Orbo and magnetic flux-gating
While the author (Kavee) doesn't know of any bona fide "free
energy" proof springing from the Orbo technology, he does think there are
several fascinating effects that are worth exploring, which could lead to
greater efficiency. Preface rebuttal by Steorn CEO with follow-up comment
by CLaNZeR confirming Kavee's point.
Steorn CEO, Sean McCarthy
Prior to publishing the article below by Kavee, we wanted to give Steorn and
opportunity to respond. On May 12, 2010 5:35 AM Mountain, we received the
following from Sean McCarty, CEO of Steorn.
I am really not sure what the purpose of the article is to be honest. The JNL solid state device may seem at face value to be similar to SS
[solid state] Orbo, but they are very different things. As for the idea of 'magnetic flux gating' its a term that I hear a lot in the OU community and to be honest I have no idea at all what it
The JNL device is a device that works on a domain rotation principle - i.e. the addition of the biasing magnets provides an preferred direction to the toroid core domains, the changing current through the toroid gives motion to these domains (we now in effect just have a moving magnet), and we hence get a current flow in the pickup coil (thats the simple effect of the biasing of the toroid core). There is nothing unusual about this effect, and its entirely normal, and conservative from an energy standpoint. I am NOT trying to pour cold water on things here, but an understanding of magnet interactions would show the domain rotation effect of the JNL system from first principles.
SS Orbo is a very different beast, has been replicated has been demonstrated, most recently last week here:
So I really do not understand the purpose of the proposed article, the comparisons between Orbo and JNL, the term 'magnetic flux gating' etc.
Given that input from Sean, had I not spend the time typesetting this page, I
would have dropped it and not bothered to publish it. But there may be
some science of interest here to those of you who are endeavoring to understand
this field. As for me, I must admit that a lot of this goes over my
head. If I took the time, I could probably start to understand it better,
but I have too many things going at once to focus in on this one as some of you
are. -- Sterling
for Pure Energy Systems News
With the recent development and publicizing of Steorn's Orbo and consecutive
replication of the system and confirmation of certain claims' by well
respected French researcher, Jean-Louis Naudin, people flock on to replicate
Orbo and its variants in a phenomenal scale. Abundance of information (or
scarcity, on principles) both made it attractive, as well as repulsive due to
the very fact that we all pop our eyes expecting "free energy" demonstration
out of these units. [As far as the author knows,] nobody at this point of time made measurable free energy
demonstrated so far with either Orbo or its variants.
However, Orbo and its variants do exhibit fascinating effects worth exploring, than on wild goose chase on free energy. Proposition may not seems attractive
than "free" counterpart, but it may eventually lead us to paying very less
or insignificant amount, for the consumption of energy.
This article is an explanation to the observations on Flux-Gating devices and
its variants. Sounds scary, well, Steorn's Orbo and Naudin's 2SGen are such
devices, where many other people have tried other configurations with more or
less success in the history. There are few patents covered some of the
configurations, but I am not going to assert them here, since original inventors
of those may not be comfortable attributing them to gross flux-gating. Once you
know the principles, devising various configurations or evaluating and
explaining some of those magnetic rotary or pulsed solid state energy devices
For the purpose of this article, I will be using Steorn's Orbo configuration
and Naudin's 2SGen configuration (as published at Naudin's website) as
examples. It may be helpful to read on Flux-Gating and Asymmetric Magnetic
regauging as discussed by many other authors else ware.
It is vital to understand following concept and terminology, in terms of
understanding the gating principles and results.
stated in Wikipedia: "Magnetic flux (Greek letter Φ (phi)), is a measure
of the magnetic field strength existing on a two dimensional surface, such as
one side of a magnet. In textbook diagrams, magnetic flux is usually pictured as
cluster of vectors attached to a geometrically abstract surface. Each vector
intersects a separate point on the surface. The SI unit of magnetic flux is the
weber (in derived units: volt-seconds), and the unit of magnetic field is the
weber per square meter, or tesla. (In cgs units the unit of magnetic flux is
Magnetic flux, if considers analogous to electrical current, then the flux can
be routed in a magnetic circuit just like an electrical current in an electrical
circuit. As an example, bar magnet radiates flux from N and absorbed from S
poles. If placed in air, it naturally does this, while some of the flux goes to
infinity (not much understood, but calculations does proves). Analogous to wires
in an electrical circuit, ferromagnetic material provides the "conductive"
path for flux in a magnetic circuit. It is more common to use a "keeper"
shortening two poles of horse shoe magnet, for storage. This is essentially a
magnetic circuit, where all flux is channeled through the "keeper" into the
magnet itself, blocking radiation or interaction with other magnetic material in
A typical transformer is an example to a magnetic circuit. Its core, usually
with a square or figure 8' cross section provides the necessary magnetic
path for the flux to follow. This however does not confine all the magnetic flux
to the core, so portion of the magnetic energy escapes to the environment. This
essentially meaning magnetic interference to the neighboring devices and energy
See below for toroidal core, which is a special type of an electromagnet, where
all the flux contained within its core, eliminating magnetic interference and
It is important to understand there are many difference between electrical and
magnetic circuits, so it cannot be considered equal in its entirety.
This is analogous to electrical resistance in an electrical circuit. As
electrons flows through the least resistance, magnetic flux tend to flow through
the least reluctant path. Unlike resistance, Magnets don't dissipate energy in
magnetic reluctance. Inverse of the Reluctance is called permeance, measured in
Henry (same as inductance), but concepts are different.
It is important to know that reluctance is non linier; meaning it varies
depending on the magnetic field. When a high-permeable material is in the path
of strong magnetic flux, it can be saturated, and reluctance goes high (limiting
magnetic flux). This makes high permeable material becomes low permeable at the
point of flux saturation. Above this level, reluctance increases rapidly.
Reluctance also increases in low flux incidents.
Air, glass, water etc. are low permeable materials. Air gaps are used to reduce
the saturation (increasing the saturation point), where more energy can be
stored before the core get saturated. Meaning, more flux can be concentrated and
channeled before reluctance increases.
Ferromagnetic materials have a tendency to keep a memory of past MMF (magnetomotive
force). Meaning, after the source of the magnetic flux is cut off; remnant
magnetism is left in ferromagnetic circuits, creating a flux with no MMF.
This is a very interesting configuration of a magnetic circuit. Simply put, it
can be called as a special coil/transformer, without magnetic interference to
The core is essentially doughnut shape, and the coil is wound on it where the
resultant electro-magnetic field (flux) contained within the core itself.
Commonly known right hand thumb rule easily shows why the field is contained
within the core.
Traditionally the troroid is used to lessen electromagnetic interference, since
this is the most common transformer (or inductance) arrangement to suppresses EM
noise. Quite naturally, when the core is saturated, the permeability drops
(increase reluctance) significantly. It is worth reading the experiment done by
Naudin making this point clear, which published on his website.
For the purpose of this article, I would assume readers are already familiar
with Steorn's Orbo configuration or Naudin's Orbo replication configuration.
I would not attempt to explain the setup in detail, which can be readily found
on the net.
Image to the right is from Naudin's website, picturing his Steorm Motor V3
Above illustration is all it needs to understand the fundamentals leading to
exotic phenomena. However, here goes a description to have heads up.
Then we should concentrate on the toroid itself, which makes this setup more
interesting. The illustration only shows one turn of the coil as a cross
section. To the right, you can see a perfectly wounded toroid, which makes it
easier to understand the underlying principle. Simply, it let the magnetic flux
cut the coil perpendicular on top and bottom sections of the coil, making only
those two surfaces are effective on any possible EM induction. Interestingly
enough, the setup (if done carefully) let the induced current balanced off since
both are on opposing directions. This is how the EMF or Back EMF is nullified.
The two magnets arranged in the rotor oriented opposite directions to obtain a
flux flow from North of one magnet to the South of the other. (Flux lines are
for the illustration purpose only; it does not represent actual flux densities
other than the directions).
So the obvious point to place the toroid is somewhere between the two magnets.
You can see the flux path is a bit away from the rotor surface, so this also
shows why the toroid and the rotor should have a gap, which should be fined
tuned to have more flux cutting through it. The requirement is to have as much
as flux directing through the toroid.
Thus far it is evident, provided that;
1) To magnets are identical
2) Coil is wounded perfectly on toroid (single or multi-layer)
the optimal position for the toroid is exactly vertically center to the magnets.
Horizontal position is dependent on magnetic power and material characteristics.
But somewhere a little away from the rotor (not very close to it).
But we normally end up winding our toroids less than perfect, with overlapping
turns just like the one pictured here, from Naudin's setup. This is alright,
and nothing sets you away from the goal, but it makes you do some extra work to "tune to the sweet spot", meaning, vertical and horizontal position to
nullify EMF/BEMF can be offset to the exact middle. With a little bit of
patience and the luxury of a good oscilloscope can get you there for sure.
Cancelling EMF/BEMF is inherited to this type of configuration, just that we
need to carefully position to compensate less-than-perfect torodial coil winds.
It is important to understand there is still another back EMF component present
in the setup, coming through the collapsing magnetic field caused by the
switching of current through the coil. This can be eliminated with bifilar wound
coil, which is the standard practice on toroids used in RF applications.
Hystorisis can also affect the performance, but can be reduced by selecting
proper material for magnetic core.
Magnetic attraction motor
Let's keep the toroid aside for a while and pay our attention to the rotation,
where movements always make fun to look at (than solid state).
Toroid core is essentially a high-permeable magnetic core (remember, high
permeable means low in reluctance to flux, like low resistance to electrical
current), which attracts magnets. It only concentrates flux, but wont align its
poles permanently. If we take only the toroid core (without wires winded), it is
easy to visualize the attraction taking place. Please take a note, torodial
position does not hinder the attraction, but can influence the attraction force.
(Keeping it horizontally and vertically positioned for nullifying EMF/BEMF
should be the goal, not to maximize the attraction)
When the flux channels through high-permeable material (our torodial core),
concentration of flux can be felt to hand, in terms of a great force. In the
motor setup, it actually holds the magnets in front of toroid firmly, without
let it passing by.
Also note that the toroid's orientation. It is not a coincident having it
horizontal, but to facilitate all the principals in its geometry. In this setup,
turning the toroid to any other direction would diminish one or more key
principles, vanishing the exotic results we are after.
Magnetic gating effect in toroid
Thus far we know the configuration let the magnets attracted to the toroid on
its own. Now the trick is to overcome its force, just as the magnet approaches.
If we withdraw the toroid precisely as magnets approaches, precisely enough, the
kinetic energy let the magnet pass (as it was not there) and attracted naturally
to the next toroid. If we keep withdrawing and placing back each toroid (in quad
configuration), we can sustain motion. This is another key to understanding the
Luckily, the torodial coil is a special kind of animal, which concentrates
magnetic flux within the core itself (no outside radiation or interference).
Enough coils winded and having right amount of voltage and current applied, the
core get saturated to a point where permeability drops significantly (high
reluctance) which resists further flux going through it. Simply put, the core no
longer attracted to magnets. Another key to overall phenomenon is this
saturation point in toroid. Please refer to naudin's simple experiments to
understand this key concept. Now we have a better way to withdrawing the toroid
when the magnets approaches, that is to saturate the core precisely at the
point. This is the process of flux gating.
1) No observable EMF/Back EMF this is due to the coil arrangement on toroid
which expose to the perpendicular magnetic flux, nullifying net resultant
current on the coil.
2) Sweet spot due to the inconsistencies of hand-winded coil on toroids
makes it less than perfect cross-sections exposed to magnetic flux. Objective is
to adjust vertically to nullify net resultant current through the coils (no EMF/back
3) Spin at high RPMs this is due to the absence of back EMF which generally
governs and controls the rotation speed on a traditional motor. Here, only
limiting factor is the mechanical friction, and switching (gating) frequency
possible at electronics.
4) Motion independence from toroid current rotational movement is achieved
by magnetic attraction only. No current is consumed for making the mechanical
move. Current is only consumed to saturate the toroid core, making it low
permeable to cancel attraction at the precise point.
5) Speed/Rev independence from toroid current same as above. There is no
magnetic coupling between toroid coil and magnets, thus input current is not
related to the motion speed, torque or direction.
6) Load on pick-up coils does not affect input current The rotor movement is
totally independent of input current. Thus, any load applied to it does not
affect input side of the setup. It can be a mechanical toque load, or coil
pick-up load. Input to out-put super isolation tempt us to think on the lines of
COP>1, but still more tests to be done confirming if any.
In this setup, input power is consumed ONLY for saturation of torodial core,
which is a totally dependent on toroid material characteristics, input current,
voltage, and coil properties. These things can be improved in isolation, to
consume less power at input section. Out-put can be either mechanical torque or
electromagnetic pickups (dynamo) utilizing the rotational movement of magnets,
also can be developed and optimized in isolation. This super isolation makes
Orbo and its variants remarkable and deserves academic attention. Free energy or
not, these devices and principles can lead us to making super efficient motors
and generators in near future, consuming far more less energy. Cutting down 20%
of power demand on traditional air-condition motor can effectively cut down on
carbon footprint and greenhouse gasses. Thinking on these lines along motivates
anybody to pay some respect to the presented technology.
If you understood the presentation so far, I am sure I can be learned from you
from now on. It's just a matter of thinking of other possible configurations
minimizing input power and maximizing the output. It all drill-down to different
geometry. However, exercising brain alone will not work, but actual build
experience, and testing with bare metal will give you the essence of it at no
In fact, if you are an enthusiast on these subjects, and followed "free
energy" or affiliate titles throughout, then I am sure you can recall many
similar devices came on your way. And also you are now in a position to dissect
and describe some of these devices, if they were so alien and extraordinary for
you in the first place.
This is the last part of the article, where I am going to put forward the
possibility of going solid state utilizing same principles discussed so far. As
an example, Naudin has already taken the first steps with his 2SGen.
In the rotor variant, moving magnet is always there for our convenience, so
placing a pick-up coil is all it needed to cut the flux and generate some
current. In solid state version, we don't have moving parts, but still a
fluctuating flux is needed cutting a secondary coil inducing current.
This flux change is achieved through a pulse circuit. It can be a simple pulse
circuit or a complicated PWM (pulse width modulation) circuit. In a PWM, duty
cycle can be adjusted to make different measurements and finding "sweet-spots", which is essential in a research/test setup. There are many
resources in the net making a simple PWM, so nothing more to it is described
A traditional transformer already utilizes this fluctuating flux field
generating power on secondary coil. So there is nothing significant about it.
The significance comes in the geometry where EMF/back EMF naturally suppressed.
To the right, you see Naudin's 2SGen V3, as published in his site. Now, even
without having a diagram to assist, you should be able to visualize the flux
map. Again, the objective is to have toroid coil's electromagnetism stays
separated (not coupled) from the secondary coil. This comes without an effort,
since toroid by definition concentrate all magnetic flux inside the core.
Flux fluctuation is achieved through magnetic gating only. Flux is supplied
indefinitely by the magnets attached. power supplied to the torodial coil is
used to change the permeability of the core, and nothing more. Secondary coil
cuts through by the flux change from the magnets, gated through the toroid.
For making things simpler, here goes an illustration of the same setup.
By looking at this, you will easily realize this is not the optimal setup
utilizing our knowledge thus far. But still, this allows flux gating, EMF/Back
EMF reduction, input to output isolation etc. making it a good candidate for
solid state unit.
Following configurations are some of the possibilities, which either have seen
elsewhere or pure concepts of mine. Those who has the capacity to fabricate and
experiment; these can be good starting point.
This concludes the article, and hope the reader now have a fair understanding on
the principles of these working prototypes, and more importantly the knowledge
to come up with more efficient geometries and configurations.
Authored by Kavee
Some of the images are taken from internet sites publically available.
Credit is stated where deemed necessary. Respective trademarks and patents
honored. Unless otherwise noted, this document contains author's independent
views or original ideas. Everything published here is for the betterment of
community, towards making awareness of new technologies etc. Author takes no
responsibility on damages caused by misinterpreting or using anything published
# # #
On May 12, 2010 7:59 PM Mountain, Kaveendra (slt) replied to Sean
McCarthy's comment above as follows:
I thought it is worth mentioning something regards to Seans comment.
Magentic Flux Gating is to change flux direction (channel), in a magnetic circuit, by means of changing permeability, providing alternate low reluctant path, or influencing by stronger field. It also refer when a flux is abruptly stopping (boundary) without letting it flow on normal path, again by means of above mentioned methods etc.
Secondly, I have not mentioned about SS Orbo any ware in my article (frankly, I have not even seen it yet). If I implied SS Orbo, that is unintentional. In solid state version, my reference is only with 2SGen by JLN. And also worth mentioning I was refereeing to the Orbo replication done by JLN, not necessarily the Steorn Orbo in point comparison. I humbly believe both rotary versions are similar, according to the publically available information.
Lastly, the purpose of the article is simply to understand the exciting results observed (no EMF/BEMF, input to output energy decoupling etc.). All credit in this regard should go to Steorn and JLN, in total.
- - - -
On May 12, 2010 9:13 PM Mountain, Kaveendra (slt) added:
Sean only commented on the 2SGen, on which I have only allocated a very small space in my article. I also believe 2SGen is not the optimal setup, which needs improvements. Simple domain rotation is not what we are after, but the phenomena on Torodial coils, at the saturation (or near saturation) point. Again this is not exotic (surely exciting), but gross physics, with cleaver setup of different geometries.
Worth mentioning, I havent compared SS Orbo with 2SGen anywhere in my article (sorry to see Sean has missed the point). Interested to know about SS Orbo, who replicated SS Orbo, or where it was demonstrated so far with measurable FE output.
* * * *
On May 13, 2010 2:02 AM, Sean CLaNZeR, one of the most respected
replicators in the world, and a key player under NDA with Steorn:
At the moment I have moved away from Steorn and the SKDB and I am no longer involved with replicating their claims.
Over the last 3 years behind the scenes in the SKDB we have gone from Stop Start Orbo to PM-Orbo to E-Orbo and now SS-Orbo.
I spent a lot of time over the years trying to replicate PM-Orbo (Permanent Magnet) with no success of a self runner, then I put a huge amount of time and money into the E-Orbo (Electromagnetic) which never showed a gain.
The latest replication I did was on Steorn's SS-Orbo (Solid State) and I logged a lot of data using a PC scope.
Instantly after following Steorns design and finishing the build the scope shots and data were coming out the same as Steorns.
They claim this anomaly within the data shows a gain and if this is indeed a gain, then it is actually very easy for others to replicate.
The SKDB area where the long time members reside is seperate from the new paying community, so I have no idea how far they have gone with the Orbo Technology but
I know in the area where I was, that there have been no self sustaining replications of
I will not go into the reasons I left the SKDB, but lets just say I find Steorn's ways of working with members very frustrating as do many others.
So back onto public claims for me, starting with Bob
Boyce's Hex Controller.
* * * *
On May 13, 2010 8:12 AM Mountain, Paul Lowrance <email@example.com>
First of all, congratulations to Steorn. My "Tiny Orbo Replication
4" has clearly shown excess energy. Total input was 180 mW where 170 mW of
that went to joule heating due to electrical wire resistance, which comes to 10
mW for the motor. The output from one pickup coil was 280 mW. Also, I would take
a guesstimate that "Tiny Orbo Replication 4" produced ~ 2 watts of
heat from bearing and air drag alone.
Steorn's claims are legit.
Regarding the list from Kavee article:
#1 #3 are definitely pluses.
#4 I dont get because in my replications the magnetic core permeability
changes as the magnet moves closer. IMO, one *huge* plus for the Tiny Orbo
Replications is for the cores permeability to increase as the magnet gets
closer, and decrease as the magnet gets farther away.
#5 is correct in regards to joule heating losses in the toroid current. The
energy that goes into inductance increases with rpm, but my measurements show
that nearly 100% of that energy can be captured back. So for the most part,
Id say #5 is correct. In my Tiny Orbo Replication 4″ the device was
spinning at over 17 thousand rpms, which I guesstimate to produce ~ 2 watts
of heat just from bearing and air drag, and there was 170 mW losses in joule
heating, and the pickup coil was producing 280 mW, yet the total input into coil
(less joule heating) was only 10 mW.
#6 More pickup load equates to more motor drag, and the motor *will* slow
down, which will effect the #5 above. In the Steorn demo the decrease in motor
speed was a small amount.
* * * *
Turned Down NASA Replicator Offer
On May 12, 2010 9:14 PM Mountain, Pete Collins wrote:
Subject: Steorn Not interested in validating Orbo w/ NASA
Hi Sterling, I made numerous offers w/ Sean McCarthy to have Orbo validated and the results published publicly by NASA.
Sean said he was interested initially and has now ignored any of my followups.
The two individuals from NASA are:
1. Mike Nelson - Liquid Propulsion Engineer, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, supports Shuttle launches and development of new launch vehicles
2. Ken House - "Ken is an electrical engineer. He is uniquely qualified to test electric motors because he mentored under Frank Nola, one of the most prolific NASA inventors in the field of DC motors of all time. Frank actually made improvements on some of Tesla's orginal designs. How many people do you know that can say that? At one time, Frank held the most patents at the Marshall Space Flight Center. One of his patents for something called "The Power Factor" completely revolutionized the way that electric motors used in all kinds of appliances around the world were made. Frank retired on the royalties that he made from the "power factor" alone. He's living down in Florida near West Palm Beach today. Ken trained under this guy. He knows electric motors backward and forward. If that doesn't qualify Ken then nothing does."
* * * *
Paul Offers his OU Orbo Replication for NASA Testing
On May 13, 2010 11:23 AM Mountain; Paul Lowrance wrote:
Regarding the comment from Pete Collins, tell him that I would be more than
happy to put together a "Tiny Orbo Replication" that clearly shows
excess energy if *NASA* can provide in writing what they would do to help this
information quickly become well known to the world. I'm not talking about
putting the results on some low traffic page on NASA.
* * * *
I Can Dee Why Orbo Declined NASA Offer
After several emails back and forth between Paul and Pete, Paul wrote:
I appreciate the reply, but IMO Mike's reply clarifies everything and
explains why Steorn lost interest in spending time or resources on this. Mike
clarified that it's an "informal look", and that it's "our spare
I have no rights to the "Tiny Orbo Replication," which should be
clear in the name, as it contains the word "Orbo." I'm not interested
in shipping out a "Tiny Orbo Replication" device for my own
benefit [...]. Presently my time is spent on my own solid-state device,
which has shown excess energy.
Although, if Mike or anyone within the Los Angeles county, California, wishes
to test the "Tiny Orbo Replication," then I'd love to take the time to
meet where they can analyze it until their hearts are content, but it's not
going to be mailed ending up who knows where without any written agreement
assuring me what will come of it.
Mike seems very clear that he or NASA is not interested in signing any
agreement. I've been down this road too many times. [...]
Also, if Mike or anyone wants to replicate the "Tiny Orbo Replication
4," then they're more than welcome to see the replication web page for a
* * * *
Censorship and Silence from Steorn
On May 12, 2010 10:41 AM Mountain; Mary Yugo wrote:
(caveat: Mary Yugo is a perpetual skeptic of all free energy
claims, and often appears as a paid disinformant)
Saw your piece on Steorn and Naudin.
I wanted to point out that Steorn closed their public forum without notice or comment. This is hardly what a successful company with a dramatic new product does. And, far as I know, Sean has not answered any questions about Orbo on Youtube or any of Steorn's social media sites for more than 6 weeks.
Second, if SS-Orbo has been, as Sean told you, replicated, nobody knows who did it. Also, the so-called demo Sean refers to has not been commented upon anywhere I know of so what actually happened there is unknown. There are no public measurements on SS-Orbo and those on E-Orbo that were shown on videos from the Waterways Visitor Centre are incompetent and meaningless. There is no credible evidence whatever that Steorn has ever properly tested any product of theirs and no evidence they have ever produced overunity with any of them.
If anyone wants to discuss Steorn, there are two public forums where they can do this freely without censorship. Both require a brief and non-intrusive membership application which is usually accepted without delay. The most used is at:
and the backup forum is at:
- - - -
Nobody -- not the press, not any large company -- has published any show of interest in Steorn's supposed technology.
And finally, Steorn is years behind in filing required corporate financial reports in
* * * *