Cookies-law

Cookies help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
http://www.overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please leave this website now. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

Poplamp

poplamp

CCTool

CCTool

LEDTVforSale

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

OverUnity Book

overunity principles book

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 82017
  • *Latest: heinnex

  • *Total Posts: 493244
  • *Total Topics: 14501
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 4
  • *Guests: 79
  • *Total: 83

Facebook

Author Topic: Confirmation of OU devices and claims  (Read 12588 times)

Offline tinman

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4895
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #45 on: November 12, 2017, 11:50:21 AM »
 author=Void link=topic=17491.msg512984#msg512984 date=1510482843]
 




Quote
Hi Tinman. If you charge a smaller capacitance cap to a much higher voltage, it still
takes current over time to charge that cap up. The higher you charge a capacitor,
the longer it is going to take to charge up unless something unusual is going on.
It wouldn't hurt to experiment with different total capacitance bank values though to see
what the impact is on performance.


Yes,i understand that,but a smaller value at a higher voltage would see more of the stored energy delivered to the battery.

I have three phases on the gen i am using,and so i can split each phase into pieces,and give us 3 different working voltage's,and so,we can try various size cap banks.

Quote
Batteries are weird because they are electro-chemical in nature and I think
in some cases their weird behavior can sometimes fool experimenters. However
if you leave a setup running steady for say 48 hours or so while drawing say 35 Watts or so
from the battery, and the loaded battery terminal voltage hasn't dropped at all, then you
may really have something. It is when people do a test run for less than 24 hours and then
also measure the unloaded battery terminal voltage and that sort of thing that can
lead people to draw wrong conclusions. :)

Oh yes
I am well aware of batteries and there tricks.

Quote
I'm not sure what you meant in your other comment in regards to having an open mind.
I have an open mind or I wouldn't be experimenting with this kind of stuff myself.
I just mentioned some ideas on how to possibly reduce wheel spinning. :)
Anyone is free to experiment however they like... IF some people want to try to replicate
setups where they don't have all the details , that is up to them. ;)

I was referring to myself.
Years ago,i was all for the free energy stuff-back in the days of IAEC.

Over the years,things never turned out like the claims being made.
And over the years,you start to learn what is rubbish,and what is true.

So i guess you could see that now as me having a closed mind,and maybe it's time i stepped into things again with an open mind  :)

Brad

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #45 on: November 12, 2017, 11:50:21 AM »

Offline Erfinder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #46 on: November 12, 2017, 11:54:17 AM »

OK,so the schematic below is wrong--!OR! missing bits?.


your common sense, and years of experience should have you answering yes to all of those questions...



Are you willing to help out with this project in a straight forward manner ?,as in sharing how you circumvented the lenz drag,or perhaps completing the schematic as John had it.


I assist how I choose to assist....you don't get to dictate how I share and communicate my perspective.  All the schematics one need are already in the public domain....the problem is, authorities and those who label themselves authorities see things at face value, what you see is not always what you get....  for the record, I know as much as the next guy about what John had....I came to my own conclusions after "considering" what he said, and what he didn't say. 

Yes,no problem with cogging with a good sized flywheel.
However,if there were an even number of magnets,and an odd number of coil,would mean that each the coils were not hooked in series or parallel,as each of there phases would be different.


There you go again, jumping to conclusions.....  things are not as they seem...


Well,with parts of the schematic/circuit missing from what we have,it's going to have to be by trial and error.


See this is when it helps to be a fanboy rather than a debunker....  The prior, knows the goal, and works towards it, using what was given to discover the missing pieces....  shooting in the dark (trial and error) are the tools of the ill prepared, the lazy, the debunker...


Actually,Bedini said the watson machine was a copy of his machine.


The funny thing about your statement here is you think you are informing me of something....you aren't....as the story goes, watson copied bedini, eventually bedini perfected the design, miniaturized it, passing it off as a novelty.....got the public intersted in it...protecting the idea, preserving the concept.... this went on for 20+ years....  finally, he scaled it back up and presented the scaled up version in 2010...  a fundamental change was introduced, namely, the SG was married to the Kromrey, with the SG operating as both an energizer and prime mover, while the kromrey operated as a generator and motor....  wrap your noggin around that one.......


Well i suppose that i could build a 3 phase drive circuit,as it was a motor to start with.


How about brainstorming what the damn thing was supposed to be before you begin anything, and drag folk along in your wake for the ride of their lives which, if it continues the way it's going, will lead to another bashing of the inventors work, not because he failed, more like the replicator failed to appreciate the inventor's vision...


Im guessing that it should be a pulsed motor though,and we are then to look at the inductive kickback as our high voltage source.


Brad


The prime mover, the flywheel and the energizer must become one.....  comprehend the concept, and then mirror it, nesting one system within the other, forming something likened to a fractal.... just like he did....


Offline tinman

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4895
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #47 on: November 12, 2017, 12:10:44 PM »

your common sense, and years of experience should have you answering yes to all of those questions...




I assist how I choose to assist....you don't get to dictate how I share and communicate my perspective.  All the schematics one need are already in the public domain....the problem is, authorities and those who label themselves authorities see things at face value, what you see is not always what you get....  for the record, I know as much as the next guy about what John had....I came to my own conclusions after "considering" what he said, and what he didn't say. 


There you go again, jumping to conclusions.....  things are not as they seem...



See this is when it helps to be a fanboy rather than a debunker....  The prior, knows the goal, and works towards it, using what was given to discover the missing pieces....  shooting in the dark (trial and error) are the tools of the ill prepared, the lazy, the debunker...



The funny thing about your statement here is you think you are informing me of something....you aren't....as the story goes, watson copied bedini, eventually bedini perfected the design, miniaturized it, passing it off as a novelty.....got the public intersted in it...protecting the idea, preserving the concept.... this went on for 20+ years....  finally, he scaled it back up and presented the scaled up version in 2010...  a fundamental change was introduced, namely, the SG was married to the Kromrey, with the SG operating as both an energizer and prime mover, while the kromrey operated as a generator and motor....  wrap your noggin around that one.......



How about brainstorming what the damn thing was supposed to be before you begin anything, and drag folk along in your wake for the ride of their lives which, if it continues the way it's going, will lead to another bashing of the inventors work, not because he failed, more like the replicator failed to appreciate the inventor's vision...



The prime mover, the flywheel and the energizer must become one.....  comprehend the concept, and then mirror it, nesting one system within the other, forming something likened to a fractal.... just like he did....

Ok Erfinder--this is not the thread for you.

You are just going to be the same old Erfinder,where we have pages of nothingness from you.

This is a thread where people will post links to vital information for each other--not just say that the information is all over the net--not good enough.

So no,this will not be a thread full of your nothingness and riddles.

So please,refrain from posting here.

I have asked nicely.


Brad

Offline Erfinder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #48 on: November 12, 2017, 12:15:51 PM »
Ok Erfinder--this is not the thread for you.

You are just going to be the same old Erfinder,where we have pages of nothingness from you.

This is a thread where people will post links to vital information for each other--not just say that the information is all over the net--not good enough.

So no,this will not be a thread full of your nothingness and riddles.

So please,refrain from posting here.

I have asked nicely.


Brad


aye.....you asked nicely.....  hope you invested in a good life jacket.....this bucket is destined to sink....


Offline Grumage

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #49 on: November 12, 2017, 12:53:30 PM »
Dear Erfinder.

A few posts back you mentioned an “ odds even “ relationship between the energiser rotor and stator.

Most pictures on the web seem to depict an “ even “ relationship.

Was this something you developed or found advantageous from your early experiments?

Cheers Graham.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #49 on: November 12, 2017, 12:53:30 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Erfinder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #50 on: November 12, 2017, 01:16:08 PM »
Dear Erfinder.

A few posts back you mentioned an “ odds even “ relationship between the energiser rotor and stator.

Most pictures on the web seem to depict an “ even “ relationship.

Was this something you developed or found advantageous from your early experiments?

Cheers Graham.


With regards to the SG, everything  is even for the most part....  we never see Bedini actually do an odd even setup, we assume he had one when we research the Watson machine....assuming the attached image is a photo of the Watson device..   Look carefully at the magnets and see that they do not align with the coils.  As I stated before, you can engineer an offset within an even system, however, it's more complicated.... 


Other researchers, old men when Bedini was young, were exploring and or investigating odd versus even.  Check muller and adams for more information. 


Offset in an even system yields superior results to odd versus even systems, that has been my experience.


I responded out of respect,  you are aware that Tinman does not want me posting here....so....I hope I answered your question....  I will be respecting his wish from here on out.

Offline tinman

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4895
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #51 on: November 12, 2017, 01:24:26 PM »

With regards to the SG, everything  is even for the most part....  we never see Bedini actually do an odd even setup, we assume he had one when we research the Watson machine....assuming the attached image is a photo of the Watson device..   Look carefully at the magnets and see that they do not align with the coils.  As I stated before, you can engineer an offset within an even system, however, it's more complicated.... 


Other researchers, old men when Bedini was young, were exploring and or investigating odd versus even.  Check muller and adams for more information. 


Offset in an even system yields superior results to odd versus even systems, that has been my experience.


I responded out of respect,  you are aware that Tinman does not want me posting here....so....I hope I answered your question....  I will be respecting his wish from here on out.

If it is going to be responses like the above Erfinder,then please feel free to do so.


Brad

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #51 on: November 12, 2017, 01:24:26 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline stupify12

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #52 on: November 12, 2017, 01:40:33 PM »
Tinman,

Go for it! learn from trial and error while working with your device.
I would go for the Hi amp charging the battery. Buck-boost converter for conventional approach.
I think its better to use the dry cell battery like Tesla batteries.
We look forward for the big flywheel device you are making, don't listen to others,see for yourself what results you get from your build.

Will

Offline tinman

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4895
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #53 on: November 12, 2017, 01:54:37 PM »
Ok,after some more digging,i have the words straight from the horses mouth--John him self.


Quote:
The reason is the DC motor must be off when the dis-charge occurs.
http://www.johnbedini.net/john34/bedmot2.jpg

After looking at what Tom Bearden did in the book Electromagnetics part 4, This is what I did in 1984 to make the first model 2. I knew that it must be a switching and impedance problem, I also knew allot about pulse charging systems and what they did to the lead acid storage batteries . I also knew about charging batteries with huge Capacitor Banks. I was good at this because of the Amplifiers we were building at the time.

You run into all kinds of Impedance problems and Phasing, so this was a piece of cake. I also knew about Mass weight and what flywheels did and how they stored energy. I figured that the generator could not be the normal kind because they were saying the word ENERGIZER which really means MAGNETO, but this did not answer the question of where the current came from, the Capacitor was the answer.

The MAGNETO would charge this very fast and to High Voltages some times 10 times the battery voltage. When the machine first ran it would explode the batteries if they were bad, so I put the switch S1 to control it. When the battery would get low I would switch S1 to charge the battery back up.

This was 18 years ago with what we have today this machine can be made real easy if you tinker with it and get it set right. The ENERGIZER How did I come up with this one you see in the picture. My uncle was a old time mechanic who was a real tinker, he use to tell me of the old lighting circuits just after the horse and carriage days and things that people would never believe, this is where My MAGNETO comes from. I told Jim Watson how to do this, I never thought that he would build a Machine that big but He did. and that's the story of this machine. Jim got paid off I got pushed agents the wall and told to by gasoline the rest of My life but once you see something like this you never give up.


John go's on to say--as he has many time's,that when you hit the battery with continual high current pulses,a reaction takes place within the battery that you do not get with a steady DC current.

So,the cap dump system is used,as the generator it self could not deliver such high current pulses at an instant. The caps are charged by the magneto over time,and then all that stored energy hits the battery hard.

So we now know that the !energizer! is just a magneto,and the schematic he supplied in the link is of his V2-->but he seems to have left out the FWBR.
I would also move S1 to a position before the cap,so as you do not get an over voltage in the cap when S1 is open.

What is a magneto

Quote: a small electric generator containing a permanent magnet and used to provide high-voltage pulses.

Well,this is exactly what we will have with my setup.
The high voltage pulses will come from the cap,that is charged by the magneto.

High voltage pulses can be obtained from a magneto in many different ways--spring loaded rotors that flip from one spot to another fast,while the shaft remains at a constant speed--EG,automotive magneto's,or by coil shorting,such as the small magneto i have on my bench that was used to make the telephone ring back in the 30's.
Johns version stores the charge from the magneto into a capacitor,and then a switching mechanism dumps that high voltage charge into a battery.

The only difference between what my setup will be,and the schematic John supplied above,is we will be using an electronic switching circuit,instead of the commutated switching John used in his V2 machine.


Brad

Offline Erfinder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #54 on: November 12, 2017, 02:23:12 PM »
Ok,after some more digging,i have the words straight from the horses mouth--John him self.


Quote:
The reason is the DC motor must be off when the dis-charge occurs.
http://www.johnbedini.net/john34/bedmot2.jpg

After looking at what Tom Bearden did in the book Electromagnetics part 4, This is what I did in 1984 to make the first model 2. I knew that it must be a switching and impedance problem, I also knew allot about pulse charging systems and what they did to the lead acid storage batteries . I also knew about charging batteries with huge Capacitor Banks. I was good at this because of the Amplifiers we were building at the time.

You run into all kinds of Impedance problems and Phasing, so this was a piece of cake. I also knew about Mass weight and what flywheels did and how they stored energy. I figured that the generator could not be the normal kind because they were saying the word ENERGIZER which really means MAGNETO, but this did not answer the question of where the current came from, the Capacitor was the answer.

The MAGNETO would charge this very fast and to High Voltages some times 10 times the battery voltage. When the machine first ran it would explode the batteries if they were bad, so I put the switch S1 to control it. When the battery would get low I would switch S1 to charge the battery back up.

This was 18 years ago with what we have today this machine can be made real easy if you tinker with it and get it set right. The ENERGIZER How did I come up with this one you see in the picture. My uncle was a old time mechanic who was a real tinker, he use to tell me of the old lighting circuits just after the horse and carriage days and things that people would never believe, this is where My MAGNETO comes from. I told Jim Watson how to do this, I never thought that he would build a Machine that big but He did. and that's the story of this machine. Jim got paid off I got pushed agents the wall and told to by gasoline the rest of My life but once you see something like this you never give up.


John go's on to say--as he has many time's,that when you hit the battery with continual high current pulses,a reaction takes place within the battery that you do not get with a steady DC current.

So,the cap dump system is used,as the generator it self could not deliver such high current pulses at an instant. The caps are charged by the magneto over time,and then all that stored energy hits the battery hard.

So we now know that the !energizer! is just a magneto,and the schematic he supplied in the link is of his V2-->but he seems to have left out the FWBR.
I would also move S1 to a position before the cap,so as you do not get an over voltage in the cap when S1 is open.

What is a magneto

Quote: a small electric generator containing a permanent magnet and used to provide high-voltage pulses.

Well,this is exactly what we will have with my setup.
The high voltage pulses will come from the cap,that is charged by the magneto.

High voltage pulses can be obtained from a magneto in many different ways--spring loaded rotors that flip from one spot to another fast,while the shaft remains at a constant speed--EG,automotive magneto's,or by coil shorting,such as the small magneto i have on my bench that was used to make the telephone ring back in the 30's.
Johns version stores the charge from the magneto into a capacitor,and then a switching mechanism dumps that high voltage charge into a battery.

The only difference between what my setup will be,and the schematic John supplied above,is we will be using an electronic switching circuit,instead of the commutated switching John used in his V2 machine.


Brad



Know a thing by what it does.....  The energizer is nothing more than a magneto, magnet, coil, points....  energizer, magnets, coil, BJT..... 


vindication.....  this was pointed out on page 3.....useless babble my ass.... 


unfortunately you are still missing the point....  the layout is wrong.....  the magneto must become a motor.....


the capacitor discharge path which includes the charge battery, is through through the magneto, specifically through the very same inductor which charged the cap.  I will demonstrate this, however, I will not provide any diagrams I just want it to be known that it can be done!  If you want to do it, figure it out like I had to...


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #54 on: November 12, 2017, 02:23:12 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline wattsup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2611
    • Spin Conveyance Theory - For a New Perspective...
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #55 on: November 12, 2017, 02:31:32 PM »
@all

Biggest mistake of the Bedini thingy is the diameter of the Energizer/Generator coil wheel seems slightly greater then the flywheel so any drag on those coils will be transferred to the shaft tenfold. Leverage is the most neglected factor in our rotating machines and cannot be compensated by fancy switching. So if the base design is faulty, the total design will not work.

So.... instead of let's say a 24 inch generator wheel, you used 3 or 4 smaller diameter generator wheels on that same shaft? Now the leverage of the flywheel will always be greater then the breaking leverage of the drag causing generator coils.

But guys will not think about their designs in advance. They will just jump in blindly thinking that "REPLICATING" someone  elses mistakes will produce a different result.

wattsup


Offline tinman

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4895
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #56 on: November 12, 2017, 02:43:19 PM »


vindication.....  this was pointed out on page 3.....useless babble my ass.... 


unfortunately you are still missing the point....  the layout is wrong.....  the magneto must become a motor.....




Quote
the capacitor discharge path which includes the charge battery, is through through the magneto, specifically through the very same inductor which charged the cap.

No where dose John mention that the magneto is put into a motoring phase,nor that the discharge from the cap ,go's through the magneto coils.

Johns own diagram also dose not show this-see below.

Quote
  I will demonstrate this, however, I will not provide any diagrams I just want it to be known that it can be done!  If you want to do it, figure it out like I had to...

Yes,i know how to do that already.
But neither John or the diagram calls for that.


Brad


Offline Erfinder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #57 on: November 12, 2017, 03:34:09 PM »
No where dose John mention that the magneto is put into a motoring phase,nor that the discharge from the cap ,go's through the magneto coils.


no brad its not mentioned in the diagram, dig like you did before and find that I am right!


[/size]Johns own diagram also dose not show this-see below.

Yes,i know how to do that already.
But neither John or the diagram calls for that.


Brad

if you knew his work, you would have identified it just like I did........ you would know that he superseded his old shit.....

you're too close minded for your own damn good....I offered to make a demonstration but after this post see that there is no point.....

Offline tinman

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4895
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #58 on: November 12, 2017, 04:10:34 PM »

no brad its not mentioned in the diagram, dig like you did before and find that I am right!




you're too close minded for your own damn good...

Quote
if you knew his work, you would have identified it just like I did........ you would know that he superseded his old shit.....

But it is his old !shit! that i wish to replicate,not some super seeded model.
I wish to build the one depicted in Johns schematic.

Quote
.I offered to make a demonstration but after this post see that there is no point.....

If you wish to show me,then that would be appreciated.
If you dont wish to show me,then that would be understandable.

If what you have is not related to the machine i wish to build(the one depicted in the schematic i posted),then there is not much point wasting your time doing so.

If it is related to the V2,then by all means--im all ears and eyes.

Brad


Offline tinman

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4895
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #59 on: November 12, 2017, 04:15:10 PM »
@all

Biggest mistake of the Bedini thingy is the diameter of the Energizer/Generator coil wheel seems slightly greater then the flywheel so any drag on those coils will be transferred to the shaft tenfold. Leverage is the most neglected factor in our rotating machines and cannot be compensated by fancy switching. So if the base design is faulty, the total design will not work.

 Now the leverage of the flywheel will always be greater then the breaking leverage of the drag causing generator coils.

But guys will not think about their designs in advance. They will just jump in blindly thinking that "REPLICATING" someone  elses mistakes will produce a different result.

wattsup

Quote
So.... instead of let's say a 24 inch generator wheel, you used 3 or 4 smaller diameter generator wheels on that same shaft?

Well thats not very good math Wattsup.

So now the generator wheels are 1/4 the size,but we have 4 times as many.
This means--no loss/no gain.

You just made 3 left turns,and ended back where you started from :D

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #59 on: November 12, 2017, 04:15:10 PM »

 

Share this topic to your favourite Social and Bookmark site

Please SHARE this topic at: