I have built a Hubbard Coil with 9 ferrite cores. Eight in serie
as input and the central core as output. I used litzwire and the effectivity was 67%
with the frequency of 174,925 KHz. I have decided to give the Hubbard Coil a second
chance, since I have read the patentinformation from
Paul M. Brown
Apparatus for Direct Conversion of Radioactive Decay Energy to Electrical Energy
US Patent 4,835,433 and the
William N. Barbat
Self-Sustaining Electric-Power Generator Utilizing Electrons of Low Inertial Mass to Magnify Inductive Energy
US Patent Application 2007/0007844.
They are variation of
Alfred M. Hubbard’s Atmospheric Power Generator.
Alfred Hubbard. At Portage Bay on Lake Union,
Seattle, Washington in America, Alfred Hubbard, an acquaintance of Nikola Tesla,
demonstrated in 1919 a self-powered electricity generator design. The generator was
about 14 inches (350 mm) tall and 11 inches (280 mm) in diameter. It powered a 35
H.P. electric motor, which pushed an 18-foot boat which contained no batteries,
continuously around the bay for several hours. This demonstration was witnessed by
thousands and ended because the wiring was beginning to overheat.
said that the cable used contained seven strands of 0.09-inch (2.286 mm) diameter.
Each of those strands would be able to carry 12 amps and so if this is correct, the
cable had a current-carrying capacity of about 84 amps. The diameter of the wire
including the insulation was said to be 0.34 inches (8.5 mm). The inner core was said
to be made of a pipe containing 16 iron rods with 43 turns of wire around it, which if
correct, would suggest 43 turns in 14 inches or 3 turns per inch, implying a
cylindrical coil with the turns side by side, touching each other.
However, a great deal of misleading information, not to mention a good deal of
speculation has been spread around concerning the Hubbard design, which Alfred took
three years to develop. Several years after the demonstration, when Hubbard was
employed by the Radium Company, he said that radium was used in the device, which is
something which I personally, find very hard to believe, and strongly suspect that
Hubbard was persuaded to say that by his employers who were selling radium at that
Hubbard made a sketch of one of his smaller generators which was used
for ordinary household electrical appliances and that showed a very simple design
which had eight cylindrical primary coils each of which was wound on a solid iron bar
and connected in series. These primary coils surrounded a slightly larger secondary
coil of some 35 turns wound around a hollow tube filled with metal bars or wires
(presumably of soft iron). This smaller device was about six inches (150 mm) tall
(maximum wire diameter 4 mm including the insulation) and about five inches (125 mm)
in diameter. Each core had only one layer of thick insulated wire and not many turns
I understand that when a patent was applied for, the patent
application was seized and a spurious “Of National Security Importance” order slapped
on it, acting as an unlawful gag order on Hubbard, prohibiting him from ever
developing, using, showing or selling it or anything akin to it. The US Patent Office
is a privately owned commercial company, and while they will probably be using the
design themselves, they certainly have no intention of ever allowing the public to
have access to it as energy freedom is a major step towards complete freedom.
Consequently, we know next to nothing about Hubbard’s successful design.
The general arrangement might have been something vaguely like this:
Since the suddenly passing of the
free energy legend
John Bedini, Shortly after he introduced the
BEDINI RPX SIDEBAND GENERATOR I have
decided to opensource all my ideas about the
As you can see this is the Coutier Coil and the difference from the
Hubbard Coil is that the Coutier Coil has a closed magnetic path on the top and
bottom like an ordinary low frequency transformer with an E and I core. Because
soft iron conducts a
magnetic field 50,000 times more than air. It follows that the effectivity of the
Hubbard Coil can be increased by having squared soft iron rods covering the ends of
the round rods at the top and bottom of the Hubbard Coil.
I think that Alfred Hubbard got the design of his Coil from Nikola Tesla patent of
the rotating field of the
TESLA PATENT 381,968 ELECTRO-MAGNETIC MOTOR.
Alfred Hubbard claimed that the Hubbard Coil worked with atmospheric electricity which
is another name for high voltage. Maybe the round rods had two coils - one low voltage
and one high voltage with a sparkgap to limit the voltage as in the
Another way to power the Hubbard Coil is to use a
constant current source,
and connect it to the primary of rod 1. Connect secondary of rod 1 to primary of rod
2. Connect the secondary of rod 2 to primary of rod 3 and so on. Then you can connect
the secondary of rod 8 to the primary of another Hubbard Coil.
In Joseph Cater’s book “The Awesome Life Force”
he attempts to explain the theory of its operation, but it must be clearly understood
that what Cater says is just speculation on his part as Hubbard’s actual design was
never disclosed publicly.
What Cater says is certainly plausible, and even if it is not Hubbard’s design, it is
worth investigating and experimenting with. The mechanism put forward by Cater is
based on the well-known and widely accepted graph of the magnetisation of soft iron
versus applied levels of magnetic force. This graph is highly non-linear and the
central section of the graph rises steeply, indicating that there is a considerable
increase in the magnetisation of the iron for relatively little increase in energy
Cater stresses that the input waveform should be pulsating DC. The method of applying
pulsing DC is then, almost the same as for the Clemente Figuera design shown in
chapter 3, with an offset base level of DC current flow which needs to be maintained
at all times.
Here is the magnetisation graph for soft iron:
Fig. 29 shows a graph of the magnetisation of an iron core plotted against ampere
turns per unit length. The term “ampere turns” is the number of turns of the coil per
unit length of the coil multiplied by the number of amps of current flowing through
The steep section of the curve appears to start at around 3.5 Tesla, and so, a
constant DC current in the magnetising (Hubbard primary) coil needs to provide that
level of magnetisation at all times, and the applied pulsing DC half-sinewave waveform
applied on top of that and since the induced EMF in a coil is directly proportional
to the rate of change of magnetic flux, it follows that the higher the frequency of
this sine wave supply, the better. Using a ramp waveform might well be more effective.
Normal working transformers have ampere-turns which are well below this critical
point. The additional EMF induced in the coils by the magnetisation of the iron
offsets the natural inductive impedance of the coils. This is why transformers have
such a high degree of efficiency. If any material other than iron or special steel
were used for the core, the efficiency would drop significantly. Hubbard used part of
the output power to provide the input power, and so he only needed to provide input
power for less than a second to get the device running. The power supply might well be
of this nature:
Here, instead of letting the high frequency rectified sine wave (or ramp generator
signal) reach zero volts, and additional DC current supply is maintained, and while
the signal generator pulses add to the overall voltage applied to the device, the
voltage is never allowed to reach zero.
There is possibly another factor which could contribute to the success of the Hubbard
device. At that time, the only insulated wire available had thick and heavy
insulation. This means that adjacent turns of wire in the coil were separated by a
distance equal to twice the thickness of the insulation. Consequently, the gap
resulted in a cancellation of magnetic effects produced by electrons flowing in the
wire. Since inertia is dependent on the ability to generate a magnetic field, the
inertial properties of the electrons would be almost nullified.
There is an optimum distance between the wires which would produce the maximum effect.
It seems likely that the thick insulation on Hubbard’s wire produced this optimum
distance. Most of the resultant magnetic field was that which encircled both wires and
that would be the weaker part of the field. This means that a relatively low EMF could
accelerate a larger number of electrons to a high velocity during a very short period
of time. As the electrons leave the coil, inertia returns. This would result in a
backup of a high concentration of electrons in the coil. Since electrostatic repulsion
is not affected, electrons would be ejected from the coil at a high velocity despite
their increased inertia. This would produce an output of both high voltage and high
Joseph Caters Version of the Hubbard Generator.
Although containing conflicting information, there is what appears to be an
implementation of the Hubbard coil system, or perhaps a very closely related device
from Joseph H. Cater. As usual, information on it is limited and not particularly
clear, so the following is just my attempt to piece together some information from
different sources. Much of this information comes from a document which has Geoff
Egel’s name on it and although it seems likely that Geoff is quoting some other
source, my thanks goes to him for sharing what we have here. The diagrams give the
names of various minor websites none of which exist any longer and so these have been
removed as they have no useful purpose any longer. Here is an original diagram from
As it seems to me that there are many conflicting details in this information, I am
presenting it here in pretty much the same form in which it reached me. You will
notice that the composite central coil is now presented as the secondary rather than
the primary. It should be stressed that Hubbard never disclosed his design publicly
and so this, and similar information elsewhere, has to be considered to be guesswork.
The Self-powered Generator of André Coutier.
Some twelve years after Hubbard’s public demonstration, on 12th January 1933, André
Coutier was awarded patent
FR739458 which is entitled
Self-generating Electrical Generator. This design is so similar to the Hubbard device
that it seems very likely that it IS the Hubbard device under a different name.
The apparatus is composed of a closed magnetic circuit (Fig.1)
consisting of one soft iron central core coil, surrounded by a number of smaller
diameter soft-iron cored coils. While the diagram shows six coils, that is not a fixed
number. The smaller diameter coils have the same number of wire turns wound around
them and so each of those small coils produces the same current as that which flows in
the coil wound around the large inner coil. The cross-sectional core areas of the
satellite coils is set to be the same as the cross-sectional area of the central coil
The overall design is very simple as shown here:
According to the patent, each of the surrounding coils has an output current equal to
that of the central coil. So, if a current of say, 1 amp, is fed to the central coil,
then each of the six surrounding coils will have an output current of 1 amp. As the
six output coils are wired in parallel, the output current should be 6 amps, giving a
COP value of 6 or if you prefer, an electrical efficiency of 600%.
No system is 100% efficient as there are some losses from the wire resistance, the
heating of the wire, eddy currents flowing sideways in the iron cores, etc. in each
coil. So, the overall efficiency will be less than 600% but the overall energy gain
will still be substantial. The voltage remains essentially unchanged but please
remember that as the current increases, so must the wire diameter in order to carry
that increased current.
Coutier uses three of these coil sets as part of his arrangement and he then takes off
a controlled amount from the output to provide the needed input for the system:
The output is alternating current. Coutier chooses to use an isolating transformer in
his feedback control which feeds the necessary input current to his oscillator
circuit. He also uses a mechanical vibrator as his oscillator as way back in 1933
there were no readily available semiconductors. His overall circuit diagram uses
infinity symbols to indicate Alternating Current and it looks like this:
An attempted translation of the patent text is:
The device consists of a closed magnetic circuit (fig. 1) consisting of one central
core of soft iron, in the shape of a cylinder. There are N similar satellite cores,
set parallel to the central core and placed in a circle around the central core.
The central core is an inductive coil with the number of turns required to achieve
saturation of the magnetic circuit with the chosen inductive current. Each of the
satellites coils has the same number of turns as there are in the central core coil.
Given the particular provision of the magnetic circuit, each of the satellite coils is
an isolated transformer and so the current induced in each of the satellite windings
has the same power as the central coil current. Thus, the unit produces a
multiplication of electrical energy. As the output energy exceeds the initial input
energy, we see immediately the opportunity to use some of the output energy to provide
the necessary input energy on a continuous basis.
The device used for the industrial model of the perpetual self-powered electricity
generator, established for use in industry, maritime and river navigation, and
traction on railways, is shown schematically in Fig.2.
Three multiplier devices (there can be any number of these devices) are combined in
series, so that the core e of one circuit is powered by electricity from the combined
satellite circuits f, of the previous device. The satellite coils of set 1 feed the
central coil of set 2. Similarly, the set 2 satellite circuits feed the central coil
of set 3.
Each unit with 6 satellites (there can be any number of satellites) determine the
factor of power amplification of each set, and in this case it is 6. With the three
coil sets shown, the power amplification is 6 x 6 x 6 = 216 times the input power.
It is easy, using an output power tap and the rheostat h, to provide the energy
required as the input current. The coil i is magnetically linked to coil j, as they
are mounted on the same core and they form a 1-to-1 ratio transformer. The output of
coil j is used to operate a buzzer k whose AC coil output is used to feed the central
coil e of the first power multiplier circuit.
The device also includes two batteries l and m - which are intended to deal with any
eventuality. One battery can be charged while the other is available for use if there
is an accidental stop of the generator.
Multiplication of electrical energy carried out by induction of satellite windings,
grouped in a circle around an inductive central winding. The sum of the
cross-sectional areas of the satellite cores is equal to the cross-sectional area of
the central core. Self-generating perpetual electrical energy is achieved by taking
energy from the last multiplier and using it to provide the input current.
This video claim it shows the bi-toroidal topology transformer, but in reality it show
The André Coutier Transformer
with one input coil in the middle and two satellite coils, to the left and right.
Since the suddenly passing of the free energy legend
John Bedini, Shortly after he introduced the
BEDINI RPX SIDEBAND GENERATOR I have
decided to opensource all my ideas about the Coutier Coil. As you know the area of the
center coil of the Coutier Coil is equal to the sum of the areas of the satellite
coils. My idea is to do the opposite, making the center coil area, half of any
satellite coils. The primary will act as an activation coil only and the energy in the
Coutier coil will bounce between the satellite coils like the
Thane C Heins
bi-toroidal topology transformer.
back to linkpage
read and sign my guestbook