On Wednesday I heard good news from Steorn.
They let me know that my ORBO OCube was finally being shipped to me here in Australia — hooray! Well….not so fast with the celebrations. Within hours of consuming three times my own bodyweight in vintage Krug, Steorn had apparently emailed the following out to those who purchased an OCube:
‘We have shipped two ocubes and have received reports back that the lithium ion battery in the devices is charging to somewhere in the region of 8V, which is well in excess of the safe level of 4.2V. As a result, we have had to halt any further shipments while we address this. We are currently testing a new configuration with a battery charge controller and these tests will take several more days. Once we are satisfied that the units are operating as they should we will provide another update concerning shipping etc’
So all was lost? Not really, as you shall see — for this story has a disgustingly pleasant resolution. For the god of Overunity did witness the said OCube injustice and did make up for this by sending forth into the land of kangaroos and Hugh Jackman – an OPhone instead!
So — I am currently waiting on delivery of a prototype OPhone with the OCube to follow soon after (once Steorn are happy the OCubes are operating normally).
I plan on doing a fair bit of testing when both the OPhone and OCube arrive. I’ll keep you posted.
In other news…
An OCube powering a bank of LEDs through a USB power meter.
Meanwhile a crowd-funded OCube has arrived with eCatWorld owner Frank Acland, who has been busy putting the ORBO through it’s paces. He did note however that Steorn explained his was not shipped with a battery, but with a 5 farad super capacitor. Steorn did say that they had some initial problems with shipping due to the regulations around shipping products with Lithium batteries, and no wonder when you see some of the issues around lithium batteries.
Frank’s findings seem to be in line with what was expected of the OCube; Straight out-of-the-box, the OCube was initially powering a bank of LEDs for some considerable amount of time and this no doubt depleted the accumulated power stored in the battery capacitor. Since then, and (again as expected), the OCube needs to be left alone for some time for the charge to build back up again.
More recently the focus has been on getting the back cover off the OCube to be able to directly measure the power being produced by the twin ORBO Power Packs — Steorn’s instructions were that opening it might require ‘mild agression’ — this however may be more difficult than first thought. Many people will remember Steorn saying that the OCube units were potted (filled with special resin to protect the internal components from moisture). If this unit is indeed ‘potted’ then it may be that the back cover will never come off.
My guess is that only the Orbo Battery (not the entire device) is potted. Potting the whole device would increase its shipping weight considerably. The lithium battery or supercapacitor and the USB port would not seem to need moisture protection.
Supercapacitor seems like a better way to go for this application, given some of the the issues with shipping lithium batteries. One hopes the OPhone doesn’t run into the same shipping issues.
If the Orbo Battery.Powerpack is indeed putting out unpredictable voltage levels, a charge controller seems like a very good idea.
I agree with Steorn’s decision to hold back on the delivery until the issue is resolved. The safety issues around lithium batteries need to be resolved.
You agree?
A company ships a finished product, and within a short time its core function is discovered to be broken – and it took only two customers to notice this?
Why didn’t Steorn notice this? What kind of product testing have they? I read that they’ve had over 20 million Euros of investment. For that money, I would expect them to have a competent test lab, putting sample Ocubes through various trials – as well as a detailed stress test procedure for every unit they ship.
But they didn’t notice the voltage was DOUBLE the safe level? This product doesn’t DO anything except output a voltage! What else is there to test – that the paint is orange?
Gentlemen, there is only one question in my mind. I am sure that the investors and shareholders will never get their money back; that’s the whole point of Steorn, if you ask me.
My question to you is; do you expect to get YOUR money back, your refund for a failed device, before the company folds?
It might be that people need to buy their own li-ion battery locally and inserted it into the case.
I suspect the original design includes a charge controller but may be incorrectly configured for 2 cells instead of 1 cell.
I agree with Dan, the potting was for just the orbo battery, not the whole unit.
Getting the back off might mean using a bit more force – tapping a larger thread into the 4 lid screw holes, sinking 4 bolts down to just before the main case holes through block of plastic with a handle and pull it apart.
Or use some kitchen knives/spudgers and lever it open.
I think a Ultra capacitor is only useful if the DC-DC boost circuit that provides the 5v output is able to drain the 5F cap down to almost zero voltage.
At the moment I suspect it shuts off at 3.3V to protect the li-ion battery that is mean to be there instead.
Potted… I am sure it will come apart
Today I posted a question for Steorn, on this Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/Orbo-217496297671/
I politely asked why they would risk the existence of their company on the success of their products (the phone and the Cube) when it would be much easier to license the power pack to firms that already make phones etc.
(These products are clunky, feature-poor and expensive. They cannot succeed commercially. And yet Steorn’s financial accounts, according to one source, state that the firm may close down if these products are NOT profitable.)
It may interest you to know that the question was not answered. Instead it was deleted.
[[ I politely asked why they would risk the existence of their company on the success of their products (the phone and the Cube) when it would be much easier to license the power pack to firms that already make phones etc. ]] Well, to license anything as radical as Orbo you at least need to have done due diligence in terms of extensive field testing, which is essentially the current phase.
[[ These products are clunky, feature-poor and expensive. They cannot succeed commercially. ]] They’re not intended as commercial products, only as proof-of-concept devices that will provide a broad testing base and capital for further R&D, and may become quite valuable collectors’ items for those taking the risk.
[[ And yet Steorn’s financial accounts, according to one source, state that the firm may close down if these products are NOT profitable. ]] Steorn have taken huge risks and need to realize a profit on these items — how else can they attract further capital? So of course their future is tied to these initial Orbo “demo” products.
[[ It may interest you to know that the question was not answered. Instead it was deleted.]] I can understand that. Do you think they’re not entirely familiar with the points you raise? Success hinges on good will, perseverance and diligent problem-solving; having to divert otherwise-useful energy into bucking skeptical headwinds would not be fruitful for them.
I don’t quite agree with you.
For one thing, I believe that questions SHOULD be answered, if you’re burning through other people’s money AND looking for approval and recognition from the public. Don’t bite the hand you’re trying to eat from.
I once questioned Microsoft in much the same way, and got back a long, polite detailed reply from a senior engineer. He didn’t consider it a waste of time. And he was right too – I could have been a journalist.
“field testing”, if it is a necessary task that benefits Steorn, should not cost the testers so VERY much money. Why are they paying 10 times the price of similar products, to do Steorn a favour?
Also, they should be enrolled formally in a test program, with forms to fill and results to measure. I don’t see any sign of that.
If this is “field testing” then it looks as bad and amateurish. Which would be understandable in an underfunded startup firm but is NOT tolerable in a decade-old firm that has sucked up so much investment money.
Now, Steorn seems to be betting their EXISTENCE on the COMMERCIAL success of: a very primitive phone; and a “charger” that will take decades to repay its cost!
Do you think they could succeed in the marketplace? No you don’t, because you called them “proof of concept”.
So…we both believe that Steorn is about to die!
Why is it your business to worry so much about Steorn’s success or failure? Have you been personally harmed by them?
Update : I now seem to be blocked from posting any comments on the Orbo Facebook page.
I repeat: all that I did was politely ask an important, relevant question. These people are not their own masters, they are running the show with investors’ cash. I believe they should answer questions.
I have an idea.
Suppose that Steorn’s investors were to tell the IDA that Steorn poses a danger to Ireland’s reputation.
I mean, imagine if the world’s media were to spread an amusing story of an “Irish perpetual motion device” that doesn’t work? In my opinion we are only weeks away from that possibility.
Ireland’s image as a center of technology development could be damaged – and the cost of repairing it could run into many millions. What does a global ad campaign cost?
So my idea is, have the Government buy out the shares, take over the company, recall and refund the products, and close the whole thing down slowly and quietly.
That might be the only way for the investors to recover their money. What do you think?
My idea is that we adopt a scientific stance; i.e., wait until the actual results are in. Doubt may be healthy, but cynicism, vigilantism and prejudicial opinions based on speculation are not science, and aren’t constructive.
” … imagine if the world’s media were to spread an amusing story of an “Irish perpetual motion device” that doesn’t work? …”
If in the long run Steorn fails to produce, it will fall on its own face with no help from outside. Besides, the kind of activity you’re suggesting may well have serious legal implications and is probably not advisable.
Please keep in mind that much of what we take for granted today was once considered absolutely, flat-out impossible. Also, please be aware that “perpetual motion” is your own characterization, not Steorn’s. They claim only that a particular type of electret can produce current in addition to voltage (as electrets have done since 1962 in condenser microphones).
Oh, no, on THAT point you are flat-out wrong.
If the “electret” maintains a current as well as a voltage, then it is doing work.
Such a thing is called a “perpetual motion machine of the first kind”. It doesn’t matter if there are moving parts; if it generates power from nowhere then it’s a “perpetual motion machine”.
Since there is no ‘motion’ as such perhaps not. I would say a better term might be an ‘overunity’ device, since it is producing more power out that in. And of course, there is the small fact that there is no known source for the energy, except for perhaps the Zero-Point Field.
” … If the “electret” maintains a current as well as a voltage, then it is doing work. “”
Why put quotes around “electret?” It’s a very well established and quite common thing.
But yes, in this case an electret, or something very close to it along the same lines, may be doing work.
” .. if it generates power from nowhere then it’s a “perpetual motion machine”… ”
But nobody has literally claimed that it’s actually generating power from nowhere.
Claiming “something from nothing” is one thing, and not fully understanding why something works is quite another.
If the Orbo battery works, it is obviously converting one form of energy to another. We may not yet understand that more obscure form of energy (it may be zero-point or something else), but our lack of understanding doesn’t render it impossible.
Scientists know all too well what many self-styled “skeptics” tend to forget: that the absence of a plausible mechanism does not forbid the existence of a phenomenon. If it did, there would have been no communicable diseases prior to the discovery of microbes and the sun would have given no light until we became aware of nuclear fusion.
Fortunately, reality isn’t bound by our theories about what’s possible and what’s not. Science is about theory catching up with reality, not the other way round.
I agree lets wait until we have some real scientific data, as they have so far provided no independently verified scientific data to suggest this works whatsoever.
But I don’t agree that in the meantime we should take the idea that it works on faith, however much we might want to believe that it does.
Asking us to believe they are harvesting energy from an unknown source or that the law of conservation of energy is wrong in some way and then consistently failing to provide verifiable proof while harvesting money from investors and now selling expensive sealed unit products to consumers that get delayed because of very basic design and build flaws around voltage regulation, is a big ask and we would be foolish not to be skeptical at this stage.
Happy to be proven wrong but some people seem happy to take a great deal on faith here.
On the bright side for those who bought one, if the oCube proves not to work and Orbo becomes a proven scam the devices will probably still have some value as collectors items.
Dan:
I put quotes around “electret” because Steorn’s alleged device does not meet the definition of the word. It’s not even “close”. Electrets are unusual but they don’t defy the laws of physics and they don’t do work.
Steorn are making an amazing, huge, astonishing claim here. It deserves critical appraisal. If they tell us it’s “like an electret” or “not perpetual motion”, they should know better and I have to wonder why they would say such things.
Anyway, you suggest that the device draws power from some unknown background source. Don’t judge it, you say, because you don’t understand it. And that is a valid comment.
But that possibility exists alongside two OTHER possibilities; that Steorn are wrong, or misleading us.
It would be extremely expensive for me to evaluate a Steorn power source, but I can evaluate Steorn’s behaviour. History contains many examples of firms that had a valid discovery to announce, and other firms that tried to fool us with evasion and lies because they had nothing.
In my opinion, Steorn’s behaviour matches the latter much more closely than the former.
Jeff:
You say it’s “perhaps not a perpetual motion machine” if there’s no motion?
If you would spend 2 minutes reading Wiki about “perpetual motion machines”, you would discover your error. Why do you think that the name of a thing contains all the information that you need? Did you assume that the musician Prince was actually a prince?
” … you suggest that the device draws power from some unknown background source. Don’t judge it, you say, because you don’t understand it. And that is a valid comment. ..”"
Thanks, David. To me, that’s the crux of it. It’s OK to be suspicious of claims that seem to challenge existing understandings, and it’s quite proper to test those claims rigourously to the extent possible. I just don’t think it’s fruitful to cross the line into declarative counterclaims until the initial claim has been properly vetted, which can take time. Claims and counterclaims are easy. Testing can be hard, and, as we have seen in other areas, can reveal unanticipated complexities and variables that then require further evaluation and understanding. For example, if a device is somehow drawing energy from the environment, is that energy uniformly distributed, or will that device’s performance vary from place to place? If so, what can we learn from that, and how can we then make the product’s performance more predictable?
” … But that possibility exists alongside two OTHER possibilities; that Steorn are wrong, or misleading us. ..”"
Quite so, and I have no quarrel with that. There have been some outright charlatans in the “free energy” sphere and also some innocent promoters of poorly tested concepts and devices.
” … It would be extremely expensive for me to evaluate a Steorn power source … ”
Maybe so, but none of us is obliged to evaluate it ourselves, as there will be plenty of others doing so, both empirically and analytically. I think we can be quite certain of that.
” … but I can evaluate Steorn’s behaviour. History contains many examples of firms that had a valid discovery to announce, and other firms that tried to fool us with evasion and lies because they had nothing. In my opinion, Steorn’s behaviour matches the latter much more closely than the former. “”
I can understand your feeling that way. But suspicion is not science, and there are many possible reasons for what we have seen; notably, the fact that this is Steorn’s first foray into the realms of overseas manufacturing and product distribution, which are worlds apart from their core expertise in R&D. The risks and learning curves there are steep and unforgiving, and missteps are virtually inevitable at the outset. Personally, I think it might have been a mistake for Steorn to have crossed the line into manufacturing, but I can also think of several quite valid reasons for them to have decided to take the risk. In any case my armchair opinions about this are worth no more than the opinions of any other outsiders. So we wait and watch.
This is NOT to declare that Orbo is as advertised. It is only to suggest that it is most sensible to be patient, fair, and scientifically evenhanded, and not cast aspersions or jump to conclusions until the dust has settled and the returns are in.
Thing that strikes me is that a charger or phone that size could have a very substantial primary lithium battery in it. If that were connected via a resistor to a smaller battery or supercap it would appear that the device recharged itself.
Not saying that IS what’s inside, but it’s a possibility that needs to be discounted.
An estimate of the physical volume of the device would give some idea of the maximum watt-hours it could hold if it was all battery, and that in turn would indicate at what point in longevity or number of recharges we can discount that as an explanation.
” … An estimate of the physical volume of the device would give some idea of the maximum watt-hours it could hold if it was all battery, and that in turn would indicate at what point in longevity or number of recharges we can discount that as an explanation …” ••••••• Simply weighing the device would put to rest any such suspicions. This would probably be easiest with the OPhone because presumably its housing is plastic and the weight of its electronics board is modest-to-negligible compared with a battery. •••••• As for the Cube, surely Steorn would be delighted to provide the weights of its various components and housing. In any case, with the Cube, if you can’t disassemble it, a constant load and sensitive voltage measurements should soon reveal what’s what. Even more simply, connect a parallel string of LED lights whose collective draw is just below the device’s rated continuous capacity and wait a month or two. ••••••• And finally, who in their right mind would release a claimed over-unity device that could easily be opened destructively if not otherwise? Surely, hordes of fire-breathing, militant debunkers would be the first to pool their lunch money so they could be the first to bust this “fraud.”
>> “who in their right mind would release a claimed over-unity device that could easily be opened destructively”
Perhaps somebody who has no concerns about future competition, because they plan to close down their company – as I outlined above.
” … >> “who in their right mind would release a claimed over-unity device that could easily be opened destructively”
Perhaps somebody who has no concerns about future competition, because they plan to close down their company – as I outlined above. …” •••••••• This might be a possibility, if one were blithely unconcerned about being sued by one’s investors and/or imprisoned for fraud. So I think one needs to take a step back and give the situation some evenhanded thought before making speculative or implied accusations. •••••• Personally, I would rather be patient and follow the dictates of the scientific method than be ruled by my prejudices or beliefs. If Steorn have tried to pull a fast one (as opposed to being merely unwise or inexperienced) then they would deserve the consequences. But, like thousands of their predecessors, they may also be on to something in spite of its seeming strangeness or impossibility. If we cannot allow for that, I think we should at least have the wisdom to keep our opinions in check until the pudding is actually served. •••••• We certainly don’t want to fall into the trap of behaving like the reactive minions of Organized Skepticism, whose methodologies tend more often to be faith-based than scientific. •••••• See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNzZ2TRmcmw
Dan…what are your thoughts on this now that ecat guys have made no progress in displaying any success in function of the device? How many more times will you let Steorn fool you? How many times now have they failed in total in the last 16yrs?
Hi, Kip… I don’t recall having made any comments here about e-cat. In any case, you seem to have misunderstood my previous remarks. For the record, I am neither defending nor condemning Steorn, as it is not for me to do either. In time, either Steorn’s claims will be validated or they won’t. That determination will presumably be made on a scientific and/or legal basis, not by outside observers for whom talk and opinions are cheap. If Steorn have been running a scam, they will be prosecuted in due course. If they have marketed a basically legitimate but prematurely released product, they may fail commercially, and perhaps deservedly so. But at the same time we cannot avoid the lessons of history that tell us knee-jerk skepticism based on “established knowledge” is quite often a fool’s errand. That same history also teaches us that many things we take for granted today failed innumerable times before they succeeded. So I think the better part of wisdom is to remain agnostic until we have some definitive –not merely speculative — information. •••• In any case I have not personally invested any money in Steorn or ordered either of its putative products, so I fail to understand how I might be being “fooled.” •••• As you may recall, one of Steorn’s online videos clearly shows the assembly of a demonstration ORBO battery: Their proprietary formulation is sandwiched between two sheets of allegedly identical metal, and a resulting current is measured across those electrodes by (as I recall), a DMM and a ‘scope. So either those metals were not in fact dissimilar (which is possible because we did not see them being cut from the same piece), or one piece was invisibly coated with a dissimilar metal, or some other subterfuge was afoot. On the other hand, the pattern of current rise did not conform to the that of a galvanic battery, so something else was apparently going on. •••• Even more to the point, these observations and speculations, and a thousand more, have absolutely no bearing on the truth of the matter one way or another. Your skepticism or mine will not change the outcome of things one iota. •••• For all we know, Steorn may have perfectly legitimate reasons for staying quiet at this time; i.e., waiting for enough feedback and independent testing to roll in to be able to support its claims robustly, and not wasting its time and resources swatting away interim speculations. There may be a dozen other possibilities that, as outsiders, we may not have remotely considered. •••• So there you have my outsiders’ opinions for what they may be worth.
so, we’re in march now. What is the news?
Pretty sure the news is that Steorn is a joke..
It’s almost April now.
Did you get a device?
Did it work?
Did you ask for a refund?
Did you get a refund?
Are you a real person or a Steorn shill?
Say something! The advertisements on this page won’t click themselves!
” … It’s almost April now.
Did you get a device?
Did it work?
Did you ask for a refund?
Did you get a refund? …”
•••••
These are all excellent questions.
••••••
“…Are you a real person or a Steorn shill?
Say something! The advertisements on this page won’t click themselves! …”
•••••
I can’t speak for anyone else, but if you were to address me in such a disrespectful manner I wouldn’t be especially motivated to respond.
People have invested their hard-earned money into this product. From reports elsewhere, it does not work. I think the investors deserve to hear all the “news” that was promised.
I think that printing the optimistic news, and then going silent when the bad news arrives, is not neutral. I think it is a tactic so favorable to Steorn that it cannot be called “independent” as the page banner claims.
Respect has to be earned, and disrespect can be earned also.
Hi, Dave…
As I understand it, the main problem reported above involved *excessive* voltage , not a lack thereof. But if you know something the rest of us don’t, please give us the specifics.
” …From reports elsewhere, it does not work …”
••••
Citations, please? “Elsewhere” is a big place!
••••
” … Respect has to be earned, and disrespect can be earned also. …”
••••
I agree absolutely that respect must be earned. But a lack of respect is one thing and aggressive expressions of personal disrespect are quite another, especially if one has not been personally harmed. If Steorn’s investors have been harmed or disadvantaged in any way, I agree that by all means they should speak up and give us the particulars. Do the devices simply produce no energy at all? Are there voltage-control or other technical issues? Manufacturing issues? Quality-control issues? Possible sabotage issues? Why focus on one possibility to the exclusion of all the others, when we just don’t know?
Well, thank you for lecturing me on politeness and good manners, but it doesn’t change the fact that this website went silent on February 11. Even if the promised device did not arrive, that is significant “news”.
” … Even if the promised device did not arrive, that is significant “news”. …”
••••
I agree absolutely, and I’m as curious as you are about what’s going on. So I googled “steorn delivery” and this page came up: http://dispatchesfromthefuture.com
According to these posts, Steorn seem to have embarrassed themselves and pissed people off by making premature promises (but we already know that). Whether this is a matter of deception, inexperience, Really Poor Judgment, sabotage, manufacturing issues, Murphy’s Law, plain old bad luck or something else we’ll have to wait and see. Unfortunately the ball is in their court, not ours.
Is anyone really surprised by this delays, failures, lack of evidence for objective examination and excuses are all Steorn has given us for years, will this change at this stage it’s a real act of faith to still believe they might have anything.
Only scammers argue about manners and politeness instead of addressing concerns.
“Products” that reportedly don’t work, “testers” who don’t post the reports they promised, and a company CEO reminding me of Mr. Bean… it’s been amusing!
But what was the point of it all?
I think we can answer that by looking at this very blog. No, not the announcements by Craig Brown, if he really exists (and if he does, I wonder why he lets his broken promises sit here for all to see?). Look instead at the sides and top of the blog. Look at the advertisements.
Internet advertisers are now very good at crafting ads for exactly the kind of people who read the page. And the ads that I see on this blog are all about…. financial investments.
To me, that suggests the whole Orbo fiasco was about taking money from investors.