ll see what that gives us later tonight.

          • DrD

            Using those two data points gives 90mV/hr.
            That is a fast discharge rate
            Therefore, to have arrived at 4.65V by 3.45 pm on the 29th, after having started at, let us say 5.1V would have taken only 5 hours.
            That suggests that it must have been well charged (un damaged?) on the morning of 29th.
            How’s my mental arithmetic?
            I’m a bit surprised, I wonder how the faulty battery comes into this, especially as you said it travelled with it connected.

          • OM

            Frank, wait, do not hurry with diodes.
            It seems that the DC-DC converter is not switched off all the time and that it consumes energy.
            But now it is turned off and the voltage does not drop anymore.
            Let’s observe some more time.

          • Sanjeev

            It does look like there is something in the electronics that is draining both the cores.

          • OM

            Yes, it is.
            Except that we have a single core device, I think.

          • FC

            The fact that we have seen O3-O4 cutoffs at various O1-O2 readings (4.17V, 4.15V, 3.663V, 3.664V, and 3.666V) seems to contradict your theory. As does the fact that we have seen a 5.17V O3-O4 reading when O1-O2 was below all those levels (at 3.662V, to be more precise).

            If there was only one core, the cutoffs would only happen at a certain O1-O2 value. And O3-O4 would never be 5.17V below that level.

          • OM

            This is the correct reasoning, but only if the system is working properly. It seems that the DC-DC converter is switched on and off in accordance with the phases of the moon.

          • FC

            We have no proof of that supposition. Unfortunately, all we have for now is some data and Shaun’s words. So, personally, I think that we are better off just sticking to the data in order to try and prove/disprove Shaun’s claims, rather than making new hypotheses that we’ll never have a chance to prove/disprove.

          • OM

            Shaun also said that there is no DC-DC converter in the device.

            So what?

          • FC

            I don’t remember that. In fact I remember him saying the exact opposite. Where and when did he say that?

          • OM

            I cant find it right now. Only this:
            ————–
            To
            reference some questions below, SM has said that there is no direct
            electrical connection between the reference core (o1-2) and the primary
            core (o2-3).
            ————–

          • FC

            Right, but that doesn’t mean that the primary core isn’t connected to a “5V controller chip”, as stated by Frank in his first video above, which outputs through O3-O4.

            Besides, if there was only one core and no voltage controller chip, why would we need two pais of terminals (O1-O2 and O3-O4)? And why would we get two different readings through them? And why would one of them resemble so closely the behavior of a 5V controller chip while the other one is all over the place?

            Personally, I think that data supports quite well the assumption that the device is set up as Shaun told Frank (and Frank explained to us in the first video above). But the orbo cores are losing “charge” for some reason. But that’s only my opinion and I may very well be wrong.

          • OM

            We definitely have the controller IC output on O3O4.
            Characteristics of the voltage readings indicates this.
            All other findings – a big question.
            Very bad situation.

          • FC

            True.

            We would have been a little more certain of the internal setup with another pair of terminals for the power core, before the controller chip. But I guess they ran out of space.

            Agreed, TARFU. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • Frank Acland

            Certainly Shaun has told me that there is a controller chip in there. I asked him yesterday if it was possible to put the bias circuit on o3-4 and he said no, because it is connected to the control module.

          • FC

            Thanks, Frank.

    • Frank Acland

      When I first got the package, first thing I did was check in with Shaun and took various readings from him. When I measured o1-o2 he commented that it was low, and it shipped at above 5 V. So it may have been falling ever since it left Ireland.

      • Frank Acland

        I believe the first reading I took was around 4.6 Volts

        • Frank Acland

          Also the unit arrived with the battery attached, but l since discovered that the battery seemed defective. It was giving voltages all over the place — from 9.15 to 0 and in between.

          • DrD

            Thanks Frank, Yes, I could tell it had already fallen, i was rather hoping I might be able to estimate when it started it’s fall, like, was it in the air, airport or when it was being potted. Alas, I think that faulty battery would be a further complication to any such reliable extrapolation. I could see your first reading was 4.65V (but don’t know the exact time) and the 2nd was 4.38V at 6.40.35. We do seem to suffer some bad luck.

          • Frank Acland

            Well my understanding is that the potting took about 24 hours to set at Steorn HQ. And if Shaun tested it just prior to shipping and it read at 5 V+ after it had been potted for 24 hours then maybe something happened in transit.

          • SG

            I wonder if the combination of potting + X-ray can have a detrimental effect on the electrets. We know X-rays alone can already (although they seemed to make it okay from China to Ireland in working condition), but could the potting exacerbate it somehow?

  • DrD

    Question:
    At what time did the latest Orbo’s Bias begin to fail (fall).
    Possible answers:
    1) Using the measured discharge rate from 2nd Mar it works out at approximately 110 hours prior to Franks first test. That takes us back to about mid day on Thursday 25th Feb.
    2) Using the measured discharge rate from 21:00 29th to 07.30 on 2nd Mar only takes us back to Sun morning 28th Feb.
    (Was the latter with/without bias?)
    Clearly, both can not be correct and both could be wrong. The reason for the big diffference is due to the different discharge rates. On the 3rd there are periods with and without bias. The rate with bias is 20% slower than without (3 vs 3.6 mV/hr). The unmonitored period spanning the 1st Mar showed an average rate of 11 mV/hr. Why such a big change, is it recovering?
    Note:
    I assumed the Ref voltage started at 5V?? and was stable until it started to fail (fall). I wasn’t able to find any confirmation of the 5V (some info puts it at 5.2V which would extend the fail time backwards.
    I extrapolated backwards starting from Franks first measurement of 4.65V on 29th Feb (late afternoon I assumed?).
    The discharge rates were calculated at times when no load was attached.
    The unit had already been substantially discharged before any of the rate measurements were taken. This of course could completely invalidate my technique as the rate before and after dischrge are probably very different (but maybe not?).

    • FC

      If I remember correctly, the voltage was 3.9V in the morning of 1st March. Then, the battery was disconnected. And in the evening, the voltage was 3.8V.

      But perhaps Frank can fill in some blanks in the spreadsheet either from memory or from the readings he shared with us in his comments.

      • DrD

        I used the actual first reading (4.65V) from his very first video on 29th. It’s still there at the top. (I didn’t try to use that to calculate any rates because he followed it by adding the load). The rest I got from his SS, I assume they are correct. I see he didn’t record that result? If your confident it might give a cross check. I just wasn’t sure if the long “unmonitored period had bias on. It reads as if it had but in any case, it seems the bias only slows it about 20%. Allowing for the bias would take estimate 2) back to some time late on Sat

        • FC

          Actually, there is another reading prior to the test: 4.38V. It’s in Frank’s second video. But then again, it’s pretty much the same reading as the one at the start of the test.

          I think that the bias was off only from the morning to the evening of 1st Mar. The rest of the time, it was on.

          But I would rather have Frank confirm this end.

          • DrD

            Yes, I noticed that. Actually, that would be the most valuable pair of data points of all (4.65-4.38V), if only we had exact times for them. They preceed any damage inflicted by the load and are closest in time to the pre-delivery discharge period if you get what I mean.

          • FC

            Absolutely. Although according to Frank, the original battery was already giving strange readings (from 0 to 9 V) at the time of the second video.

            I guess we need Frank to fill in some blanks here (times and readings). But I’m pretty sure about the 3.9V in the morning and 3.8V in the evening of 1st Mar.

          • Frank Acland

            To the best of my recollection the package arrived around 2:00 pm on Feb 29th. That first video would have been made around 3:00 p.m. that afternoon.

          • Frank Acland

            I checked my Youtube History. The video was posted on 4:15 pm on Feb 29th — so it would have been made probably about 1/2 hour earlier than that.

          • FC

            Ok, thank you. And can you confirm what I said before about 1st Mar? Morning reading: 3.9V. Battery subsequently disconnected. Evening reading: 3.8V. New bias circuit subsequently connected.

          • Frank Acland

            Yes, that sounds right, but I can’t be sure that the bias was disconnected all that time. I did some troubleshooting with Shaun during that day and we were taking various measurements.

          • FC

            Ok. Thank you very much, Frank.

          • DrD

            Thanks, I’ll see what that gives us later tonight.

          • DrD

            Using those two data points gives 90mV/hr.
            That is a fast discharge rate
            Therefore, to have arrived at 4.65V by 3.45 pm on the 29th, after having started at, let us say 5.1V would have taken only 5 hours.
            That suggests that it must have been well charged (un damaged?) on the morning of 29th.
            How’s my mental arithmetic?
            I’m a bit surprised, I wonder how the faulty battery comes into this, especially as you said it travelled with it connected.

    • Frank Acland

      When I first got the package, first thing I did was check in with Shaun and took various readings from him. When I measured o1-o2 he commented that it was low, and it shipped at above 5 V. So it may have been falling ever since it left Ireland.

      • Frank Acland

        I believe the first reading I took was around 4.6 Volts

        • Frank Acland

          Also the unit arrived with the battery attached, but l since discovered that the battery seemed defective. It was giving voltages all over the place — from 9.15 to 0 and in between.

          • DrD

            Thanks Frank, Yes, I could tell it had already fallen, i was rather hoping I might be able to estimate when it started it’s fall, like, was it in the air, airport or when it was being potted. Alas, I think that faulty battery would be a further complication to any such reliable extrapolation. I could see your first reading was 4.65V (but don’t know the exact time) and the 2nd was 4.38V at 6.40.35. We do seem to suffer some bad luck.

          • Frank Acland

            Well my understanding is that the potting took about 24 hours to set at Steorn HQ. And if Shaun tested it just prior to shipping and it read at 5 V+ after it had been potted for 24 hours then maybe something happened in transit.

          • SG

            I wonder if the combination of potting + X-ray can have a detrimental effect on the electrets. We know X-rays alone can already (although they seemed to make it okay from China to Ireland in working condition), but could the potting exacerbate it somehow?

  • Frank, What is your present plan going forward? Will you keep testing this latest ‘dud’ Orbo or ? Are you still expecting to recieve and test a working ‘big Orbo’ to replace the first ‘dud?’ What about an Irish location to run the tests on Orbo(s), it seems the testing proceedure is simple enough. Would you be willing and able to fly to Dublin and set up in your hotel room to run tests for a week there, close to Steorn… rule out some sort of issue with the Orbo’s when in transit.

    • Frank Acland

      Immediate plan is to do some more testing later today on this unit with the diodes that Shaun has suggested. I like your idea of setting up shop in Dublin, but right now it would not be financially feasible. Steorn says they will be sending one of the next iterations of the ocube when they are ready for those who have ordered them, and also an ophone.

      • Sanjeev

        What does your last sentence mean ? Is everyone getting a free ophone?

        • Frank Acland

          I think they meant they would send one to review when they are ready.

  • Frank, What is your present plan going forward? Will you keep testing this latest ‘dud’ Orbo or ? Are you still expecting to recieve and test a working ‘big Orbo’ to replace the first ‘dud?’ What about an Irish location to run the tests on Orbo(s), it seems the testing proceedure is simple enough. Would you be willing and able to fly to Dublin and set up in your hotel room to run tests for a week there, close to Steorn… rule out some sort of issue with the Orbo’s when in transit.

    • Frank Acland

      Immediate plan is to do some more testing later today on this unit with the diodes that Shaun has suggested. I like your idea of setting up shop in Dublin, but right now it would not be financially feasible. Steorn says they will be sending one of the next iterations of the ocube when they are ready for those who have ordered them, and also an ophone.

      • Sanjeev

        What does your last sentence mean ? Is everyone getting a free ophone?

        • Frank Acland

          I think they meant they would send one to review when they are ready.

  • R V

    I think they are just going to have to send you some unpotted devices to test.

  • R V

    I think they are just going to have to send you some unpotted devices to test.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    Frank, what are your plans with the cube? It seems to be of no value for further tests, so how about putting it into a bucket with thinner in order to remove the resin?

  • Andreas Moraitis

    Frank, what are your plans with the cube? It seems to be of no value for further tests, so how about putting it into a bucket with thinner in order to remove the resin?

  • OM

    Frank, wait, do not hurry with diodes.
    It seems that the DC-DC converter is not switched off all the time and that it consumes energy.
    But now it is turned off and the voltage does not drop anymore.
    Let’s observe some more time.

    • Sanjeev

      It does look like there is something in the electronics that is draining both the cores.

      • OM

        Yes, it is.
        Except that we have a single core device, I think.

        • FC

          The fact that we have seen O3-O4 cutoffs at various O1-O2 readings (4.17V, 4.15V, 3.663V, 3.664V, and 3.666V) seems to contradict your theory. As does the fact that we have seen a 5.17V O3-O4 reading when O1-O2 was below all those levels (at 3.662V, to be more precise).

          If there was only one core, the cutoffs would only happen at a certain O1-O2 value. And O3-O4 would never be 5.17V below that level.

          • OM

            This is the correct reasoning, but only if the system is working properly. It seems that the DC-DC converter is switched on and off in accordance with the phases of the moon.

          • FC

            We have no proof of that supposition. Unfortunately, all we have for now is some data and Shaun’s words. So, personally, I think that we are better off just sticking to the data in order to try and prove/disprove Shaun’s claims, rather than making new hypotheses that we’ll never have a chance to prove/disprove.

          • OM

            Shaun also said that there is no DC-DC converter in the device.

            So what?

          • FC

            I don’t remember that. In fact I remember him saying the exact opposite. Where and when did he say that?

          • OM

            I cant find it right now. Only this:
            ————–
            To
            reference some questions below, SM has said that there is no direct
            electrical connection between the reference core (o1-2) and the primary
            core (o2-3).
            ————–

          • FC

            Right, but that doesn’t mean that the primary core isn’t connected to a “5V controller chip”, as stated by Frank in his first video above, which outputs through O3-O4.

            Besides, if there was only one core and no voltage controller chip, why would we need two pais of terminals (O1-O2 and O3-O4)? And why would we get two different readings through them? And why would one of them resemble so closely the behavior of a 5V controller chip while the other one is all over the place?

            Personally, I think that data supports quite well the assumption that the device is set up as Shaun told Frank (and Frank explained to us in the first video above). But the orbo cores are losing “charge” for some reason. But that’s only my opinion and I may very well be wrong.

          • OM

            We definitely have the controller IC output on O3O4.
            Characteristics of the voltage readings indicates this.
            All other findings – a big question.
            Very bad situation.

          • FC

            True.

            We would have been a little more certain of the internal setup with another pair of terminals for the power core, before the controller chip. But I guess they ran out of space.

            Agreed, TARFU. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • Frank Acland

            Certainly Shaun has told me that there is a controller chip in there. I asked him yesterday if it was possible to put the bias circuit on o3-4 and he said no, because it is connected to the control module.

          • FC

            Thanks, Frank.

  • FC

    So far, the diode seems to have had little effect on O1-O2. But let’s wait a few more hours (or days?) to draw any conclusion. We have no other choice anyway, since the power core seems to have fallen below the voltage regulator’s cutoff threshold (as indicated by the ~0V readings at O3-O4).

    • FC

      O1-O2 is still stable, after 5 hours and 42 minutes.

      • Sanjeev

        The reference orbo is still an orbo and it should go up like a normal healthy orbo. Guess something went wrong.

        • FC

          True. Something is wrong.

          My best guess is that at least the bias core, but maybe both cores, are losing charge though the resin somehow. And so far, the reference voltage circuit can only manage to slow things down, or at best arrest the fall.

  • FC

    So far, the diode seems to have had little effect on O1-O2. But let’s wait a few more hours (or days?) to draw any conclusion. We have no other choice anyway, since the power core seems to have fallen below the voltage regulator’s cutoff threshold (as indicated by the ~0V readings at O3-O4).

    • FC

      O1-O2 is still stable, after 5 hours and 42 minutes.

      • Sanjeev

        The reference orbo is still an orbo and it should go up like a normal healthy orbo. Guess something went wrong.

        • FC

          True. Something is wrong.

          My best guess is that at least the bias core, but maybe both cores, are losing charge though the resin somehow. And so far, the reference voltage circuit can only manage to slow things down, or at best arrest the fall.

      • Olof

        Maybe the diode is connected wrong direction? It must be a forward direction from 9 volt battery plus terminal to orbo cell plus terminal.( Or forward direction from battery minus terminal to orbo minus terminal).
        http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/textbook/semiconductors/chpt-3/introduction-to-diodes-and-rectifiers/

        • FC

          I hope it isn’t connected in the wrong direction. I assume Shaun helped Frank with that. Although it may be worth double checking with Frank. Apparently, the diode is connected across O2-B2 (the negative side of both the bias core and the battery), so the stripe should be closer to B2, if I’m not mistaken. Is that so, Frank?

          • Frank Acland

            Actually he said to put it on the positive side. The stripe is towards the battery.

          • FC

            By the positive side you mean B1-O1? Then you moved the resistor to B2-O2?

            In that case, the stripe should be on the O1 side, if Shaun’s intention is to prevent any current from flowing out of the bias core into the battery.

            I’m confused. :-/

          • Frank Acland

            No, there is no resistor on the circuit. The resistor was replaced by wire.

          • FC

            Ok, so we’re using the diode as the resistor, then.

            But this setup will allow the current to flow out from the bias core and into battery, if and when the voltage of the bias core surges, which I thought was his main concern.

            Still confused. :-/

  • Sanjeev

    The O3O4 hasn’t recovered even after 12 hours, usually it does that in few minutes. I wonder if its totally dead now.
    I also wonder what’s going on with the other OCube.

    • Frank Acland

      I started a new long-term test with the Ocube this morning. See in the post above.

  • DrD

    Goodmorning Frank,
    I’m very sorry to have to tell you this but you were sold the wrong type of diode for this application. One of the most important characteristics of Schottky diodes is that they have very high reverse leakages (even at room temperature). It can be uA, which is what your trying to block. Their other distinguishing characteristics (for which they are sold) are their very low forward voltage drop and very fast switching speed. Unfortunately, you don’t need either of those but you do need the low reverse leakage. Ordinary diodes will block pA but are only spec’d at nA because the test equipment can’t reliably test below a few nA. Sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings. If you wish I can look up the spec for the one you have, to check that Ir. You have been lucky and been given one of the better ones.

    • Dieter_G

      “It can be uA”
      It can even be mA (!) (at elevated temperatures) for the very-low-Vf ones !
      it’s ยตA for sure

      • Rob King

        The Schottky diode (1N5822?) shows a leakage of 7.7uA with a 9V battery.
        It was requested by Shaun on the basis that it *does* have a high leakage current.
        My thoughts are that if the O1-O2 voltage does not move then add another in parallel to double the leakage into the reference cell.
        Then it should start to climb.
        I understood that this device had a dc-dc converter inside with the output connected to O3-O4 – is this incorrect?

        • FC

          According to Frank (i.e. according to Shaun), yes, there is a converter between the primary (power) core and O3-O4.

          But as far as I understand Shaun’s intentions, and I may be wrong, he wants the diode to make sure that the current flows from the battery to the secondary (bias) core, but not in the opposite direction. Because apparently, the voltage of the bias core may surge above 9V during the discharge phase of the power core, due to the electrostatic interactions between them.

        • DrD

          So it’s not for blocking. In that case I withdraw my comment but I don’t understand his reasoning. It certainly won’t do what FC mentions below. No matter, I think it’s probably bit the dust any way. Good idea to revisit the original Orbo.

          • FC

            I don’t understand him either.
            But as you said, this device is gone now.
            So let’s watch the ocube show again. ๐Ÿ™‚

        • DrD

          Ah, so what you’re saying Rob, I think, is that Shaun is using it as a
          constant current source instead of the resistor which also explains our
          concern that it would be almost a short circuit without the 1MEG (it’s
          the other way round). It’s not a very reliable way of doing it since
          individual devices actual leakage varies a lot. Not to worry, lets hope
          for better luck next time.

        • DrD

          As for the DC-DC, yes that was my understanding and it’s combined with a constant voltage regulator. I couldnt quite hear it all but I think that was the trinangular waverform and it made me wonder if it’s actually a charge pump.

  • DrD

    Goodmorning Frank,
    I’m very sorry to have to tell you this but you were sold the wrong type of diode for this application. One of the most important characteristics (dissadvantages) of Schottky diodes is that they have very high reverse leakages (even at room temperature). It can be uA, which is what your trying to block. Their other distinguishing characteristics (for which they are sold) are their very low forward voltage drop and very fast switching speed. Unfortunately, you don’t need either of those but you do need the low reverse leakage. Ordinary diodes will block pA but are only spec’d at nA because the test equipment can’t reliably test below a few nA. Sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings. If you wish I can look up the spec for the one you have, to check it’s Ir. You may have been lucky and been given one of the better ones (it’ll still be high tho).

    • Dieter_G

      “It can be uA”
      It can even be mA (!) (at elevated temperatures) for the very-low-Vf ones !
      it’s ยตA for sure.

      But then again, it doesn’t matter. In the long term, the current won’t flow in reverse direction, against the 9V of the battery. So what should the diode be for ?

      • Rob King

        The Schottky diode (1N5822?) shows a leakage of 7.7uA with a 9V battery.
        It was requested by Shaun on the basis that it *does* have a high leakage current.
        My thoughts are that if the O1-O2 voltage does not move then add another in parallel to double the leakage into the reference cell.
        Then it should start to climb.
        I understood that this device had a dc-dc converter inside with the output connected to O3-O4 – is this incorrect?

        • FC

          According to Frank (i.e. according to Shaun), yes, there is a converter between the primary (power) core and O3-O4.

          But as far as I understand Shaun’s intentions, and I may be wrong, he wants the diode to make sure that the current flows from the battery to the secondary (bias) core, but not in the opposite direction. Because apparently, the voltage of the bias core may surge above 9V during the discharge phase of the power core, due to the electrostatic interactions between them.

        • DrD

          So it’s not for blocking. In that case I withdraw my comment but I don’t understand his reasoning. It certainly won’t do what FC mentions below. No matter, I think it’s probably bit the dust any way. Good idea to revisit the original Orbo.

          • FC

            I don’t understand him either.
            But as you said, this device is gone now.
            So let’s watch the ocube show again. ๐Ÿ™‚

        • DrD

          Ah, so what you’re saying Rob, I think, is that Shaun is using it as a
          constant current source instead of the resistor which also explains our
          concern that it would be almost a short circuit without the 1MEG (it’s
          the other way round). It’s not a very reliable way of doing it since
          individual devices actual leakage varies a lot. Not to worry, lets hope
          for better luck next time.

        • DrD

          As for the DC-DC, yes that was my understanding and it’s combined with a constant voltage regulator. I couldnt quite hear it all but I think that was the trinangular waverform and it made me wonder if it’s actually a charge pump.

  • FC

    I hope it isn’t connected in the wrong direction. I assume Shaun helped Frank with that. Although it may be worth double checking with Frank. Apparently, the diode is connected across O2-B2 (the negative side of both the bias core and the battery), so the stripe should be closer to B2, if I’m not mistaken. Is that so, Frank?

    • Frank Acland

      Actually he said to put it on the positive side. The stripe is towards the battery.

      • FC

        By the positive side you mean B1-O1? Then you moved the resistor to B2-O2?

        In that case, the stripe should be on the O1 side, if Shaun’s intention is to prevent any current from flowing out of the bias core into the battery.

        I’m confused. :-/

        • Frank Acland

          No, there is no resistor on the circuit. The resistor was replaced by wire.

          • FC

            Ok, so we’re using the diode as the resistor, then.

            But this setup will allow the current to flow out from the bias core and into battery, if and when the voltage of the bias core surges, which I thought was his main concern.

            Still confused. :-/

  • Frank Acland

    With the new Orbo pack showing little sign of life at the moment, I’ve started a new long-term experiment with the Ocube. I charged it up at ports U1-U2 to 4.71 V and put reference voltage circuit on it using two 9V batteries and a 1M Ohm resistor. Then I placed a 2.2K Ohm resistor across U1-U2. I’ll be updating the old spreadsheet with the progress of this test here: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1SmmDLw9-g_Mamtk7qloWEeWNacHwEBpXxdwdTXnAZpc/edit#gid=0

    • Sanjeev

      I suggest sending them the ophone parts back for repairs. Or they can send you another one without bias orbo and controller etc, i.e. only the orbo cell.

      • DrD

        and hopefully they can work out what went wrong.

        • Sanjeev

          There is a possibility that the controller part failed, as we are seeing almost 0V at O3O4. There is no way to check the actual orbo voltage, so can’t say if it has failed.
          This time there were no shorts or anything unusual, so may be it can be rescued.

          • FC

            And even if it can’t be rescued, some forensic analysis could determine the cause of the failure. Otherwise, Steorn will keep on making the same mistakes over and over again.

            When you lose, don’t lose the lesson.

          • FC

            By the way, that last U1-U2 reading is interesting. The ocube power pack’s voltage is going up in spite of the 2.2k Ohm (or 10 mW) load. Maybe the ocube has come back to life after the resting period

          • FC

            And a new reading to confirm U1-U2 at 4.72V. Nice.

            The only thing that bothers me a little bit is the relatively quick drop in voltage of the batteries. Frank, I’m sorry for asking, but are you 100% sure that the bias circuit has a 1M Ohm resistor? Thanks.

          • Frank Acland

            You got me, FC! I must have got got my M and K mixed up. It makes sense now — it was a 1K Ohm on there. I’ve replaced it with a 1M Ohm now.

            I guess the test resets from here. Sorry everyone!

          • FC

            No worries, Frank. Then, there is a typo on the spreadsheet. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • Frank Acland

            Yes I’ve fixed that now.

          • FC

            Thank you, Frank.

          • FC

            No wonder the ocube was charging up. It was receiving an input of 60 mW and delivering an output of 10 mW. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • DrD

            atleast it should’ve helped the recovery

          • FC

            No doubt. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • DrD

            It wouldve been nice to have seen it over 5V but — grateful for small mercies.

          • FC

            Lol. True.

          • FC

            The new reading confirms that the batteries are recuperating, while the ocube remains stable.

          • SG

            Okay, but why? Perhaps the potting has been electrostatically saturated? Just had to acclimate to the new elevation? Will be interesting to see how this plays out over the next day or so.

          • FC

            I suppose you’re talking about the replacement device?

            I’m afraid I don’t have an answer. Not even a theory, in fact. ๐Ÿ™‚

            The possibility that someone offered about the resin being draining the cores through electrostatic conduction seems plausible to me. But I’m afraid it’s all pure guesswork until the deviced can be analyzed forensically.

          • FC

            By the way, the latest reading shows that the batteries continue recovering and that the ocube is starting to drain very slowly. Nothing strange here.

          • SG

            Yep, agreed. Now down to 4.7.

          • FC

            It’s been stable at 4.7V for more than 5 hours now. Not bad.

            It will be interesting to see what happens overnight. Usually the drops are more accentuated at night, if I’m not mistaken. Perhaps because the lower temperature makes the polymer less “fluid” and the dipoles find it harder to realign after being scrambled?

            Frank, does the ocube sleep in a place with different temperatures during the day and the night? Thank you.

          • Frank Acland

            It stays in the same place day and night. Right now the room is 63 F, my thermometer says low temperature in the room is 61 F — probably that’s at night since we turn the heat down.

          • FC

            Ok, so there’s no big difference, really. Thank you.

          • Ged

            I would hazard a guess that if enough of the cores are damaged (scrambled beyond magnetic recovery), that it could never hit 5V easily, what with that extreme capacitance increase and all. It is probably the 4×2 cores being in serial that lets it get to the 5V Steorn wants. 4.7 ish really seems our cap.

          • Ged

            Despite all it has been through, our old friend the Ocube keeps chugging on!

          • DrD

            ha, its had rest from us

          • FC

            Yes, definitely. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • Ged

            We could cut out and bypass the chip then? If Frank feels like cutting the heart out of that potted monstrosity of the phone core.

          • Sanjeev

            Where to make the cut, the internal positions are unknown.

          • Ged

            Easiest way is to follow the terminals. If O3-O4 measure across the chip, they must lead us to it.

          • A largish burr in a mini-drill, held in a ‘pen’ grip, is the most controllable way to remove resin, if it comes to that. A set of small wood carving tools would also be handy.

            The way things are going, this could become the standard kit for ECW’s Orbo tests!

      • Frank Acland

        Yes, I’ve been thinking the same thing, Sanjeev.

        • Sanjeev

          And if they can send a few of them instead of only one, the chances of getting stuck on a faulty one will reduce. With 40% failure rate, you will need at least 4 of them to be sure. Hopefully some solution will come out soon.

        • SG

          We should also ask for un-potted ones as well with a commitment not to attempt to reverse-engineer the cells themselves.

          • Ged

            Seriously. We may have to respect their potting obsession, but it just is downright getting unhealthy at this rate. We may have to stage an intervention.

          • SG

            Either that, or I would like to see SM produce a video with a potted Orbo performing as claimed. That would at least demonstrate their confidence that the potting isn’t the issue.

          • Ged

            I still think we’d probably have more luck putting together a support group to help them cope with their potting addiction.

          • Perhaps 2 videos made a few days apart? I think Frank has become their quality control department, unfortunately.

    • R V

      I suggest giving up on Steorn. You gave it a noble effort but it just seems they are incapable of providing anything that works. It’s up to them to prove what they claim to have.

      • Frank Acland

        I understand where you’re coming from, but for now I’ll keep at it so long as there’s something to test that might tell us something.

        • DrD

          very noble Frank, not to mention patient.

  • Frank Acland

    With the new Orbo pack showing little sign of life at the moment, I’ve started a new long-term experiment with the Ocube. I charged it up at ports U1-U2 to 4.71 V and put reference voltage circuit on it using two 9V batteries and a 1M Ohm resistor. Then I placed a 2.2K Ohm resistor across U1-U2. I’ll be updating the old spreadsheet with the progress of this test here: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1SmmDLw9-g_Mamtk7qloWEeWNacHwEBpXxdwdTXnAZpc/edit#gid=0

    • Sanjeev

      I suggest sending them the ophone parts back for repairs. Or they can send you another one without bias orbo and controller etc, i.e. only the orbo cell.

      • DrD

        and hopefully they can work out what went wrong.

        • Sanjeev

          There is a possibility that the controller part failed, as we are seeing almost 0V at O3O4. There is no way to check the actual orbo voltage, so can’t say if it has failed.
          This time there were no shorts or anything unusual, so may be it can be rescued.

          • FC

            And even if it can’t be rescued, some forensic analysis could determine the cause of the failure. Otherwise, Steorn will keep on making the same mistakes over and over again.

            When you lose, don’t lose the lesson.

          • FC

            By the way, that last U1-U2 reading is interesting. The ocube power pack’s voltage is going up in spite of the 2.2k Ohm (or 10 mW) load. Maybe the ocube has come back to life after the resting period

          • FC

            And a new reading to confirm U1-U2 at 4.72V. Nice.

            The only thing that bothers me a little bit is the relatively quick drop in voltage of the batteries. Frank, I’m sorry for asking, but are you 100% sure that the bias circuit has a 1M Ohm resistor? Thanks.

          • Frank Acland

            You got me, FC! I must have got got my M and K mixed up. It makes sense now — it was a 1K Ohm on there. I’ve replaced it with a 1M Ohm now.

            I guess the test resets from here. Sorry everyone!

          • FC

            No worries, Frank. Then, there is a typo on the spreadsheet. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • Frank Acland

            Yes I’ve fixed that now.

          • FC

            Thank you, Frank.

          • FC

            No wonder the ocube was charging up. It was receiving an input of 60 mW and delivering an output of 10 mW. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • DrD

            atleast it should’ve helped the recovery

          • FC

            No doubt. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • DrD

            It wouldve been nice to have seen it over 5V but — grateful for small mercies.

          • FC

            Lol. True.

          • FC

            The new reading confirms that the batteries are recuperating, while the ocube remains stable.

          • SG

            Okay, but why? Perhaps the potting has been electrostatically saturated? Just had to acclimate to the new elevation? Will be interesting to see how this plays out over the next day or so.

          • FC

            I suppose you’re talking about the replacement device?

            I’m afraid I don’t have an answer. Not even a theory, in fact. ๐Ÿ™‚

            The possibility that someone offered about the resin being draining the cores through electrostatic conduction seems plausible to me. But I’m afraid it’s all pure guesswork until the deviced can be analyzed forensically.

          • FC

            By the way, the latest reading shows that the batteries continue recovering and that the ocube is starting to drain very slowly. Nothing strange here.

          • SG

            Yep, agreed. Now down to 4.7.

          • FC

            It’s been stable at 4.7V for more than 5 hours now. Not bad.

            It will be interesting to see what happens overnight. Usually the drops are more accentuated at night, if I’m not mistaken. Perhaps because the lower temperature makes the polymer less “fluid” and the dipoles find it harder to realign after being scrambled?

            Frank, does the ocube sleep in a place with different temperatures during the day and the night? Thank you.

          • Frank Acland

            It stays in the same place day and night. Right now the room is 63 F, my thermometer says low temperature in the room is 61 F — probably that’s at night since we turn the heat down.

          • FC

            Ok, so there’s no big difference, really. Thank you.

          • Ged

            I would hazard a guess that if enough of the cores are damaged (scrambled beyond magnetic recovery), that it could never hit 5V easily, what with that extreme capacitance increase and all. It is probably the 4×2 cores being in serial that lets it get to the 5V Steorn wants. 4.7 ish really seems our cap.

          • Ged

            Despite all it has been through, our old friend the Ocube keeps chugging on!

          • DrD

            ha, its had a rest from us

          • FC

            Yes, definitely. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • Ged

            We could cut out and bypass the chip then? If Frank feels like cutting the heart out of that potted monstrosity of the phone core.

          • Sanjeev

            Where to make the cut, the internal positions are unknown.

          • Ged

            Easiest way is to follow the terminals. If O3-O4 measure across the chip, they must lead us to it.

            Edit: think of it like cutting a hardened cast off someone’s limb. It is a very similar concept in many ways.

          • A largish burr in a mini-drill, held in a ‘pen’ grip, is the most controllable way to remove resin, if it comes to that. A set of small wood carving tools would also be handy.

            The way things are going, this could become the standard kit for ECW’s Orbo tests!

      • Frank Acland

        Yes, I’ve been thinking the same thing, Sanjeev.

        • Sanjeev

          And if they can send a few of them instead of only one, the chances of getting stuck on a faulty one will reduce. With 40% failure rate, you will need at least 4 of them to be sure. Hopefully some solution will come out soon.

        • SG

          We should also ask for un-potted ones as well with a commitment not to attempt to reverse-engineer the cells themselves.

          • Ged

            Seriously. We may have to respect their potting obsession, but it just is downright getting unhealthy at this rate. We may have to stage an intervention.

          • SG

            Either that, or I would like to see SM produce a video with a potted Orbo performing as claimed. That would at least demonstrate their confidence that the potting isn’t the issue.

          • Ged

            I still think we’d probably have more luck putting together a support group to help them cope with their potting addiction.

          • Perhaps 2 videos made a few days apart? I think Frank has become their quality control department, unfortunately.

    • Bohem FromCz

      Frank, I very appreciate You show date-time in Your videos. I’m speaking of Your Ocube-test on our energetic forum with reference to Your pages (hope I d’t break Your autor laws).
      Thanks for Your informations.
      E_man

    • R V

      I suggest giving up on Steorn. You gave it a noble effort but it just seems they are incapable of providing anything that works. It’s up to them to prove what they claim to have.

      • Frank Acland

        I understand where you’re coming from, but for now I’ll keep at it so long as there’s something to test that might tell us something.

        • DrD

          very noble Frank, not to mention patient.

  • Husky

    Dear Customer,

    As you are aware there have been several delays in the shipping of your Ocube. We had placed shipments on hold due to some issues reported from initial users.

    We had identified the problem (a charge controller board) and have been testing revised boards over the past few weeks. Unfortunately we continue to have occasional technical issues with these revised boards leading to over or under charging.

    Hence we are writing to inform you that there will be another delay in shipping your Ocube, while this issue is being investigated and resolved.

    As a result of the unfortunate continued delay in shipping your Ocube to you we would like to offer you two alternatives:

    1) A full refund of your purchase price.

    2) We will provide, free of charge an, Ophone with a prototype case as compensation of the continued delay. In addition we expect to will ship your Ocube in an estimated 6-8 weeks time. If you wish to take up this option we expect to ship your Ophone within 10 working days.

    Again sorry for the continued inconvenience, please advise how you wish to proceed.

    Many thanks,

    Best regards

    The Orbo Team

    • JW

      Did anyone else on the thread receive this email?

      • Sanjeev

        All customers got it.

        • JW

          No, they screwed that up too!

        • FC

          The good news today is that, according to Frank’s very early morning readings, the ocube has been delivering 10 mW for 20 hours straight. And for the last 18 hours or so, it hasn’t even experienced any noticeable drop in voltage, after finding its point of equilibrium at 4.7V.

          • FC

            Now, this is the kind of situation in which, due to the stability of the voltage reading, we may want to double check that a current is actually going through the circuit by placing a multimeter (in amp meter mode), or an LED, in series with the 2.2k Ohm resistor.

          • Sanjeev

            Something strange is that the bias battery has gained charge. Can be some bounce back, but too slow for a normal bounce back.

          • FC

            I don’t think it’s so strange, because the batteries were delivering 60 mW with the 1k Ohm resistor, and were relieved to deliver only 60 uW with the 1M Ohm resistor. So I think that a little rebound could be expected.

            Regarding the slow speed of that rebound, maybe the small load plays a role there?

          • Sanjeev

            I guess the smaller load should only speed up the rebound rate. However I’m not sure, never checked this so carefully.

          • FC

            Well, I meant that the rebound would be slower driving a small 60 uW load than driving no load at all. Maybe I didn’t express myself correctly.

            And just to clarify, 60 mW (in the case of the 1k Ohm resistor) and 60 uW (in the case of the 1M Ohm resistor) are the power outputs delivered to the ocube. I think that the power outputs from the batteries to the resistors are 230 mW and 230 uW respectively. The difference between 230 and 60 is the energy disipated by the resistors. Maybe someone can check my math, to see if I made any mistake.

          • DrD

            That’s pretty much what I was thinking too. It would be a siginificant achievement to show that U1U2 voltage can be maintained (rising preferably) with output watts > input (from the battery, after allowing for the biasresistor loss as you just said.

          • FC

            True.

            Well, right now, the input is around 60 uW, if I’m not mistaken. So I hope it won’t be too difficult to achieve that goal.

            So I guess that’s what you want to try next, correct?

          • Sanjeev

            Yes, should be slower with 1M.

          • DrD

            U1U2 is falling. Only slowly but there is a downward drift. This suggests that if there is any internal generation it is less than the 10mW approx. That’s not a disaster but it’s not good. I wonder if 5mW is sustainable. It would help see the drift if Frank could read an extra digit. His meter can’t do that at 4.5V but there is a way round it.

          • FC

            Hmm, right. It’s taken it around 19 hours to drop from 4.7 to 4.69 V. And yes, it would be nice to have an extra digit.

            Do you guys think that we should keep using the same resistor and get some capacity data out the voltage drop? Or do you prefer to use a higher resistance to try and find the ocube’s point of equilibrium (i.e. recharge rate)?

            All opinions are welcome.

          • Frank Acland

            I’m interested in finding the equilibrium point, too. My next step up is 4.7K Ohm resistor, or I could combine a couple of resistors to make a more gradual increase in resistance.

          • FC

            Ok. Sounds good to me.
            If I remember correctly, you have a 470 Ohm resistor too, don’t you?
            Perhaps we can put it in series with the 2.2k Ohm, if possible?

          • Frank Acland

            Sure I can try that. First I’ll remove the 2.2k Ohm and see what effect that has.

          • FC

            Ok. Sanjeev thought the same. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • Frank Acland

            Yes that’s where I got the idea!

          • FC

            Lol. Ok.

          • Sanjeev

            Thanks Frank.

            By now you must have heard of the Celani replication news, it deserves a blog post. There, more work for you.

          • Frank Acland

            Thanks Sanjeev! — I have just put up a post about it.

          • Sanjeev

            Great! Thanks again.

          • FC

            Apologies accepted. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • Sanjeev

            I agree. Time to increase the R slightly.

            Just repeating again here, it should be checked if it comes back to 4.7V after removing the 2.2k.

          • DrD

            Frank, there is a fairly easy way to see the 3rd decimal if youre interested. That way you don’t have to wait hours to see the 2nd decimal change.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            As you might expect, I strongly support your suggestion to use an ammeter. A LED would likely not work in series with 2.2k.

          • FC

            Hi Andreas. I was expecting you any minute now. ๐Ÿ™‚

            Yes, totally agreed about the amp meter.

            About the LED, I’m far from being an expert, so I don’t know if there is any kind of LED that will work in this situation. But it was suggested before by somebody else.

          • Sanjeev

            Another suggestion – since it has now shown a tiny drop in voltage, the 2.2k can be disconnected for a while to check if it comes back to 4.7V or above (somewhat quickly).
            It seems to like that voltage.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            It would have to rise at least until 4.71, since 4.70 can mean anything from 4.695 to < 4.705. And we should not forget that the meter has an internal error margin as well. Maybe Frank could take a look at the spec.

          • Frank Acland

            At this level I am getting fluctuations up and down between 4.70 and 4.69, and I have been picking the lower number to report.

          • Sanjeev

            More fun facts:

            It has outputted about 16 times more energy than can be stored in a 5F cap.
            However, it would charge a phone battery to only 3.5%. Not bad for people who don’t call anybody for days ๐Ÿ˜€

          • FC

            Lol. Good stuff, Sanjeev.

            We know that the ocube received an input of 192 mWh during the 3.2 hours in which the bias circuit had a 1k Ohm resistor, instead of 1M Ohm. This is already less than the 200 mWh that the ocube has delivered over the last 20 hours. But it’s a pity Frank didn’t keep a record of the energy input when he recharged the ocube from 2.872V to 4.71V between March 3 and 4.

          • Sanjeev

            No issues. The whole energy content of 2x batteries can be assumed.

          • Michael W Wolf

            Yea I noticed that with the ogirl. She used the phone a lot and it would just shut off until it built up enough power to turn back on. No one wants the phone to keep shutting off to power up.

        • OM

          I’m surprised that Steorn still has not proposed to replace the devices.
          It is very strange.

          • FC

            True. Maybe they are still trying to come up with an optimum configuration?

          • OM

            At least, I hope that they have already identified the problem.

          • FC

            Yeah, me too. It would be sad if the third device was subject to the same problems.

          • Michael W Wolf

            well, the way I read steorn’s offer, Frank should be getting an ophone soon.

          • FC

            Yes, that’s what it seems.

          • Sanjeev

            Since Frank is in contact with SM, we may ask them to not to send the next one unless they test it themselves for a week (say). This test should be done after potting, xray scanning or whatever they think can cause the fault.

          • FC

            Excellent idea. Perhaps Frank can convey it to SM. Although I wouldn’t be surprised if they were testing that now.

          • Sanjeev

            Hopefully they will.

          • FC

            Roberto Siquieros.

            15 days ago he commented on the Week 2 thread:

            “…I got cold feet and asked for my money back. They did this straight away…”

          • Michael W Wolf

            Well if they had a bad batch of boards and they didn’t check, they are in a pickle for sure. By there own incompetence. But if their tech really works, it all will pan out in the wash. Inventors are not engineers, a lot of times they are like savants, and are very bad engineers.

          • davidbyrden

            Yes, they may lack engineering training and even talent. Did you know the inventor of mechanics theory was unable to explain it to anybody? He lacked communication skills!

            So, the obvious thing to do then, is hire engineers to design and test your devices. Ireland has good enough engineering schools that Steorn should have done so by now.

        • FC

          Or else, don’t buy anything from them until there’s sufficient evidence that they’re shipping working products. Nobody’s forcing you to buy.

        • FC

          Maybe those working units that they show are not potted and the potting resin is the main cause of their troubles? Who knows?

        • georgehants

          Has been a Wonderful page to follow and to see so much work by all you guys, our Frank included, for no return so far except the pleasure of doing worthwhile Research.
          People say that without receiving money nobody would do anything, you prove that is a myth and many people enjoy doing things to help society as a reward on it’s own.
          Will wait now for Mr. Steorn’s next move with that same open-mind that is essential, if science is not to continue to be looked at as a bunch of clowns.
          If it all turns out to be a failure then from a scientific point of view, all your work is still positive and worthwhile.
          Best

          • FC

            Totally agreed, George.
            By the way, nice quote from Poe yesterday. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • georgehants

            Thanks FC, when one is as crazy as me, have to look on the bright side and it is a Fact I think that people who think a little different have much to offer.
            Science is frightened stiff of the Wonderful savants, when of course they should be at the very forefront of Research on the Mind.

          • Mats002

            Hi George, do you have a bookkeeping record of all volontairy manhours that have gone into the ECW/MFMP/LenrForum/Gluck/Vortex etc over the last 5 years? Add to that money given for equipment and travel.

            We are part of a pretty awesome community!

          • georgehants

            Mats002, just as it should be and will be when this crazy World moves on from people having to work in pointless made up jobs, just to keep this illogical financial system going.
            Production is well able to allow everybody to work a 30 hour week and retire at 50 in a new system designed around reality and not dictated ideology favoring just a few.

    • davidbyrden

      My advice is: get the refund before they declare bankruptcy!

    • Sanjeev

      10 days is not bad. Perhaps we will see more reports of how it works or does not work.

      • SG

        I’m perplexed by this move by Steorn. Clearly, there seems to be an undercharging issue. We at ECW have never observed an overcharging issue (wouldn’t that be great!). Taking everything into consideration, the potting seems to be the culprit, or the potting+X-ray damage, or simply X-ray damage. Why would they risk shipping yet more Orbo units without announcing a specific solution to a specific identified problem?

        I really think Steorn are risking shooting themselves in the foot even more than they have. I understand we might just be within the cloud of war, so to speak, and they may know more than what they are letting on about the supposed problem and solution, but would be nice if we could get some better information. Frank has attracted a very open-minded and fair community to ECW–and we will call it like we find it. I hope that Steorn continues to recognize that they are unlikely to find a more suitable community to prove their claims in the open as they will find here. Not feeling too optimistic as this point. But I certainly have not made a final conclusion one way or the other. We need more and better evidence, period.

        • Frank Acland

          I would lean more to potting playing a role, rather than the X-ray damage, simply because the orbo cells are shipped to Ireland via air from China and I would think they would have had plenty of x-rays during that journey. I don’t think to this point that Steorn has done long-term testing of potted units, but I hope they do — to see if it has an effect. It would be nice if Steorn would send something unpotted so we can compare.

  • Husky

    Dear Customer,

    As you are aware there have been several delays in the shipping of your Ocube. We had placed shipments on hold due to some issues reported from initial users.

    We had identified the problem (a charge controller board) and have been testing revised boards over the past few weeks. Unfortunately we continue to have occasional technical issues with these revised boards leading to over or under charging.

    Hence we are writing to inform you that there will be another delay in shipping your Ocube, while this issue is being investigated and resolved.

    As a result of the unfortunate continued delay in shipping your Ocube to you we would like to offer you two alternatives:

    1) A full refund of your purchase price.

    2) We will provide, free of charge an, Ophone with a prototype case as compensation of the continued delay. In addition we expect to will ship your Ocube in an estimated 6-8 weeks time. If you wish to take up this option we expect to ship your Ophone within 10 working days.

    Again sorry for the continued inconvenience, please advise how you wish to proceed.

    Many thanks,

    Best regards

    The Orbo Team

    • JW

      Did anyone else on the thread receive this email?

      • JK

        Yes, I also received it.

        • FC

          I wonder what an “Ophone with a prototype case” mean. Does it mean that it comes with the black&red case? That the light grey case that we’ve seen in the videos is also a prototype? Or something else? I guess we’ll find out in about 10 working days + shipping time.

          Are you getting one too, Frank?

          • Frank Acland

            Yes, I have been told so.

          • FC

            Nice. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • Frank Acland

            I hope it works . . .

          • FC

            Yeah, so do I! ๐Ÿ™‚

      • Sanjeev

        All customers got it.

        • JW

          No, they screwed that up too!

    • davidbyrden

      My advice is: get the refund before they declare bankruptcy!

    • Sanjeev

      10 days is not bad. Perhaps we will see more reports of how it works or does not work.

      • SG

        I’m perplexed by this move by Steorn. Clearly, there seems to be an undercharging issue. We at ECW have never observed an overcharging issue (wouldn’t that be great!). Taking everything into consideration, the potting seems to be the culprit, or the potting+X-ray damage, or simply X-ray damage. Why would they risk shipping yet more Orbo units without announcing a specific solution to a specific identified problem?

        I really think Steorn are risking shooting themselves in the foot even more than they have. I understand we might just be within the cloud of war, so to speak, and they may know more than what they are letting on about the supposed problem and solution, but would be nice if we could get some better information. Frank has attracted a very open-minded and fair community to ECW–and we will call it like we find it. I hope that Steorn continues to recognize that they are unlikely to find a more suitable community to prove their claims in the open as they will find here. Not feeling too optimistic as this point. But I certainly have not made a final conclusion one way or the other. We need more and better evidence, period.

        • Frank Acland

          I would lean more to potting playing a role, rather than the X-ray damage, simply because the orbo cells are shipped to Ireland via air from China and I would think they would have had plenty of x-rays during that journey. I don’t think to this point that Steorn has done long-term testing of potted units, but I hope they do — to see if it has an effect. It would be nice if Steorn would send something unpotted so we can compare.

  • OM

    Frank, could you, please, measure the voltages O1-O3, O1-O4, O2-O3, O2-O4.

    • Frank Acland

      o1-3: 2.10
      o1-4: 2.14
      o2-3: 1.49
      o2-4: 1.50

      • OM

        Thank you!

        • Frank Acland

          No problem, btw while I was doing this testing I noticed a little sign of life on o3-4.

          • OM

            Frank, I’m sorry.
            Let’s make it more clear.
            ะž1-O2, ะž1-O3, O1-O4, ะž2-O3, ะž2-O4, ะž3-ะž4.
            Connect the black wire (‘-‘ of the voltmeter) to the first terminal in the pairs, the red wire – to the second terminal.
            And read the values with a sign (+ or -).
            Polarity is important information.

          • Frank Acland

            o1-2 +3.659
            o1-3 +2.14
            o1-4 +2.17
            o2-3 -1.46
            o2-4 -1.48
            o3-4 -.0.004

          • OM

            This is great!
            Now we can try to understand device internals.

  • OM

    Frank, could you, please, measure the voltages O1-O3, O1-O4, O2-O3, O2-O4.

    • Frank Acland

      o1-3: 2.10
      o1-4: 2.14
      o2-3: 1.49
      o2-4: 1.50

      • OM

        Thank you!

        • Frank Acland

          No problem, btw while I was doing this testing I noticed a little sign of life on o3-4.

          • OM

            Frank, I’m sorry.
            Let’s make it more clear.
            ะž1-O2, ะž1-O3, O1-O4, ะž2-O3, ะž2-O4, ะž3-ะž4.
            Connect the black wire (‘-‘ of the voltmeter) to the first terminal in the pairs, the red wire – to the second terminal.
            And read the values with a sign (+ or -).
            Polarity is important information.

          • Frank Acland

            o1-2 +3.659
            o1-3 +2.14
            o1-4 +2.17
            o2-3 -1.46
            o2-4 -1.48
            o3-4 -.0.004

          • OM

            This is great!
            Now we can try to understand device internals.

  • BillH

    Let’s for a moment assume that all those Ocubes that we saw on a desk at Steorn’s office
    in The Irish Times video were potted. Clearly not as single one of them worked or are fit for dispatch. If the actual production cost of the units is anywhere near the 1200 Euro asking price, which I seriously doubt, then Steorn has just wasted tens of thousands of Euros on devices that can never be repaired.

    My best advice, contact the reporter at the Irish Times, get him to collect the Ocube you are due, when and if it becomes available. They can then, at the very least confirm that it works as a phone charger before they forward it to you.

    • Frank Acland

      The way I understand it is that they pot just before shipping, and so far I don’t think they’ve shipped that many of the ocubes. They may have lost some to potting, but probably not the whole batch.

      • BillH

        I’m not convinced they did any testing after potting, which is a sad oversight, since once potted any failure is unrecoverable.

  • BillH

    Let’s for a moment assume that all those Ocubes that we saw on a desk at Steorn’s office
    in The Irish Times video were potted. Clearly not as single one of them worked or are fit for dispatch. If the actual production cost of the units is anywhere near the 1200 Euro asking price, which I seriously doubt, then Steorn has just wasted tens of thousands of Euros on devices that can never be repaired.

    My best advice, contact the reporter at the Irish Times, get him to collect the Ocube you are due, when and if it becomes available. They can then, at the very least confirm that it works as a phone charger before they forward it to you.

    • Frank Acland

      The way I understand it is that they pot just before shipping, and so far I don’t think they’ve shipped that many of the ocubes. They may have lost some to potting, but probably not the whole batch.

      • BillH

        I’m not convinced they did any testing after potting, which is a sad oversight, since once potted any failure is unrecoverable.

  • FC

    I wonder what an “Ophone with a prototype case” mean. Does it mean that it comes with the black&red case? That the light grey case that we’ve seen in the videos is also a prototype? Or something else? I guess we’ll find out in about 10 working days + shipping time.

    Are you getting one too, Frank?

    • Frank Acland

      Yes, I have been told so.

      • FC

        Nice. ๐Ÿ™‚

        • Frank Acland

          I hope it works . . .

          • FC

            Yeah, so do I! ๐Ÿ™‚

  • WayneM

    How long must this go on before one accepts it doesn’t work?

    How many years (so they say) has the Orbo team been in R&D with this toy? Yet they can’t deliver one carefully assembled Orbo to Frank when they know he is going to publicly demo their device. They did not even check that it worked before they mailed it. C’mon. Really?

    Frank, by now, has spent more research hours on this device than the Orbo team.

    I kept an open mind about this and I don’t think the Orbo was meant to be a fraud. It’s more evident now that the inventors are mistaken about the physics of the device. Regardless, they have so much invested in the idea, they just can’t let go.

    They were right about one idea. This battery is dead on arrival.

    • FC

      Fortunately, Wayne, we still live in a relatively free world. Which means that you are free to think whatever you want, to express whatever you think, and to spend your time and money in accordance with those thoughts.

      And to paraphrase Voltaire, I will always defend your freedom. But personally, I can’t find a more fulfilling way to spend my time than trying to help (within the huge limits of my abilities) to bring this technology to market. So I hope that you can respect my freedom too. ๐Ÿ™‚

  • WayneM

    How long must this go on before one accepts it doesn’t work?

    How many years (so they say) has the Orbo team been in R&D with this toy? Yet they can’t deliver one carefully assembled Orbo to Frank when they know he is going to publicly demo their device. They did not even check that it worked before they mailed it. C’mon. Really?

    Frank, by now, has spent more research hours on this device than the Orbo team.

    I kept an open mind about this and I don’t think the Orbo was meant to be a fraud. It’s more evident now that the inventors are mistaken about the physics of the device. Regardless, they have so much invested in the idea, they just can’t let go.

    They were right about one idea. This battery is dead on arrival.

    • FC

      Fortunately, Wayne, we still live in a relatively free world. Which means that you are free to think whatever you want, to express whatever you think, and to spend your time and money in accordance with those thoughts.

      And to paraphrase Voltaire, I will always defend your freedom. But personally, I can’t find a more fulfilling way to spend my time than trying to help (within the huge limits of my abilities) to bring this technology to market. So I hope that you can respect my freedom too. ๐Ÿ™‚

      • davidbyrden

        Everybody is entitled to a different opinion, FC, but the painful, inescapable fact is that only one opinion can be right. All of the other opinions must be wrong, even if their owners are “offended”, even if it’s “unfair”, even if it’s “unfree”.
        Now, may I ask you a question.
        What would it take to convince you that this thing doesn’t work?

        • FC

          As far as I’m concerned, when Steorn confirm that a device that has been sent to Frank works as intended, the tests will reveal the truth in due time. And I will accept the results, irrespective of what they are.

          But regarding your apparent belief that the truth is one and can be known, I would like to remind you that very often, what is accepted as the absolute truth turns out to be dead wrong a few years down the road. Our history is full of examples. So I prefer to be as open minded as possible and accept the fact that what is held as true today may be amended or even discarded in the future.

          • davidbyrden

            “the tests will reveal the truth”…. So you believe that Frank is technically qualified to test this device, and that he will choose to run a test that can prove failure, and that he will report the results to us honestly.
            Well, no disrespect to Frank, but I haven’t been following this since the beginning. Would you mind explaining why you believe those things?

            “…in due time”

            How long would that be, do you think?

          • FC

            One of Steorn’s main contentions is that they are selling consumer products that anyone can test. If an ocube is able to charge your phone for 2 or 3 months in a row, then it’s pretty obvious that it contains some novel technology. And if an ophone works for 2 or 3 months in a row without having to charge it, then the same conclusion applies. And you don’t need a large and prestigious scientific laboratory to certify that.

            It’s true that Steorn haven’t yet delivered a single working consumer product to an independent third party (only non-working test devices that require technical skills beyond the capabilities of most consumers). But I have nothing to lose by waiting for them to deliver working consumer products. Do you?

          • davidbyrden

            >> “If an ocube is able to charge your phone for 2 or 3 months in a row, then it’s pretty obvious that it contains some novel technology.”

            Well, that depends on the average power consumption of your phone, doesn’t it? Merely finding that out, makes the testing unnecessarily difficult.

            The oCube, I understand, weighs about a kilogram and its volume is about a liter. How many ordinary batteries could you fit into that? How long could they charge your phone for? The ocube has to solidly beat that performance before its novelty will be “obvious”.

            >> “I have nothing to lose by waiting…Do you?”

            Not sure why you’re asking about my motives. That could be construed as “go away, mind your own business”.

            I think that Ireland will have something to lose, if a story about a perpetual motion machine goes viral in technical circles, causing mockery of Irish engineering ability.

            I also would like to know if Steorn have real engineers working for them, who are accredited members of engineering institutions. They would, I understand, be subject to rules about ethical and honest behaviour. I’d like to see an interview with one of them concerning Steorn’s technology.

          • FC

            The exercise has been done before several times in these threads. But I will repeat it here for your convenience. 400 Wh per kilo is about the maximum you can get from any battery in the market. (See attachment). An iPhone 6 needs about 10 Wh for a full charge. Therefore, if you charge an iPhone 6 with an Ocube more than 40 times (which most people do in less than a month), the Ocube contains a novel technology.

            I’m glad to know that you hold such lofty motives.

    • davidbyrden

      I don’t really agree, Wayne.

      “Mistaken about the physics”…. they have repeatedly said that they don’t understand the physics. A blank page contains no mistakes.

      “This battery is dead”….If we want a new slogan for Steorn to put on their T-shirts, how about:
      “The Ocube stops working when the battery is dead”

      They could fit that extra text onto the EXISTING T-shirts!

  • FC

    As far as I’m concerned, when Steorn confirm that a device that has been sent to Frank works as intended, the tests will reveal the truth in due time. And I will accept the results, irrespective of what they are.

    But regarding your apparent belief that the truth is one and can be known, I would like to remind you that very often, what is accepted as the absolute truth turns out to be dead wrong a few years down the road. Our history is full of examples. So I prefer to be as open minded as possible and accept the fact that what is held as true today may be amended or even discarded in the future.

  • FC

    The good news today is that, according to Frank’s very early morning readings, the ocube has been delivering 10 mW for 20 hours straight. And for the last 18 hours or so, it hasn’t even experienced any noticeable drop in voltage, after finding its point of equilibrium at 4.7V.

    • FC

      Now, this is the kind of situation in which, due to the stability of the voltage reading, we may want to double check that a current is actually going through the circuit by placing a multimeter (in amp meter mode), or an LED, in series with the 2.2k Ohm resistor.

      • Sanjeev

        Something strange is that the bias battery has gained charge. Can be some bounce back, but too slow for a normal bounce back.

        • FC

          I don’t think it’s so strange, because the batteries were delivering 60 mW with the 1k Ohm resistor, and were relieved to deliver only 60 uW with the 1M Ohm resistor. So I think that a little rebound could be expected.

          Regarding the slow speed of that rebound, maybe the small load plays a role there?

          • Sanjeev

            I guess the smaller load should only speed up the rebound rate. However I’m not sure, never checked this so carefully.

          • FC

            Well, I meant that the rebound would be slower driving a small 60 uW load than driving no load at all. Maybe I didn’t express myself correctly.

            And just to clarify, 60 mW (in the case of the 1k Ohm resistor) and 60 uW (in the case of the 1M Ohm resistor) are the power outputs delivered to the ocube. I think that the power outputs from the batteries to the resistors are 230 mW and 230 uW respectively. The difference between 230 and 60 is the energy disipated by the resistors. Maybe someone can check my math, to see if I made any mistake.

          • DrD

            That’s pretty much what I was thinking too. It would be a siginificant achievement to show that U1U2 voltage can be maintained (rising preferably) with output watts > input (from the battery), after allowing for the bias resistor loss as you just said.

          • FC

            True.

            Well, right now, the input is around 60 uW, if I’m not mistaken. So I hope it won’t be too difficult to achieve that goal.

            So I guess that’s what you want to try next, correct?

          • Sanjeev

            Yes, should be slower with 1M.

          • DrD

            U1U2 is falling. Only slowly but there is a downward drift. This suggests that if there is any internal generation it is less than the 10mW approx. That’s not a disaster but it’s not good. I wonder if 5mW is sustainable. It would help see the drift if Frank could read an extra digit. His meter can’t do that at 4.5V but there is a way round it.

          • FC

            Hmm, right. It’s taken it around 19 hours to drop from 4.7 to 4.69 V. And yes, it would be nice to have an extra digit.

            Do you guys think that we should keep using the same resistor and get some capacity data out the voltage drop? Or do you prefer to use a higher resistance to try and find the ocube’s point of equilibrium (i.e. recharge rate)?

            All opinions are welcome.

          • Frank Acland

            I’m interested in finding the equilibrium point, too. My next step up is 4.7K Ohm resistor, or I could combine a couple of resistors to make a more gradual increase in resistance.

          • FC

            Ok. Sounds good to me.
            If I remember correctly, you have a 470 Ohm resistor too, don’t you?
            Perhaps we can put it in series with the 2.2k Ohm, if possible?

          • Frank Acland

            Sure I can try that. First I’ll remove the 2.2k Ohm and see what effect that has.

          • FC

            Ok. Sanjeev thought the same. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • Frank Acland

            Yes that’s where I got the idea!

          • FC

            Lol. Ok.

          • Sanjeev

            Thanks Frank.

            By now you must have heard of the Celani replication news, it deserves a blog post. There, more work for you.

          • Frank Acland

            Thanks Sanjeev! — I have just put up a post about it.

          • Sanjeev

            Great! Thanks again.

          • Sanjeev

            I agree. Time to increase the R slightly.

            Just repeating again here, it should be checked if it comes back to 4.7V after removing the 2.2k.

          • DrD

            Frank, there is a fairly easy way to see the 3rd decimal if youre interested. That way you don’t have to wait hours to see the 2nd decimal change.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        As you might expect, I strongly support your suggestion to use an ammeter. A LED would likely not work in series with 2.2k.

        • FC

          Hi Andreas. I was expecting you any minute now. ๐Ÿ™‚

          Yes, totally agreed about the amp meter.

          About the LED, I’m far from being an expert, so I don’t know if there is any kind of LED that will work in this situation. But it was suggested before by somebody else.

        • Sanjeev

          Another suggestion – since it has now shown a tiny drop in voltage, the 2.2k can be disconnected for a while to check if it comes back to 4.7V or above (somewhat quickly).
          It seems to like that voltage.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            It would have to rise at least until 4.71, since 4.70 can mean anything from 4.695 to < 4.705. And we should not forget that the meter has an internal error margin as well. Maybe Frank could take a look at the spec.

          • Frank Acland

            At this level I am getting fluctuations up and down between 4.70 and 4.69, and I have been picking the lower number to report.

    • Sanjeev

      More fun facts:

      It has outputted about 16 times more energy than can be stored in a 5F cap.
      However, it would charge a phone battery to only 3.5%. Not bad for people who don’t call anybody for days ๐Ÿ˜€

      • FC

        Lol. Good stuff, Sanjeev.

        We know that the ocube received an input of 192 mWh during the 3.2 hours in which the bias circuit had a 1k Ohm resistor, instead of 1M Ohm. This is already less than the 200 mWh that the ocube has delivered over the last 20 hours. But it’s a pity Frank didn’t keep a record of the energy input when he recharged the ocube from 2.872V to 4.71V between March 3 and 4.

        • Sanjeev

          No issues. The whole energy content of 2x batteries can be assumed.

      • Michael W Wolf

        Yea I noticed that with the ogirl. She used the phone a lot and it would just shut off until it built up enough power to turn back on. No one wants the phone to keep shutting off to power up.

  • gdaigle

    Might Frank’s Ocube have been made more defective due to the scanning of U.S. incoming shipping containers? Most shipping containers are scanned and those techniques include gamma-ray radiography (1.25 MeV), x-ray radiography (5-10 Mev), neutron activation systems (neutron interactions with inspected items resulting in gamma rays), in addition to other backscatter techniques. Might any of these have adversely impacted the magnetic domain structure of the device? In essence, is the defectiveness of Frankโ€™s tested product due not only to the charge controller board, as Steorn states, but also compounded by scanning techniques when entering the U.S. (and possibly also the potting process)? Is comparison to an existing potted Ocube that has not been shipped worth considering?

    • Frank Acland

      Shaun reckons the orbos would not be affected by any scanning equipment used in air transportation, and that they have had these cells shipped by air from China, and they seem to work fine for them in Dublin. I don’t know if they have ever tested potted ocubes or phones for long periods in-house.

      • Michael W Wolf

        Didn’t Steorn say they got bad control boards?

        • FC

          I don’t think so, Michael. I think they said that some control boards were giving problems some time after being installed. But I may be wrong.

  • gdaigle

    Might Frank’s Ocube have been made more defective due to the scanning of U.S. incoming shipping containers? Most shipping containers are scanned and those techniques include gamma-ray radiography (1.25 MeV), x-ray radiography (5-10 Mev), neutron activation systems (neutron interactions with inspected items resulting in gamma rays), in addition to other backscatter techniques. Might any of these have adversely impacted the magnetic domain structure of the device? In essence, is the defectiveness of Frankโ€™s tested product due not only to the charge controller board, as Steorn states, but also compounded by scanning techniques when entering the U.S. (and possibly also the potting process)? Is comparison to an existing potted Ocube that has not been shipped worth considering?

    • Frank Acland

      Shaun reckons the orbos would not be affected by any scanning equipment used in air transportation, and that they have had these cells shipped by air from China, and they seem to work fine for them in Dublin. I don’t know if they have ever tested potted ocubes or phones for long periods in-house.

      • Michael W Wolf

        Didn’t Steorn say they got bad control boards?

        • FC

          I don’t think so, Michael. I think they said that some control boards were giving problems some time after being installed. But I may be wrong.

  • OM

    Epoxy resin can become very hot during the polymerization.
    I remember, a small tube with a resin was self-heated to 50 ยฐ C at the surface and solidified in 3 minutes. The temperature inside could be much higher. It can be fatal for electrets. Of course, this depends on the type of resin.

    If this is our case, the only thing we can do – to return the device to Steorn.

    • FC

      Thanks for the info, OM.
      I would imagine that these are the kinds of things that Steorn are probably studying now. ๐Ÿ™‚

      • OM

        Do not mention it.

  • OM

    Epoxy resin can become very hot during the polymerization.
    I remember, a small tube with a resin was self-heated to 50 ยฐ C at the surface and solidified in 3 minutes. The temperature inside could be much higher. It can be fatal for electrets. Of course, this depends on the type of resin.

    If this is our case, the only thing we can do – to return the device to Steorn.

    • FC

      Thanks for the info, OM.
      I would imagine that these are the kinds of things that Steorn are probably studying now. ๐Ÿ™‚

      • OM

        Do not mention it.

  • Matt

    Me worries that they have been offering and selling this crap for quite a while now. Looks as if they just simply have no proper product. Nobody ever saw the red Ophone, yet it’s being offered and “delivery 12 weeks from payment”, same with the Cube which you are supposed to get only 6 weeks after payment.

    • FC

      I guess that’s why they’re offering a refund and actually sending it to those who request it.

      • Matt

        Would be nice to shut down the store until everything is working. You do not advertise products with a big hooray and then have nothing.

        • FC

          Or else, don’t buy anything from them until there’s sufficient evidence that they’re shipping working products. Nobody’s forcing you to buy.

          • Matt

            That’s an interesting point of view. It contradicts every comon thought of consumer protection. Just offer crap, them idiots are not forced to buy it.

          • FC

            No amount of consumer protection is ever going to prevent you from being swindled. Just open the newspaper on any given day and you will realize that.

            If Steorn sell non-working products, they face potential prosecution and may end up in jail.

          • davidbyrden

            In that case, I expect they will offer full and prompt refunds in full compliance with the law. I expect them to demonstrate surprising and atypical competence in this regard.

      • BillH

        Who’s had a refund?

        • FC

          Roberto Siquieros.

          15 days ago he commented on the Week 2 thread:

          “…I got cold feet and asked for my money back. They did this straight away…”

  • OM

    I’m surprised that Steorn still has not proposed to replace the devices.
    It is very strange.

    • FC

      True. Maybe they are still trying to come up with an optimum configuration?

      • OM

        At least, I hope that they have already identified the problem.

        • FC

          Yeah, me too. It would be sad if the third device was subject to the same problems.

          • Michael W Wolf

            well, the way I read steorn’s offer, Frank should be getting an ophone soon.

          • FC

            Yes, that’s what it seems.

          • Sanjeev

            Since Frank is in contact with SM, we may ask them to not to send the next one unless they test it themselves for a week (say). This test should be done after potting, xray scanning or whatever they think can cause the fault.

          • FC

            Excellent idea. Perhaps Frank can convey it to SM. Although I wouldn’t be surprised if they were testing that now.

          • Sanjeev

            Hopefully they will.

      • Dave

        As I recall, they started using the 9V batteries to improve the charging rate, but apparently it wasn’t that bad before this “optimization,” right? In fact there are many photos of Steorn charging his phone with one of the original cubes in his car, at the coffee shop, etc. So why not ship one of these original cubes which supposedly works? Hard to believe it would be offered for sale if it did not work to some level originally. Or has it ever?

        • FC

          Maybe those working units that they show are not potted and the potting resin is the main cause of their troubles? Who knows?

    • Michael W Wolf

      Well if they had a bad batch of boards and they didn’t check, they are in a pickle for sure. By there own incompetence. But if their tech really works, it all will pan out in the wash. Inventors are not engineers, a lot of times they are like savants, and are very bad engineers.

      • davidbyrden

        Yes, they may lack engineering training and even talent. Did you know the inventor of mechanics theory was unable to explain it to anybody? He lacked communication skills!

        So, the obvious thing to do then, is hire engineers to design and test your devices. Ireland has good enough engineering schools that Steorn should have done so by now.

  • FC

    I guess that’s why they’re offering a refund and actually sending it to those who request it.

  • FC

    With the new 2641 Ohm resistor combo, the ocube is outputting around 8.33 mW.

    The voltage has dropped from 4.7 to 4.69 V in less than an hour. But I don’t think we should read much into that, considering that the ocube didn’t have much time to recover from the previous test and that it is so close to its apparent maximum voltage.

    • R V

      But my iPad charger puts out 10W, not 10mW. It seems it would take months at that rate.

      • FC

        If you’ve been following this story for a while, you should know that this particular unit is underperforming due to several reasons.

  • FC

    With the new 2641 Ohm resistor combo, the ocube is outputting around 8.33 mW.

    The voltage has dropped from 4.7 to 4.69 V in less than an hour. But I don’t think we should read much into that, considering that the ocube didn’t have much time to recover from the previous test and that it is so close to its apparent maximum voltage.

    • R V

      But my iPad charger puts out 10W, not 10mW. It seems it would take months at that rate.

      • FC

        If you’ve been following this story for a while, you should know that this particular unit is underperforming due to several reasons.

  • OM
    • Andreas Moraitis

      Their statement about the harmlessness of the resin is hardly comprehensible, especially since one does not get the impression that they have the most advanced engineering power at their disposal.

      • OM

        I apologize, I did not understand your comment.
        Link leads to the article “Controlling Exotherm”.
        You see something different?

        • Andreas Moraitis

          I was talking about Steorn and their allegation that there are no potential problems with the epoxy. The article shows an additional one. Although I think that electric conductivity, especially of the liquid resin, might be the main issue.

          • SG

            Yes, it is the best failure hypothesis we have based on what we have observed. What keeps leading me back to this is the fact that we have no evidence of a potted device working as claimed–no video from Steorn, no working device in Frank’s hands, no recent testimonials from early Ophone testers (only some vague notion of reported problems), etc. What we have seen is apparently working devices at Steorn’s offices–all without the potting.

          • PT

            Have Steorn themselves addressed the latest failure and given any plausible explanation?

            It is now really up to Steorn to deliver a working product that does what they claim, especially as they have sold, and are continuing to market and sell such devices.

          • FC

            Ok, so apparently Ged was right. The attempt to charge the Ocube into the 5V range didn’t bear fruit (at least without resorting to arcing), as it only made it to 4.73V.

            Over the course of 14 hours and 15 minutes (from 5:35 to 19:50), energy was input into the Ocube at an average rate of 73.8 mW ( (5.05-4.705)*4.705/22 ). This yields an approximate total energy input of 1.05 Wh ( 73.8*14.25 ).

            Now, Frank is discharging the Ocube from an initial voltage of 4.73V through a 4.7k Ohm resistor, which yields an instantaneous output power of 4.76 mW ( (4.73^2)/4700 ). Therefore, at this rate it would take a little over 9 days to get our 1.05 Wh back from the Ocube.

            On the other hand, we may find at some point during those 9 days that the Ocube finds a level of equilibrium, which would mean that its self-recharge rate is similar to its discharge rate.

            I hope I didn’t make any mistake in my logic or in my calculations. But if I did, any correction is most welcome.

          • DrD

            We now really do need that extra digit (decimal place). It may take many days to see the 2nd decimal change by 1 digit, assuming we are close to equilibrium and 1 digit could be an error anyway.

          • FC

            Totally agreed.

          • FC

            By the way, the voltage has already dropped to 4.72V. But we have no way of knowing whether that’s a full Volt or only a fraction. And we don’t know the exact time either, as it happened overnight.

            If a point of equilibrium isn’t reached, and considering that the recharge phase started at 4.68V, it will be interesting to see the voltage 9 days from now (by the time 1.05 Wh have been extracted from the Ocube). Or alternatively, it will be interesting to see how much energy the Ocube has output, compared with the 1.05 Wh input, by the time it reaches 4.68V (whenever that happens).

          • DrD

            It’s going to be like watching paint dry.

          • FC

            Definitely. ๐Ÿ˜€

          • Ged

            If it does want to be around 4.7V, then it may just leak itself down to that point and then self charge to keep that point.

          • FC

            That makes sense. In fact, we may learn a few interesting things about the orbo pack’s behavior as it drops to 4.7V or below.

            And if it drops below 4.68V before 1.05 Wh are consumed, we may ask ourselves where the energy went. Or if this would be a normal behavior too for a hypothetical battery.

          • FC

            They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Here’s my personal interpretation of the evolution of Orbo in three pictures.

            1. Orbo test device #1.
            2. Orbo test device #2.
            3. Future Orbo devices?

          • FC

            I forgot that the bias circuit is inputting in the order of 60 uW to the Ocube. Thus, out of the 4.76 mW that the Ocube is outputting, only 4.70 mW are supplied by the cores. So in all fairness it will take us an extra 3 hours to get our 1.05 Wh back from the Ocube. Around 9 days and 7 hours in total. ๐Ÿ˜‰

          • FC

            Another correction. The charge period actually lasted 12.33 hours instead of 14.25 hours, as the DC source was disconnected between 7:30 and 9:25. Therefore, the energy input was 0.91 Wh instead of 1.05 Wh. And at the present output rate, it will take 8 days and 4 hours to get 0.91 Wh back from the Ocube. Roughly until midnight of 15 March.

          • OM

            OK. Thank you.

  • OM
    • Andreas Moraitis

      Their statement about the harmlessness of the resin is hardly comprehensible, especially since one does not get the impression that they have the most advanced engineering power at their disposal.

      • OM

        I apologize, I did not understand your comment.
        Link leads to the article “Controlling Exotherm”.
        You see something different?

        • Andreas Moraitis

          I was talking about Steorn and their allegation that there are no potential problems with the epoxy. The article shows an additional one. Although I think that electric conductivity, especially of the liquid resin, might be the main issue.

          • SG

            Yes, it is the best failure hypothesis we have based on what we have observed. What keeps leading me back to this is the fact that we have no evidence of a potted device working as claimed–no video from Steorn, no working device in Frank’s hands, no recent testimonials from early Ophone testers (only some vague notion of reported problems), etc. What we have seen is apparently working devices at Steorn’s offices–all without the potting.

          • PT

            Have Steorn themselves addressed the latest failure and given any plausible explanation?

            It is now really up to Steorn to deliver a working product that does what they claim, especially as they have sold, and are continuing to market and sell such devices.

          • OM

            OK. Thank you.

  • R V

    Steorn should consent to sending some of their power packs directly to labs to be tested. Establish that there is some strange new physics first. If that is confirmed then the rest is just engineering.

    • Sanjeev

      Commerce is not my field, but I’d not prefer to do my business like that. I’d hire a competent team of physicists and engineers and bound them in agreements and perks, develop a product and simply sell it.
      Then I’d try to remain 2 steps ahead of copy cats, because there will always be copy cats. Launch a new version, a new application every few years, build a brand and stay on top till I find another untapped area, such as anti gravity, may be. Because free energy gets boring after a while.

  • R V

    Steorn should consent to sending some of their power packs directly to labs to be tested. Establish that there is some strange new physics first. If that is confirmed then the rest is just engineering.

    • Matt

      That would imply that they give away their intellectual property. They rather let those power cells being produced in China.

      • Cesar Pinheiro

        Once deployed in the market, no way to avoid reverse engineering.

      • davidbyrden

        What intellectual property?

        Have Steorn registered any patents that we can read?

        • FC

          Actually, that’s an excellent couple of questions, right there. I would love to know the answer to those.

          I think, but I don’t know for sure, that Steorn have patents for their previous iterations of Orbo, but they don’t have one for the latest solid-state iteration. Maybe they have an application? I don’t know. Perhaps it’s very difficult (or impossible) to obtain a patent for an electret-based battery, being an old technology that has been in the open for a long time?

          • SG

            Steorn have some issued patents related to their previous Orbo incarnations. SM stated that they have patent(s) pending for the current incarnation. If they made an improvement to electret-based technology that is novel, non-obvious, and useful, then they could get a patent.

            Sometimes I hear people say that a company must wait to market or disclose the inner workings of a product because they have not yet been granted a patent. This is false. There is really no reason to hold back once patent applications are filed. In fact, if you can get uptake in the marketplace of your ideas, all the better (more potential targets).

          • FC

            Thank you, SG.

        • Matt

          You don’t need patents. Everything you build, invent, compose, write or whatever is your intellectual property right away.

    • Sanjeev

      Commerce is not my field, but I’d not prefer to do my business like that. I’d hire a competent team of physicists and engineers and bound them in agreements and perks, develop a product and simply sell it.
      Then I’d try to remain 2 steps ahead of copy cats, because there will always be copy cats. Launch a new version, a new application every few years, build a brand and stay on top till I find another untapped area, such as anti gravity, may be. Because free energy gets boring after a while.

  • Frank Acland

    Off-topic, but maybe related via vortex-l . Statement from a professor at Eindhoven University of Technology regarding the Yildiz Magnet motor. https://plus.google.com/104472960710595563193/posts/4LMQV3TzmvM

    Steorn maintained from the early days that they could get an energy gain from magnetic interactions, and say the current version of orbo is based on that principle . Muammer Yildiz has claimed the same — some of his demos can be seen on Youtube.

    • OM

      He apparently did not notice a big electromagnet under the table.

      • OM

        Generally, scientists are very naive. On the other hand, he does not say that he was examining environment and that the motor is running by itself.
        So, all right.

      • FC

        Did you notice the electromagnet under the table, perhaps?

        And are you talking about the table in the TU/e premises?

        I wonder why a university would place an electromagnet under their own table before testing a permanent magnet motor. Are you implying that they are risking their whole reputation by getting involved in a fraud?

        • OM

          Again, the address where the demonstration occurred is not shown in the document. We only see the address on the standard form, but the actual address of the event is not specified.

          Conservation laws are at the basis of nature.
          The only way to build a perpetual motion machine – discover the unknown energy flows. It is possible but not probable.
          Now there are so many perpetual motion models. But we still do not have free energy. For example, there are a lot of shows and talks from Steorn. But with our own eyes and in our territory we see two inoperative devices only.

          • FC

            120 years ago, most scientists denied the possibility of ever building a flying machine, in spite of being surrounded by birds.

            Nowadays, most people deny the possibility of ever building a perpetual motion machine, in spite of being surrounded by atoms.

            In every age, man thought that science was at the zenith of its development. And in every one of those instances, man was proven wrong.

            Therefore, I rather keep an open mind towards potential breakthroughs, rather than tossing unsubstantiated accusations of fraud simply because they go against the “established scientific truth.”

            But that’s just me, you are free to do whatever you want. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • OM

            I also keep an open mind.
            But this does not mean that we should turn a blind eye to the facts. And the fact is that there are a lot of fraudsters and illusionists now. The probabilities should be considered.
            Loud statements require serious evidence.

          • FC

            “Loud statements require serious evidence.”

            Loud accusations of fraud (like a big electromagnet under the table) also require serious evidence. Our legal system is based on the principle of presumption of innocence. So the burden of proof in on your side.

            The fact that someone cannot demonstrate something doesn’t immediately turn him into a fraudster (think of Eleanor Arroway in the movie Contact). And the fact that there are many fraudsters around, doesn’t immediately imply that we should turn our legal system on its head.

          • OM

            This is not the accusations of fraud, this is the suspicion of fraud. There is a difference. We can suspect anyone, if he makes loud statements and does not confirm it with evidence.

          • OM

            I should add, the only reliable proof in such cases – the making of a workable copy of the device by third-party experts.

          • FC

            I suppose that handling a self-made copy of the device to third party experts would work too, even if they weren’t allowed to disassemble it and had to test it as a black box. But then again, each person can demand his own requirements for valid proof.

            But for whatever reason, Yildiz hasn’t done any of that. So we still lack any proof of his claims.

          • OM

            Still, I insist on my requirement.

          • FC

            Then, should I understand that you won’t be satisfied with any proof from our black box tests of Orbo (if and when Frank gets a working unit)?

          • OM

            I do not know.
            I sometimes guided by subjective information.
            We will see…

          • FC

            It’s great to see you use the word suspicion now.

            Would you like for someone to air the suspicion that you are a murderer, even if you weren’t? Wouldn’t you like that person to respect your presumption of innocence and gather some facts before airing any suspicion?

            Throughout history, countless innocent people have been executed or have spent their lives in jail based on suspicions, because they couldn’t prove their innocence.

            Sometimes I think that the human race doesn’t deserve the gift of free energy.

          • OM

            I said, “we can suspect anyone, IF he makes loud statements and does not confirm it with evidence.”
            Please, do not skip “if”.

            “Sometimes I think that the human race doesn’t deserve the gift of free energy.” – I agree. Sometimes, I am too. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • FC

            What do you think of Rossi? Do you believe that he is a fraudster? He has been making loud statements for years without any conclusive evidence. In fact, he has even spent some time in jail.

          • OM

            Now there are many facts which prove that Rossi is not wrong.
            The effect is confirmed by other researchers.
            This is enough for me to be sure.

          • FC

            And don’t you think that it is a terrible injustice the way that Rossi has been accused for so long of being a fraud and was even sent to jail based on those false accusations (i.e. unfounded suspicions)?

            What if one day Yildiz proves that his device really works too? Wouldn’t it be terribly unfair that he’s been treated like a fraud?

    • Sanjeev

      It’d take much more than an inspection report to establish if it does work. The declaration only says that it has magnets, steel and plastic etc, but nothing about the energy measurements. It may be possible to rotate something for a long time, but energy in and energy out measurements reveal the truth always. You will find 1000s of such motors on youtube, almost none of them tries to do the energy accounting properly. Some do, but there are always errors, like cheap meters or using just a light bulb to “know” it works.
      In this case, the depletion of the magnets needs to be checked also. Yildiz is running this race since many years, I wonder what his home energy bill looks like… that’s another good test.

  • Frank Acland

    Off-topic, but maybe related via vortex-l . Statement from a professor at Eindhoven University of Technology regarding the Yildiz Magnet motor. https://plus.google.com/104472960710595563193/posts/4LMQV3TzmvM

    Steorn maintained from the early days that they could get an energy gain from magnetic interactions, and say the current version of orbo is based on that principle . Muammer Yildiz has claimed the same — some of his demos can be seen on Youtube.

    • OM

      He apparently did not notice a big electromagnet under the table.

      • OM

        Generally, scientists are very naive. On the other hand, he does not say that he was examining environment and that the motor is running by itself.
        So, all right.

      • FC

        Did you notice the electromagnet under the table, perhaps?

        And are you talking about the table in the TU/e premises?

        I wonder why a university would place an electromagnet under their own table before testing a permanent magnet motor. Are you implying that they are risking their whole reputation by getting involved in a fraud?

        • OM

          Again, the address where the demonstration occurred is not shown in the document. We only see the address on the standard form, but the actual address of the event is not specified.

          Conservation laws are at the basis of nature.
          The only way to build a perpetual motion machine – discover the unknown energy flows. It is possible but not probable.
          Now there are so many perpetual motion models. But we still do not have free energy. For example, there are a lot of shows and talks from Steorn. But with our own eyes and in our territory we see two inoperative devices only.

          • FC

            120 years ago, most scientists denied the possibility of ever building a flying machine, in spite of being surrounded by birds.

            Nowadays, most people deny the possibility of ever building a perpetual motion machine, in spite of being surrounded by atoms.

            In every age, man thought that science was at the zenith of its development. And in every one of those instances, man was proven wrong.

            Therefore, I rather keep an open mind towards potential breakthroughs, rather than tossing unsubstantiated accusations of fraud simply because they go against the “established scientific truth.”

            But that’s just me, you are free to do whatever you want. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • OM

            I also keep an open mind.
            But this does not mean that we should turn a blind eye to the facts. And the fact is that there are a lot of fraudsters and illusionists now. The probabilities should be considered.
            Loud statements require serious evidence.

          • FC

            “Loud statements require serious evidence.”

            Loud accusations of fraud (like a big electromagnet under the table) also require serious evidence. Our legal system is based on the principle of presumption of innocence. So the burden of proof in on your side.

            The fact that someone cannot demonstrate something doesn’t immediately turn him into a fraudster (think of Eleanor Arroway in the movie Contact). And the fact that there are many fraudsters around, doesn’t immediately imply that we should turn our legal system on its head.

          • OM

            This is not the accusations of fraud, this is the suspicion of fraud. There is a difference. We can suspect anyone, if he makes loud statements and does not confirm it with evidence.

          • OM

            I should add, the only reliable proof in such cases – the making of a workable copy of the device by third-party experts.

          • FC

            I suppose that handling a self-made copy of the device to third party experts would work too, even if they weren’t allowed to disassemble it and had to test it as a black box. But then again, each person can demand his own requirements for valid proof.

            But for whatever reason, Yildiz hasn’t done any of that. So we still lack any proof of his claims.

          • OM

            Still, I insist on my requirement.

          • FC

            Then, should I understand that you won’t be satisfied with any proof from our black box tests of Orbo (if and when Frank gets a working unit)?

          • OM

            I do not know.
            I sometimes guided by subjective information.
            We will see…

          • FC

            It’s great to see you use the word suspicion now.

            Would you like for someone to air the suspicion that you are a murderer, even if you weren’t? Wouldn’t you like that person to respect your presumption of innocence and gather some facts before airing any suspicion?

            Throughout history, countless innocent people have been executed or have spent their lives in jail based on suspicions, because they couldn’t prove their innocence.

            Sometimes I think that the human race doesn’t deserve the gift of free energy.

          • OM

            I said, “we can suspect anyone, IF he makes loud statements and does not confirm it with evidence.”
            Please, do not skip “if”.

            “Sometimes I think that the human race doesn’t deserve the gift of free energy.” – I agree. Sometimes, I am too. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • FC

            What do you think of Rossi? Do you believe that he is a fraudster? He has been making loud statements for years without any conclusive evidence. In fact, he has even spent some time in jail.

          • OM

            Now there are many facts which prove that Rossi is not wrong.
            The effect is confirmed by other researchers.
            This is enough for me to be sure.

          • FC

            And don’t you think that it is a terrible injustice the way that Rossi has been accused for so long of being a fraud and was even sent to jail based on those false accusations (i.e. unfounded suspicions)?

            What if one day Yildiz proves that his device really works too? Wouldn’t it be terribly unfair that he’s been treated like a fraud?

          • davidbyrden

            FC posted the old argument, “some people were once wrong therefore everybody can be wrong”.

            Which is true! But he’s ignoring the fact that there are LEVELS of wrongness.

            Some scientists did indeed state that you could not build a flying machine, and if you were to ask them for a reason, they would either not HAVE a good one, or they would show you invalid equations (because flight was not fully understood), or they would ask you where’s the necessary powerful engine. (Those last fellows weren’t wrong, by the way.)

            When we tell you that perpetual motion is not possible, we are on MUCH firmer ground than those old scientists. We have GOOD reasons that we DO understand.

            Anyway, it’s not even relevant. The important thing here is how many times Steorn had an opportunity to show us the thing working, and how many times they failed.

            Those two numbers are equal.

          • FC

            True. Steorn have yet to deliver a working product to an independent third party. But that doesn’t mean that it can’t possibly happen in the near future. Andrea Rossi was considered a fraud two years ago, and now, few people doubt that he has a working technology.

            Regarding perpetual motion machines, they already exist. They are called energy independent vehicles. And they are defined as energy-autonomous, self-sufficient, electric land vehicles, boats, ships and aircraft propelled entirely by on-board conversion of wind, sun, waves, and other ambient energy.
            http://www.idtechex.com/research/reports/energy-independent-vehicles-2016-2026-000446.asp

            But just like scientists were once denying the possibility of human flight even as airplanes were flying all around them, so do they deny the possibility of perpetual (or as long as the materials allow) motion machines even as they are moving all around them.

          • davidbyrden

            According to Wikipedia:
            “A perpetual motion machine is a hypothetical machine that can do work indefinitely without an energy source”

            The machines that you mentioned, are drawing energy from their surrounds. They are not perpetual motion machines.

            Steorn have variously claimed that their technology “converts time into energy” or gets energy from Dark Matter. If one of those suggestions were true, then it would not be a “perpetual motion machine” either.

            David

          • FC

            Under that definition, David, I don’t think there are (or can ever be) any perpetual motion machines in the universe either, let alone any built by man. I too believe in the law of conservation of energy.

            My biggest point of disagreement with modern science is that, while it admits that every atom moves perpetually, it doesn’t yet widely admit that the quantum vacuum energy (that makes atoms spin forever) can also play a part in macroscopic systems.

            To me, the quantum vacuum is an energy source just as valid, if not more, than our more traditional ones. And therefore, it has to be taken into account when applying the law of conservation of energy to ANY system.

            That alone would remove the mystery from seemingly impossible devices like the NASA-validated EmDrive,
            http://www.space.com/26713-impossible-space-engine-nasa-test.html
            which currently falls under Wikipedia’s definition of perpetual motion machines simply because not all possible energy sources have been taken into account.

          • davidbyrden

            >> “[science] doesn’t yet widely admit
            that the quantum vacuum energy (that makes atoms spin forever) can also
            play a part in macroscopic systems.

            Why do you think that quantum vacuum energy causes atoms to spin?

            Do you imagine that they are actually rotating, like a macro object?
            Do you imagine that energy has to be added to keep them going? Where do you think this energy goes, then? They don’t experience friction.

          • FC

            I don’t want to go into lengthy technical discussions here. But if you really want to go deep into the details of a view very similar to mine, you may want to read:
            http://www.encyclopedianomadica.org/English/aetherometry.php

    • Matt

      Another similarity between Yildiz and Steorn is that nobody ever got a working device.

    • Sanjeev

      It’d take much more than an inspection report to establish if it does work. The declaration only says that it has magnets, steel and plastic etc, but nothing about the energy measurements. It may be possible to rotate something for a long time, but energy in and energy out measurements reveal the truth always. You will find 1000s of such motors on youtube, almost none of them tries to do the energy accounting properly. Some do, but there are always errors, like cheap meters or using just a light bulb to “know” it works.
      In this case, the depletion of the magnets needs to be checked also. Yildiz is running this race since many years, I wonder what his home energy bill looks like… that’s another good test.

  • Cesar Pinheiro

    Once deployed in the market, no way to avoid reverse engineering.

  • Dutch Delft University of Technology 2010, demonstration Yildiz Magnet motor.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI3227d5Css&feature=share

    • Matt

      Yeah, just have a look at his magnificent line of products. As usual all those pictures of generators are just copied from the net and photoshopped.
      http://hmsbturk.com/tr/urunler/
      In 2015 he said 5 kW generators are being produced and ready for sale soon. Not really surprisingly there still is nothing. I admire how long all those con artists can keep up their scams without being busted and prosecuted.

      • FC

        Has he really scammed anyone? Has he ever sold anything, or taken money from anyone?

        I guess not. And that’s probably the reason why he has never been prosecuted. Don’t you think?

        • Mats002

          To my understanding, Frank paid for this failed product, what’s next? Another replace or money back?

          Steorn and other ‘free’ energy businesses including Rossi get money from investors who are tied to NDA:s and ‘beware-you-can-loose-all-your-money’ agreements.

          • FC

            I thought you were talking about Yildiz, since you were referring to his website.

            Regarding Steorn, it’s true that Frank paid for a working Ocube that he’s yet to receive. But to be fair, he has also received for free two test devices (that unfortunately do not work as advertised), several hours of Skype consultations, and has been promised a complimentary Ophone as well. So personally, I wouldn’t call it a scam.

          • davidbyrden

            It’s possible to scam your shareholders without scamming your customers.
            In fact, I believe it’s legal. It may not even deserve the name “scam”. It would simply be “taking money from fools”.

          • FC

            True. That’s why venture capital investment is considered one of the riskiest forms of investment. It’s almost like gambling.

    • OM

      Almost 6 years ago…

      If I had made this remarkable discovery, I would spread the most accurate description immediately, so that everyone could assemble the device.
      Yes, I would send a registered letter to the Patent Office in the same time, just to fix the fact. ๐Ÿ™‚

      • Yes, 6 years ago, how long did Rossi tried to get just 1 patent? At least he did, but
        only with the millions of IH and a lot of experts who know to avoid the dogmaโ€™s
        regarding โ€˜impossibleโ€™ devices. Yildiz put all his money in his invention, just as Rossi did, and want it to be yielding.

        • OM

          He does not understand that he will succeed, if he let go of his invention.
          And he will not get anything, if he is chasing for profits.

          • Maybe you are right, but how about Rossi?

          • OM

            I believe that Rossi has a working device.
            When it will be sold, it will be copied by anyone who wishes.

          • Yes, the E-Cat is a working device, but it was (and still is) a long and winding road. Maybe Yildizโ€™s permanent magnet motor is a working device too, but he is โ€˜still on the roadโ€™ and miles behind Rossi. Who knows, some day there will be an โ€˜Industrial Heat’ for Yildiz as well.

    • Jonas Matuzas
      • FC

        Thanks, Jonas. I believe this isn’t the first award he receives, right?

        • Jonas Matuzas

          on 2013 he was in similar exhibition in Geneva. But his motor was working for the while and something stuck inside and it was broken. Allan Sterling (I think this is good example how you become crasy then you involved in free energy topic ๐Ÿ™‚ ) was there with great expectation but finally he rote such essay: http://peswiki.com/index.php/Article:_35%2B_Reasons_Why_I_Think_Yildiz%27_Magnet_Motor_Really_Works (Actualy now I think somthing serios is happaning in this topic … (like with Steorn ha ha ha …. sorry I am getting mad too))

          • georgehants

            โ€œMen have called me mad; but the question is not yet settled, whether madness is or is not the loftiest intelligenceโ€“ whether much that is gloriousโ€“ whether all that is profoundโ€“ does not spring from disease of thoughtโ€“ from moods of mind exalted at the expense of the general intellect.โ€
            Edgar Allan Poe

  • FC

    No amount of consumer protection is ever going to prevent you from being swindled. Just open the newspaper on any given day and you will realize that.

    If Steorn sell non-working products, they face potential prosecution and may end up in jail.

    • davidbyrden

      In that case, I expect they will offer full and prompt refunds in full compliance with the law. I expect them to demonstrate surprising and atypical competence in this regard.

  • FC

    Has he really scammed anyone? Has he ever sold anything, or taken money from anyone?

    I guess not. And that’s probably the reason why he has never been prosecuted. Don’t you think?

    • Mats002

      To my understanding, Frank paid for this Non-working

      • FC

        I thought you were talking about Yildiz, since you were referring to his website.

        Regarding Steorn, it’s true that Frank paid for a working Ocube that he’s yet to receive. But to be fair, he has also received for free two test devices (that unfortunately do not work as advertised), several hours of Skype consultations, and has been promised a complimentary Ophone as well. So personally, I wouldn’t call it a scam.

  • FC

    According to Frank’s first reading of today, the ocube is losing voltage: from 4.69 to 4.68 V.

    Time to increase the resistance again?

    • Sanjeev

      Yes I guess.
      And like yesterday it should be left alone for some time just in case it wants to climb to 4.7. Say 1 hour?

      • FC

        Agreed. Or as long as it needs.

    • Frank Acland

      I will be out for a while. I just took the resistor off and will put a higher resistance on when I get back.

  • FC

    According to Frank’s first reading of today, the ocube is losing voltage: from 4.69 to 4.68 V.

    Time to increase the resistance again?

    • Sanjeev

      Yes I guess.
      And like yesterday it should be left alone for some time just in case it wants to climb to 4.7. Say 1 hour?

      • FC

        Agreed. Or as long as it needs.

    • BillH

      Surely .01 of a Volt is within the margin off error of most meters on a specific range.
      On a 10V range ,01 of FSD is 0.1% ?

      • FC

        True. I don’t know the precision of this multimeter, but from our previous experience, we believe that it can be trusted to read voltage drops of this magnitude. In fact, we are thinking about setting it to display an extra digit.

        I don’t know if DrD and Frank will read this comment, but maybe this is the best time to change the multimeter’s settings, before we start a new discharge test.

        • DrD

          Sorry I was out most of the day.
          YES, I think we should —– it’s it’s up to Frank.
          The procedure is simple, as follows:
          I think it was Rob told us that the meters range changes at 4V. So Frank just splits the load resistor into two series resistors that add up to the value he wants to use next. They should be in the ratio of approximately 1:4 (not critical). We continue to monitor U1U2 exactly as before, (no change there). In addition we add another column which records the voltage between the two resistors (across the larger one). If U1U2 is 4.69V we will see (4/5) X 4.69 = 3.752V, i.e. 3 decimals.
          It’s true what Bill says that there will always be errors but for the purposes of detecting whether it’s rising OR falling, the absolute error doesn’t matter. We will however need to see it change by more that one digit to be confident it isn’t noise or temperature. Once Frank finds the equilibrium point, then noise will indeed dominate.

          • FC

            Ok, sounds good to me.
            Now let’s wait for Frank to come back.

          • DrD

            just checked Frank’s record and it looks like the range changes at 2V, not 4V. In which case the ratio needs to be more like 1:2 and won’t be so accurate.

          • Frank Acland

            So after leaving the ocube without a resistor over u1-u2 for 5 hours there was no increase in voltage — which makes me doubt that any level of resistance at this voltage would register anything interesting.

          • FC

            Hmm. Doesn’t look good, does it? Let’s see where it stands tomorrow morning, then.

            From our previous observations, this ocube does self-recharge to a certain extent without a load (especially at lower voltages). But apparently, it can’t recharge at higher voltages, let alone while driving a load.

          • Sanjeev

            Then the only option is to let it discharge to, say 3V, and again check if it wants to self charge from there. If it does not then we are done with the tests.

          • FC

            Agreed.

            Perhaps we could let it discharge relatively quickly (e.g. through a 220 or 470 Ohm resistor) to around 3V, as you say, and then let it self-recharge with the only help of the bias circuit, to see how long it takes and how far it goes.

            If and when it recovers and stabilizes at a higher voltage, we can discharge it again in order to do an output vs input analysis.

            Is that similar to what you had in mind?

          • Sanjeev

            Yes. Can be done with the same R as now, but the low R can save time. Frank may decide or perhaps he has better ideas.

          • FC

            Ok. Let’s wait for Frank then, and see what he thinks.

          • DrD

            There is an alternative:-
            Boost the cells back closer to their intended 5V using the methods that worked before.
            That is a combination of lower bias resistor and “arcing” the 18V direct to the Orbo.
            The reason I favour this is because it seems to be generating better when it’s closer to the 5V and vice versa. (which is to be expected).

          • DrD

            In fact I suppose we could record how much energy goes into forcing it back up to where ever it goes to and then compare it with how much we get out of it when we discharge it back to where it is now. Or maybe it will not drop back (hopeful thinking).

          • FC

            Yes, that’s also an option. I wonder if we’ll be able to push it past 4.72V. Ged thinks that we won’t. But of course we weren’t talking about arcing before, which may revive some of the “dead” cores.

            The reason why the lower voltage option was suggested is because we know from experience that the ocube recovers from around 3V by itself, with the only help of the bias circuit. Whereas we’re seeing now that it doesn’t recover as easily from 4.68V to 4.7V under the same conditions. But you’re also right that it appears as if the energy delivered for every 0.01V drop is greater at higher voltages than at lower ones.

          • DrD

            I agree, it’s so badly damaged that it might not go as high as before but there’s no harm in trying. I think the key was shocking it with high power (arcing) and then maintaining the bias at a much higher level for a while (much higher V or much lower R or both).
            It doesn’t seem to like the lower voltages.

          • Dieter_G

            “Perhaps we could let it discharge relatively quickly (e.g. through a 220 or 470 Ohm resistor) to around 3V…”
            That is exactly the way to create a whopping rebounce-effect. The pack -whose behavior resembles that of batteries- is now at 4.7V and it will “remember” this old voltage level and partly bounce back to it when discharged. The quicker the discharge (that is : the shorter the time you hold it at its “new” level of 3V), the more pronounced the effect will be. So there will definitely be a rise in voltage if you do this, however it still hasn’t to do with generating energy.

            For an example, just look at the two 9V batteries Frank uses as the bias at the moment. It took more then 2 days for them to recover from the initial 1K load that drained them so quickly, and this recovery-process still hasn’t finished.

          • FC

            You’re absolutely right, Dieter. So maybe we should use the 2.2k Ohm resistor again, or the 1k Ohm resistor. What do you think?

    • Frank Acland

      I will be out for a while. I just took the resistor off and will put a higher resistance on when I get back.

  • FC

    True. That’s why venture capital investment is considered one of the riskiest forms of investment. It’s almost like gambling.

  • FC

    True. Steorn have yet to deliver a working product to an independent third party. But that doesn’t mean that it can’t possibly happen in the near future. Andrea Rossi was considered a fraud two years ago, and now, few people doubt that he has a working technology.

    Regarding perpetual motion machines, they already exist. They are called energy independent vehicles. And they are defined as energy-autonomous, self-sufficient, electric land vehicles, boats, ships and aircraft propelled entirely by on-board conversion of wind, sun, waves, and other ambient energy.
    http://www.idtechex.com/research/reports/energy-independent-vehicles-2016-2026-000446.asp

    But just like scientists were once denying the possibility of human flight even as airplanes were flying all around them, so do they deny the possibility of perpetual (or as long as the materials allow) motion machines even as they are moving all around them.

  • FC

    Actually, that’s an excellent couple of questions, right there. I would love to know the answer to those.

    I think, but I don’t know for sure, that Steorn have patents for their previous iterations of Orbo, but they don’t have one for the latest solid-state iteration. Maybe they have an application? I don’t know. Perhaps it’s very difficult (or impossible) to obtain a patent for an electret-based battery, being an old technology that has been in the open for a long time?

    • SG

      Steorn have some issued patents related to their previous Orbo incarnations. SM stated that they have patent(s) pending for the current incarnation. If they made an improvement to electret-based technology that is novel, non-obvious, and useful, then they could get a patent.

      Sometimes I hear people say that a company must wait to market or disclose the inner workings of a product because they have not yet been granted a patent. This is false. There is really no reason to hold back once patent applications are filed. In fact, if you can get uptake in the marketplace of your ideas, all the better (more potential targets).

      • FC

        Thank you, SG.

  • FC

    Under that definition, David, I don’t think there are (or can ever be) any perpetual motion machines in the universe either, let alone any built by man. I too believe in the law of conservation of energy.

    My biggest point of disagreement with modern science is that, while it admits that every atom moves perpetually, it doesn’t yet widely admit that the quantum vacuum energy (that makes atoms spin forever) can also play a part in macroscopic systems.

    To me, the quantum vacuum is an energy source just as valid, if not more, than our more traditional ones. And therefore, it has to be taken into account when applying the law of conservation of energy to ANY system.

    That alone would remove the mystery from seemingly impossible devices like the NASA-validated EmDrive,
    http://www.space.com/26713-impossible-space-engine-nasa-test.html
    which currently falls under Wikipedia’s definition of perpetual motion machines simply because not all possible energy sources have been taken into account.

    • davidbyrden

      >> “[science] doesn’t yet widely admit
      that the quantum vacuum energy (that makes atoms spin forever) can also
      play a part in macroscopic systems.

      Why do you think that quantum vacuum energy causes atoms to spin?

      Do you imagine that they are actually rotating, like a macro object?
      Do you imagine that energy has to be added to keep them going? Where do you think this energy goes, then? They don’t experience friction.

  • FC

    One of Steorn’s main contentions is that they are selling consumer products that anyone can test. If an ocube is able to charge your phone for 2 or 3 months in a row, then it’s pretty obvious that it contains some novel technology. And if an ophone works for 2 or 3 months in a row without having to charge it, then the same conclusion applies. And you don’t need a large and prestigious scientific laboratory to certify that.

    It’s true that Steorn haven’t yet delivered a single working consumer product to an independent third party (only non-working test devices that require technical skills beyond the capabilities of most consumers). But I have nothing to lose by waiting for them to deliver working consumer products. Do you?

  • georgehants

    Has been a Wonderful page to follow and to see so much work by all you guys, our Frank included, for little return so far except the pleasure of doing worthwhile Research.
    People say that without receiving money nobody would do anything, you prove that is a myth and many people enjoy doing things to help society as a reward on it’s own.
    Will wait now for Mr. Steorn’s next move with that same open-mind that is essential, if science is not to continue to be looked at as a bunch of clowns.
    If it all turns out to be a failure then from a scientific point of view, all your work is still positive and worthwhile.
    Best

    • FC

      Totally agreed, George.
      By the way, nice quote from Poe yesterday. ๐Ÿ™‚

      • georgehants

        Thanks FC, when one is as crazy as me, have to look on the bright side and it is a Fact I think that people who think a little different have much to offer.
        Most of science is frightened stiff of the Wonderful savants, when of course they should be at the very forefront of Research on the Mind.

    • Mats002

      Hi George, do you have a bookkeeping record of all volontairy manhours that have gone into the ECW/MFMP/LenrForum/Gluck/Vortex etc over the last 5 years? Add to that money given for equipment and travel.

      We are part of a pretty awesome community!

      • georgehants

        Mats002, just as it should be and will be when this crazy World moves on from people having to work in pointless made up jobs, just to keep this illogical financial system going.
        Production is well able to allow everybody to work a 30 hour week and retire at 50 in a new system designed around reality and not dictated ideology favoring just a few, mostly those least deserving.

  • OM
    • FC

      Yeah, that’s right.

      By the way, that website has also debunked Andrea Rossi’s scam, so they are totally credible themselves.

      • OM

        There is a description of the “battery “rebouncing” effect” and a customer reviews.
        What about the “open mind”?

        • FC

          I don’t discard any possibility, believe me. I just can’t find any conclusive evidence one way or the other. And even if I found conclusive evidence, I would keep my mind open, just in case.

          But regarding the ocube, so far, we have seen instantaneous shorts to 0V and we have seen voltage spikes during recovery. So of all the possibilities, the battery hypothesis seems to me one of the most unlikely.

          • OM

            “I don’t discard any possibility…”
            This is exactly what I wanted to hear.
            Thank you.

          • FC

            No worries at all. ๐Ÿ™‚
            Isn’t that the basis of an open mind, anyway?

          • OM

            Sure. ๐Ÿ™‚

        • BillH

          What about the conventional batteries that were found inside the case and shouldn’t be there? That also sounds quite similar. Ignoring negative evidence is almost as bad as giving too much credence to positive but unsubstantiated evidence.

          • FC

            I’m sorry for responding, Bill, but I think that maybe you’re addressing me as well.

            I know very little about the flashlight, so I would not dare to express an opinion, even if I had one.

            As for ignoring evidence – whether confirming or falsifying Steorn’s claims, in this case – I think that the virtue of an open forum like ECW is that everybody is kept in check by everyone else. So the end result should be very impartial.

          • OM

            1) We do NOT have a workable device.
            2) We do NOT have direct evidence that Steorn is a fraud.

            We have only our hypothesis.
            I am personally inclined to believe that the working device does not exist. Maybe I’ll change my opinion.

    • Metabunk (Mick West) is possibly not the most authoritative source you could cite:

      http://www.look-up.org.uk/metabunk/

  • OM
    • FC

      Yeah, that’s right.

      By the way, that website has also debunked Andrea Rossi’s scam, so they are totally credible themselves.

      • OM

        There is a description of the “battery “rebouncing” effect” and a customer reviews.
        What about the “open mind”?

        • FC

          I don’t discard any possibility, believe me. I just can’t find any conclusive evidence one way or the other. And even if I found conclusive evidence, I would keep my mind open, just in case.

          But regarding the ocube, so far, we have seen instantaneous shorts to 0V and we have seen voltage spikes during recovery. So of all the possibilities, the battery hypothesis seems to me one of the most unlikely.

          • OM

            “I don’t discard any possibility…”
            This is exactly what I wanted to hear.
            Thank you.

          • FC

            No worries at all. ๐Ÿ™‚
            Isn’t that the basis of an open mind, anyway?

          • OM

            Sure. ๐Ÿ™‚

        • BillH

          What about the conventional batteries that were found inside the case and shouldn’t be there? That also sounds quite similar. Ignoring negative evidence is almost as bad as giving too much credence to positive but unsubstantiated evidence.

          • FC

            I’m sorry for responding, Bill, but I think that maybe you’re addressing me as well.

            I know very little about the flashlight, so I would not dare to express an opinion, even if I had one.

            As for ignoring evidence – whether confirming or falsifying Steorn’s claims, in this case – I think that the virtue of an open forum like ECW is that everybody is kept in check by everyone else. So the end result should be very impartial.

          • OM

            1) We do NOT have a workable device.
            2) We do NOT have direct evidence that Steorn is a fraud.

            We have only our hypothesis.
            I am personally inclined to believe that the working device does not exist. Maybe I’ll change my opinion.

    • Metabunk (Mick West) is possibly not the most authoritative source you could cite:

      http://www.look-up.org.uk/metabunk/

      • OM

        No matter what they say about the site.
        In any case, the following information is trustworthy:
        http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=xO6YghleF-0
        http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=5HfAKX7TwiE
        http://users.ece.gatech.edu/etentze/Procs14_Sangkil.pdf
        http://www.ti.com/lit/ml/slyp086/slyp086.pdf

      • Caribou

        The Look Up site you quoted is not exactly authoritative either – they make a bunch of flimsy vague accusations and don’t link to a single shred of evidence.

        I think the Metabunk site has done an amazing job at documenting the clearly erroneous information and often outright lies distributed by the chemtrail believers. They have also held themselves to a very high standard of evidence and kept the conversation very civil.

  • FC

    From what I see in the spreadsheet, Frank, you’ve taken the high voltage route. ๐Ÿ™‚

    • Frank Acland

      Yes, that’s what I’ve decided to try based on the discussion. Hard to budge it past 4.70 V though.

      • FC

        Good on you. ๐Ÿ™‚
        Maybe Ged will win the bet and it won’t go much higher? We’ll see.

  • FC

    From what I see in the spreadsheet, Frank, you’ve taken the high voltage route. ๐Ÿ™‚

    • Frank Acland

      Yes, that’s what I’ve decided to try based on the discussion. Hard to budge it past 4.70 V though.

      • FC

        Good on you. ๐Ÿ™‚
        Maybe Ged will win the bet and it won’t go much higher? We’ll see.

  • Tim

    Here is why Orbo/Steorn is a scam:

    – Somehow they just managed to stumble upon not one, but two completely different technologies that they allege produce energy continuously. Initially it was completely mechanical, now there are no moving parts. What are the odds?

    – Something always goes wrong at the last minute. When the original orbo was (about to be) debuted to the world, I believe they said something about studio lights overheating their “magnetic bearings”. This came at the last minute. Then we heard nothing for years. Why didn’t they try and correct the original device if it was so close to working that they were willing to demonstrate it publicly?

    – Once again, we have a last minute problem, just as the product is apparently ready for the public. They’ve developed a world changing technology, but just can’t get the controller chips to function properly.

    – They send out a unit to a site like this, which is filled with over unity enthusiasts, people who want to believe. Apparently there were “about twenty” Orbos sent out. Somehow this is the only one that has shared their experiences. Could it be that this is the only place that received anything?!

    – They send out the product to this site and holy sh*t, it’s actually missing major components that are supposed to be a part of the Orbo. Just another last minute ‘oopsy daisy’. If the product is real, how can they be so clumsy with all of the skepticism they face?

    – They’ve spent a lot on marketing and image. The narrative is always a David vs Goliath thing where they try and make you root for the little guy. Perhaps an even clearer indication of their focus on marketing and deception is their purchase of hundreds of thousands of facebook page likes, most of which are from India. Why do this if you’re legit?

    – Why not demonstrate Orbo with an LED flashlight? Simple and useful. Why build a “dumbphone” that nobody wants in 2016? Do they really expect us to believe that “O-girl”, someone who admits she uses a smart phone, gets any satisfaction out of using something that can only make calls?

    – They ship the devices in potted resin. If they were really trying to show the world that it works, they would know that people would want to see the internals. They would also know that eventually someone will remove all of that resin. It reeks of an attempt to further carry on the failed story.

    – In the Irish Times video of the facilities, Sean references an area that is apparently filled with “accounting guys and suits”. I seriously doubt they have multiple accounting staff. What have they sold in the last ten years? Basically they order components and do pay roll, if they even have any employees. A google of “steorn” and “linkedin” only shows shaun’s profile. A direct search on linkedin reveals eight employees that aren’t accessible from a normal account. Seven of the profiles have no pictures. They’re quite possibly fake accounts. Also, only two of them have anything to do with research and engineering.

    – Shaun takes the reporter into a room that has Orbos almost too neatly arranged. Yes, perhaps it could be real and they would still have reasons to make an aesthetically pleasing arrangement of the product, but I would have asked why they’re all laid out so neatly. What function does this serve in the production line? What happens in this room exactly?

    My father was the victim of a ponzi scheme years ago. This feels like the same thing. There are big moments of promise, only to result in let down at the last second. There are also dramatic shifts in strategy and product. In 15 years this company has produced nothing. Don’t you think there’s a simple reason?

    They’d have you believe that the world just won’t buy into the idea that something can run forever and that it’s so hard to convince people. But it’s not if you actually have a product that can do that. I’m sure we can all think of a path of less resistance to illustrate this than the one Steorn has chosen. The reason they haven’t is because it’s fake.

    • How dare you suggest that the ‘O’ phone has nothing to give satisfaction to an ‘O-girl’. It’s a phone, texting device, and it vibrates… what more does a girl need for satisfaction ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • Matt

      You gotta have your mouth washed out with soap you nasty truthteller. ๐Ÿ˜€

    • Matt
      • Tim

        Hilarious. I believe I said they were buying users from India mainly, my apologies, it was those Orbo crazy Pakistanis who are bending over backwards to “like” the page, but oddly don’t ever comment or engage in conversation about it. I’m sure it’s nothing.

        This is likely an investor scam. They probably don’t want to actually sell anything to real people, as it would be far too much to manage and having a tonne of product out in the wild would disable their ability to control the message. That’s why they’re offering a ridiculously priced USB charger and a phone the size of a brick, almost nobody will want it.

        What they hope to do, I believe, is to bilk their investors until they have absolutely no more trust. I believe the exit strategy is to try and fail legally where the message will be that the product was legit, but the market just wouldn’t entertain it so they tried but it didn’t work out. I’m not familiar with Irish law, but I would anticipate that this won’t be “the end” if lawsuits have anything to do with the story.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      I agree that several things are obviously wrong with this company. However, I disagree with your claim that this site โ€œis filled with over unity enthusiasts, people who want to believe.โ€ This may be true for a number of readers, but certainly not for the vast majority. If it were so, I and others would have left this site long since.

      • FC

        Totally agreed, Andreas. I think that the objectivity of this community is impeccable.

        • Tim

          My apologies to both of you. I shouldn’t have branded all the same. I’ve admittedly been following this thread mainly and haven’t had an opportunity to get a proper feel for the general dispositions of the site’s followers.

          • FC

            Apologies accepted. ๐Ÿ™‚

        • DrD

          And even if it does prove to be a scam, I think we’ve all had fun and with a bit of luck, Frank will get a refund.

          • FC

            Exactly. ๐Ÿ™‚

            In fact, for the fun and entertainment that we’ve had over the last four weeks, 1,200 euros was dirt cheap. I would be more than willing to pay my share. ๐Ÿ™‚

            In any case, I seriously doubt that it is a scam for very simple reason that it works so badly. It would have been a lot easier to pot a relatively large battery and keep us wondering for a month or two. But this Ocube, with its 9V batteries and the blue cylinder sticking out of the resin, looks much more like a failed experiment to me than a carefully prepared scam.

          • R V

            Obviously they thought they really had something that worked. Perhaps they do but either they are completely incompetent at evaluating what they have or they are doing something that severely damages what they do have. Someone needs to go there and spend a week or so at Steorn and see what’s they have as far as those power cells and how they evaluate them and how they put it all together because clearly something is not working as they thought.

          • R V

            If it were a scam there would probably not be any refunds.

    • SG

      The main emphasis of ECW over the years has been the e-Cat. More recently, Frank has also been covering other possible exotic energy technologies. The reason that we took a particular interest in Steorn was because they were offering a product for physical inspection (and some of us had followed this company closely from the start and could not entirely shake our interest).

      The fact that they are offering a product for inspection is more than most “free energy” ventures and clearly sets them apart. It was worth taking a look. As you can see, none of the “enthusiasts” on here have claimed that it works–yet. We have kept our minds open, and have determined that the devices received from Steorn to date have *not* worked as claimed. Most here, however, seem open and welcoming toward Steorn sending another device, and we would test it as well. There is no harm in this. Something is learned each time. Most here seem to enjoy the journey.

  • How dare you suggest that the ‘O’ phone has nothing to give satisfaction to an ‘O-girl’. It’s a phone, texting device, and it vibrates… what more does a girl need for satisfaction ๐Ÿ˜‰

  • Andreas Moraitis

    I agree that several things are obviously wrong with this company. However, I disagree with your claim that this site โ€œis filled with over unity enthusiasts, people who want to believe.โ€ This may be true for a number of readers, but certainly not for the vast majority. If it were so, I and others would have left this site long since.

    • FC

      Totally agreed, Andreas. I think that the objectivity of this community is impeccable.

      • DrD

        And even if it does prove to be a scam, I think we’ve all had fun and with a bit of luck, Frank will get a refund.

        • FC

          Exactly. ๐Ÿ™‚

          In fact, for the fun and entertainment that we’ve had over the last four weeks, 1,200 euros was dirt cheap. I would be more than willing to pay my share. ๐Ÿ™‚

          In any case, I seriously doubt that it is a scam for very simple reason that it works so badly. It would have been a lot easier to pot a relatively large battery and keep us wondering for a month or two. But this Ocube, with its 9V batteries and the blue cylinder sticking out of the resin, looks much more like a failed experiment to me than a carefully prepared scam.

          • R V

            Obviously they thought they really had something that worked. Perhaps they do but either they are completely incompetent at evaluating what they have or they are doing something that severely damages what they do have. Someone needs to go there and spend a week or so at Steorn and see what’s they have as far as those power cells and how they evaluate them and how they put it all together because clearly something is not working as they thought.

        • R V

          If it were a scam there would probably not be any refunds.

  • FC

    The exercise has been done before several times in these threads. But I will repeat it here for your convenience. 400 Wh per kilo is about the maximum you can get from any battery in the market. (See attachment). An iPhone 6 needs about 10 Wh for a full charge. Therefore, if you charge an iPhone 6 with an Ocube more than 40 times (which most people do in less than a month), the Ocube contains a novel technology.

    I’m glad to know that you hold such lofty motives.

  • FC

    Ok, so apparently Ged was right. The attempt to charge the Ocube into the 5V range didn’t bear fruit (at least without resorting to arcing), as it only made it to 4.73V.

    Over the course of 14 hours and 15 minutes (from 5:35 to 19:50), energy was input into the Ocube at an average rate of 73.8 mW ( (5.05-4.705)*4.705/22 ). This yields an approximate total energy input of 1.05 Wh ( 73.8*14.25 ).

    Now, Frank is discharging the Ocube from an initial voltage of 4.73V through a 4.7k Ohm resistor, which yields an instantaneous output power of 4.76 mW ( (4.73^2)/4700 ). Therefore, at this rate it would take a little over 9 days to get our 1.05 Wh back from the Ocube.

    On the other hand, we may find at some point during those 9 days that the Ocube finds a level of equilibrium, which would mean that its self-recharge rate is similar to its discharge rate.

    I hope I didn’t make any mistake in my logic or in my calculations. But if I did, any correction is most welcome.

    • DrD

      We now really do need that extra digit (decimal place). It may take many days to see the 2nd decimal change by 1 digit, assuming we are close to equilibrium and 1 digit could be an error anyway.

      • FC

        Totally agreed.

        • FC

          By the way, the voltage has already dropped to 4.72V. But we have no way of knowing whether that’s a full Volt or only a fraction. And we don’t know the exact time either, as it happened overnight.

          If a point of equilibrium isn’t reached, and considering that the recharge phase started at 4.68V, it will be interesting to see the voltage 9 days from now (by the time 1.05 Wh have been extracted from the Ocube). Or alternatively, it will be interesting to see how much energy the Ocube has output, compared with the 1.05 Wh input, by the time it reaches 4.68V (whenever that happens).

          • DrD

            It’s going to be like watching paint dry.

          • FC

            Definitely. ๐Ÿ˜€

          • Ged

            If it does want to be around 4.7V, then it may just leak itself down to that point and then self charge to keep that point.

          • FC

            That makes sense. In fact, we may learn a few interesting things about the orbo pack’s behavior as it drops to 4.7V or below.

            And if it drops below 4.68V before 1.05 Wh are consumed, we may ask ourselves where the energy went. Or if this would be a normal behavior too for a hypothetical battery.

          • FC

            They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Here’s my personal interpretation of the evolution of Orbo in three pictures.

            1. Orbo test device #1.
            2. Orbo test device #2.
            3. Future Orbo devices?

    • FC

      I forgot that the bias circuit is inputting in the order of 60 uW to the Ocube. Thus, out of the 4.76 mW that the Ocube is outputting, only 4.70 mW are supplied by the cores. So in all fairness it will take us an extra 3 hours to get our 1.05 Wh back from the Ocube. Around 9 days and 7 hours in total. ๐Ÿ˜‰

      • FC

        Another correction. The charge period actually lasted 12.33 hours instead of 14.25 hours, as the DC source was disconnected between 7:30 and 9:25. Therefore, the energy input was 0.91 Wh instead of 1.05 Wh. And at the present output rate, it will take 8 days and 4 hours to get 0.91 Wh back from the Ocube. Roughly until midnight of 15 March.

  • SG

    The main emphasis of ECW over the years has been the e-Cat. More recently, Frank has also been covering other possible exotic energy technologies. The reason that we took a particular interest in Steorn was because they were offering a product for physical inspection (and some of us had followed this company closely from the start and could not entirely shake our interest).

    The fact that they are offering a product for inspection is more than most “free energy” ventures and clearly sets them apart. It was worth taking a look. As you can see, none of the “enthusiasts” on here have claimed that it works–yet. We have kept our minds open, and have determined that the devices received from Steorn to date have *not* worked as claimed. Most here, however, seem open and welcoming toward Steorn sending another device, and we would test it as well. There is no harm in this. Something is learned each time. Most here seem to enjoy the journey.

  • Gron Skog

    Hi all. My first post here :-). Just want to say I really appreciate all the work you put in evaluating Steorn’s claims. Having no technical expertise myself, the discussion is not easy to follow but it seems clear you are striving to maintain a high scientific standard throughout. Thank you!

    Having followed the Steorn saga from the beginning I contacted them in December about putting an order in for the ophone. I was, however, recommended to wait for some customer feedback. I then contacted them via Facebook a couple of weeks ago to ask what the status was with the ophone, but didn’t get a reply. I then emailed them a week or so ago and got this reply (thought it could be of interest for you, considering the ongoing discussion about their seriousity):

    Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 17:21:47 +0000
    Subject: Re: Still possible to order an ophone?

    From: [email protected]

    To: [email protected]

    Hi Marcus,
    Thank you for your email and I apologise for our delay in replying.
    I expect that you will only begin to see information posted in relation to initial tests and customer feedback in 2-3 weeks time.

    We are you still taking orders.
    I would ask you to wait for another couple of weeks and you can then watch for the initial feedback. You will then be in a more informed position to decide weather you wish to make an order.

    Kind regards,
    The Orbo team

    Best regards
    The Orbo Team

    On 29 February 2016 at 08:33, Marcus Grรผnerwald wrote:

    Hi. I was in touch with you a couple of months ago to order an ophone. However, I took your advise to wait for more information to be posted on the initial tests and customer feedback.

    I am still really interested in putting an order in but your Facebook page has gone a bit quiet lately and the two video diaries on the phone have not placed an update for a while. I am therefore curious to hear what the status is.

    Are you still taking orders? Do you have any information on how well the phones work at the moment? Really would like to know if I should wait with ordering or if you are happy with the quality of the first shipments.

    Looking forward to your reply.

    Kind regards,
    Marcus

    • SG

      It is certainly a strange response. It is almost as if someone at Steorn has doubts about the product and wants to minimize the number of orders. I can’t think of any other purposes for this kind of email message from Steorn.

      • SG

        On the other hand, maybe they are confident in their product, but have a concern that something is happening to the product between the time it leaves their facility and the time it is delivered to the end user. Perhaps they are trying to get to the bottom of this issue and minimizing orders while they do that.

        • DrD

          That is the way it looks

  • Gron Skog

    Just a quick comment on my thoughts. 1: the English is a bit strange but I guess the admin staff might not be Irish. 2: the reply sounds similar to the one I got already in December. There is no mention on the feedback already posted so I’m not sure how to interpret this. Is there more feedback coming or is this an old email? Maybe they’re aiming for the 10 year anniversary in August…

    Still, the response was more than I expected so I’ll keep swinging the cat and throwing salt over my shoulder, whilst following your work.

    • FC

      Thank you very much for your kind words and for sharing your experience.

      My opinion is that Steorn are still trying to find the optimum configuration for their products, both regarding the Orbo cores and the integration of the cores with the rest of the electronic components, as well as trying to figure out why the two test products they sent to Frank and the fully functional products they gave to trusted parties, have failed so quickly.

      • Gron Skog

        Yes I am bound to agree. Doesn’t seem likely they would be trying to fool the community this way. However, as someone working with business development and innovation funding I can’t help being a bit curious about their business strategy…. Guess I’ll have to wait for the movie ๐Ÿ™‚

        • FC

          They definitely make some strange business decisions for someone looking from the outside. But probably those decisions make more sense when looking from the inside.

          • Tim

            You guys are giving them too much credit. They’ve purported to show, on video, working units. These units don’t just produce micro trickles of rebound, but can apparently “charge a cell phone twice a day”. In fact they demoed a “working” Orbo in Slatterys pub nearly a year ago; left it on the shelf for some time. There was a bunch of social media banter from the pub and others about how great it worked. Of course, nobody opened it to discover the big battery inside. That was in May.

            Months later in December they started taking orders, no failure rates or anything like that were initially discussed. You would think that any kinks, like those experienced here, would have been noticed between the amazing ‘success’ of the pub demo and the official release, no? Why are all of the orbos suddenly breaking down now?

            If they were having any trouble getting them to work perfectly it certainly didn’t detract from time invested on an attractive enclosure with cool packaging. And aren’t these devices mainly intended to illustrate the proof of concept (as Shaun has mentioned many times)? Why demonstrate your proof of concept by placing the internals in distracting, resin potted packing? It’s simply to buy time. That’s why. They’re not protecting the copying of their technology with the resin because a determined person could remove it. It’s meant to make the testing confusing, because that’s the best they can hope for with a product that doesn’t work.

            I used to not be able to figure out what motivation they’d have to lie myself, but when mentioned that they’re 23 million in debt it became clear. They’ve been bilking investors for years and it’s a run-away-train. Maybe it started noble. Maybe they thought they were on to something, maybe they’re can’t tell themselves the truth because it hurts too much, but at the end of the day this product is a fake. They’ll probably write it off to variabilities in the unknown dark energy phenomenon, reduced solar activity or something with no scientific basis.

  • FC

    Thank you very much for your kind words and for sharing your experience.

    My opinion is that Steorn are still trying to find the optimum configuration for their products, both regarding the Orbo cores and the integration of the cores with the rest of the electronic components, as well as trying to figure out why the two test products they sent to Frank and the fully functional products they gave to trusted parties, have failed so quickly.

    • Gron Skog

      Yes I am bound to agree. Doesn’t seem likely they would be trying to fool the community this way. However, as someone working with business development and innovation funding I can’t help being a bit curious about their business strategy…. Guess I’ll have to wait for the movie ๐Ÿ™‚

      • FC

        They definitely make some strange business decisions for someone looking from the outside. But probably those decisions make more sense when looking from the inside.

  • OM

    Preparation of 4.7 V cathode material LiNi0.5Mn1.5O4 by an oxalic acid-pretreated solid-state method for lithium-ion secondary battery
    http://www.scholarmate.com/scmwebsns/publication/view?des3Id=XoZy2GosiBw4bohQn4mkbQ%253D%253D

    Research Article
    http://www.hindawi.com/journals/amse/2011/768143/
    Figure 5: Discharge curves of LiNi0.5Mn1.5O4 cathode at rate indicated.
    http://www.hindawi.com/journals/amse/2011/768143.fig.005.jpg

    • OM

      If I have understood correctly, the solid curve is for the charging cycle and the dashed curve is for discharging.

  • OM
  • OM
  • OM

    If it is assumed that we have a battery, you may continue to charge it. The voltage will remain constant and will begin to rise at the end of the charge cycle.

  • Sanjeev

    The voltage is dropping even with 4.7k, that means there is no self charge at all.
    The situation is made complicated by the 5F, 5V cap. May be there is a built in over voltage protection in the cap (such as a zener), which prevents it from going above 4.7V. There is also a possibility that the cap is leaking the energy from the orbo cell, so we never see a steady voltage or rising voltage.
    But so far 3 orbo packs have failed tests (1 from ocube and 2 from ophone brick), if its just bad luck then it can’t be worse for steorn.
    Anyway, I’m ready to participate in testing anything that steorn keeps throwing at us.

    • DrD

      It actually means that if there is any self charging effect remaining it’s less than 4.7mW which would certainly include zero.
      As for the 4.7V clamp, I have a suspucion that with a bit more agression we could force it up above 5V! I wouldn’t suggest trying just yet in case it causes more damage.
      Despite that hint of optimism I can’t help but feel we’re running out of hope on this unit but I still like the idea of continuing.

      • Sanjeev

        We didn’t see any voltage rise when the load was removed. So I guess if its generating anything, its beyond the resolution of instruments.
        The only test remaining (IMO) is to see if it rises up when discharged to a low voltage. This should show if there is a clamping circuit somewhere.

    • Ged

      If it is forced above its max order state, it may simply relax back down and not “self charge” till it gets back to where it wants. If so, self charging would kick back in around 4.67-4.7 V, and be absent at voltages above that.

      • Sanjeev

        How do you find out which is the max order state and the voltage there?

        • Ged

          By doing exactly what Frank has been doing :).

          If this works like the model suggests, once it is revived enough to self charge it’ll approach that max order state asymptotically from below, and if force charged a bit above it, it should relax back down and decline to that state.

          So to find the state, just force charge till it won’t budge on practical time scales and then see to where it declines (no appreciable self charge above max). Which, we have indeed advocated and Frank has done.

          • vibrator !

            Saturation requires annealing in an applied e-field, not simply dumping charge on it.

            Frank should use Nitromors to melt the epoxy and extract a cell – unroll it or whatever – and reset it using Steorn’s method. Done methodically we can then ascertain the maximum energy needed to freeze the cell into its saturated state, for comparison against its subsequent output performance

            If it costs say 10J to prep the cell, then hopefully we’ll be able to draw at least this much back out… and then some, if it works as described..

          • FC

            I think that Frank may not even need to unroll any cell. Some of them (maybe 3 out of 8?) still seem to work ok. It’s the “dead” ones that are dragging down the pack as a whole.

            But if we were to take the surgical route, I would prefer Frank to start with the second test device. Those cores are not damaged, simply drained, and they should be relatively easy to revive. Whereas the Ocube may still be give us some interesting data as is.

          • Ged

            Charge has done a fine job so far, as the voltage behavior jumps and bias circuit results show.

          • DrD

            So according to your theory, the internal generation will start once it drops below 4.67V and the rate will increase asympotically from about 4.67?
            It’s certainly not generating much if anything right now.
            I see it just hit 4.7V last night.

          • Ged

            Sort of. Generation will start from our view after it falls back to its “set point”, but should be maximal near that point where the highest alignment is achieved (pushing past that point probably just puts energy in between the plates as a charge sep just like a cap and no longer directly via the dipole polymer, but with a very small amount of head room as we have seen). Self recharging should actually decrease very slightly as more disorder is put in via net energy losing power load, but then really fall once it passes that tipping point alignment threshold. Not enough data to quantitate all this yet.

            But, that should be a good test of the model, to see if it is wrong or not (so far). At its “set point” range, I would guess capacitance, as we see it, would be at its relative max too, so it should be quite a bit more resistant to change in that area (seems to be a few hundredths of a volt wide?).

          • Frank Acland

            Force charging doesn’t seem to hold above about 4.73. From what we have seen, “self charging” seems to happen rapidly if shorted out to below a volt, and then decreases as it approaches 3 Volts (see March 3 on the spreadsheet). But it also seems like the rate of self-charge is not uniform. Maybe it depends how quickly the packs are discharged, or how long the short is held for. We can do some testing on this at some point.

          • Xavier Pitz

            If I remember correct Shaun said that the “recovery rate” from an orbo cell is supposed to be variable & unpredictable. Only an average integrated over a day could be expected…

          • Ged

            All that data strongly supports the model of how it works, so far.

            The model suggests that self charging is a function of two terms: energy/power density of wherever it pulls energy from, and the physical percentage state of dipole alignment (dead and self nullifying disordered -> partly aligned to magnetic field produced by metal plates by bias voltage allowing further alignment -> high alignment percentage allowing self magnetic field generation and forcing on the material, and high charge separation/capacitance induced on the metal plates). This also means energy storage is a function of two factors: energy stored as capacitance induced on the plates, and energy stored as order in the dipole alignment of the material itself. The former doesn’t store much, but a short time span discharge will pull from that without tapping into the slower and larger energy release caused by physical disordering of the material.

            So, discharge length and intensity would be indeed an important factor in impacting recharge, as recharge is entirely dependent on the alignment of the material and the x variable of the harvest source. We can’t track x yet, but the -rate- of disordering for a given starting order percentage and power draw, will be directly tied to x.

            Thus, the variability in self charging is explained by the model, but the model predicts that self charging (and capacitance) will always follow general trends of being highest when most ordered, and will fall off a cliff once the disorder increases enough to trip a mode change transition (e.g. From ordered to semiordered modes). If we don’t see that, then the model will be in question or falsified.

            Once max order is obtained, you can’t physically align anything more, so over charging doesn’t change the material, but just stuffs whatever extra charge difference the plates can take based on the internal resistance of the material (which is highest at full order, thus so is capacitance across the dipole polymer material).

            Anyways, so far your data is surprisingly supportive of this model, but as all models it takes only one contrary piece of evidence to disprove.

            Thank you again for all your work and data!

          • Frank Acland

            Ok, so based on that analysis, what tests do you thing should be done to effectively test your hypothesis?

          • Ged

            Basically exactly what you have already been doing. Testing the power output at different voltages via discharge (and capacitance by both discharge and recharge, but you already did that). The rate of voltage drop should increase as voltage decreases after a point for the same given load (when starting at or below the voltage rest state of course; which 4.73 V seems to be above, in which case the inverse will be true till that natural rest point is passed).

            Edit: also, the need for the bias circuit for recharging should appear and disappear based on the semiordered-ordered threshold, respectively.

            If this baby is just a fancy battery, the model should be quickly disproven by the voltage-load rate of change relationship.

      • DrD

        To prove it Frank needs to remove the load and it will continue to fall.

        • Ged

          Exactly. It may just be slow to fall on its own, but I believe we have already seen that happen in the data.

  • OM

    Interesting, that even the most simple schematic can have very unusual properties.
    It’s easy to confuse any researcher.

    http://s30.postimg.org/fykk36fkh/Untitled3.jpg

  • OM

    Interesting, that even the most simple schematic can have very unusual properties.
    It’s easy to confuse any researcher.

    http://s30.postimg.org/fykk36fkh/Untitled3.jpg

  • SG

    It is certainly a strange response. It is almost as if someone at Steorn has doubts about the product and wants to minimize the number of orders. I can’t think of any other purposes for this kind of email message from Steorn.

    • SG

      On the other hand, maybe they are confident in their product, but have a concern that something is happening to the product between the time it leaves their facility and the time it is delivered to the end user. Perhaps they are trying to get to the bottom of this issue and minimizing orders while they do that.

      • DrD

        That is the way it looks

  • OM

    I wonder. Steorn probably reading this thread. Is it hard to write here and to clarify the situation? Probably it is not included in the plan.

    • georgehants

      OM, a little response of thanks for all the work done and a clear update on the timeline for the next move would be appreciated, I think.

      • OM

        OK, let’s wait…
        How many times are we going to wait?

  • OM

    I wonder. Steorn probably reading this thread. Is it hard to write here and to clarify the situation? Probably it is not included in the plan.

    • georgehants

      OM, a little response of thanks for all the work done and a clear update on the timeline for the next move would be appreciated, I think.

      • OM

        OK, let’s wait…
        How many times are we going to wait?

  • OM

    I have no more questions. Everything is clear.

  • OM

    I have no more questions. Everything is clear.

  • R V

    For those who talk to Steorn, can you ask them if they ever noticed a lowering of the operating temperature of their power cells? Does any part of the system cool down when supposedly providing power?

  • R V

    For those who talk to Steorn, can you ask them if they ever noticed a lowering of the operating temperature of their power cells? Does any part of the system cool down when supposedly providing power?

    • Stephen

      If it does that. That in it self could be really interesting especially as a heat sink for thermal control where you don’t want to have to radiate heat else where. It may have implications for the laws of thermodynamics though.

      • R V

        That’s why I asked, the Second Law implications. Most people are not yet aware but Sheehan et. al. have shown a substantial violation in a hydrogen system with two different refractory metals. Everything starts out at equilibrium but quickly moves to about a 100K difference that is maintained at steady state which is not supposed to happen.

        Anyway, it’s a lot easier to accept a Second law device than a supposed conversion of time to energy as Steorn speculates.

        • vibrator !

          The excess energy form is a force/time delta, per classic Orbo.

          If it was a 2LoT violation it arguably wouldn’t need a “reference voltage” since it would be using phonon absorption to restore the polarisaiton density. But that’s inconsistent on multiple levels – not least that heat in = heat out for a given closed loop domain rotation (IOW the cell would radiate the same heat back out when degaussing, assuming constant isothermal conditions), per the magnetocaloric effect.

          There may be some degree of magnetistriction-type effects, and likewise piezo effects (EMF’s from mechanical pressure on the cell), but together with the thermoelectric effects, all of these interactions are symmetrical and incidental to the exploit.

          The gain is due to the freely induced potential in the dielectric caused by the applied e-field. It’s a novel form of induction, in a new type of electret.

          I floated the “energy from time” concept back in 2007 on the Steorn forum after realising the central exploit, however later concluded time was inert and it was virtual photon exchanges (standard EM mediator), and thus ambient quantum momentum, ultimately footing the bill.

          Who knows, maybe all gauge boson interactions are actually powered by time after all – the “energy from time” concept has a lot going for it in its own right, but as part of a broader conceptualisation too involved for our immediate needs..

          TL;DR – it’s free work by passive EMF’s.

          • R V

            Thanks but I know 2nd law violation is possible now and all this stuff dealing with quantum whatever is dubious in my mind. As per Randy Mills,