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: 81930
  • *Latest: kunjb

  • *Total Posts: 490885
  • *Total Topics: 14446
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 216
  • *Total: 218

Facebook

Author Topic: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device  (Read 179684 times)

Offline citfta

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 524
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #450 on: June 12, 2016, 12:32:27 PM »


We could build a simple JT type circuit to test this cap to cap transfer system,and see how high in percentage we could get this transfer to happen. I think one of those garden light circuits would do just fine,where we replace the LED for a cap and diode.


Brad

Hi Brad,
Here is a simple circuit that swaps the energy from one battery to another.  You should be able to substitute a couple of super caps for the batteries to test the transfer efficiency.

http://overunity.com/16326/thats-not-a-knife-this-is-a-knife-er-ou-flashlight/

Carroll

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #450 on: June 12, 2016, 12:32:27 PM »

Offline ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5981
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #451 on: June 13, 2016, 08:05:18 PM »
I feel the need to make a short post here on the history of this heretofore Urban legend of David Bowling's continuous charging device

back when this all started we did not know Dave,  and some made assumptions of wrong measurements or inexperience with battery systems and their true potential etc etc.
and when he showed up here it seemed the original device had stopped working.

it is the original device which I feel the need to clarify ,
David had three  7AH batteries being switched as outlined in the thread thru a 350 watt inverter and nothing else ,

regardless of the load or motor.. I mean to clarify Nothing else ,

 no connection to the mains or ancillary charging systems.

nothing but three batteries and a load and a 350 watt inverter

this system ran constant loads ...serious loads such as shop vacs Drills etc 24/7 for one month with absolutely no mains or outside power source.

will three 7ah batteries make 100,000 watts [100KWH] [modest load.. not a drill or shop vac which would be much more]

??

once disassembled to take to a patent attorney .....upon arriving to demonstrate ...
it did not work..
and that is pretty much where this thread started and David's obvious obsession began.

and it is quite understandable indeed [his obsession ]

respectfully
Chet K



Offline Dbowling

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 151
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #452 on: June 13, 2016, 08:41:29 PM »
Just to clarify, with that original setup I had two batteries in series with a motor between them and the single battery in parallel. Splitting the positives. The inverter was connected to battery 3 in the traditional manner, and I ran loads on the inverter.


That setup ran loads 24/7 for several weeks.


I have spent 8 years of my life trying to replicate what that system was capable of, and have never been successful. That particular battery exhibited behavior I have never seen in any other battery


My original description stated that when I hooked up just the three batteries and the motor, nothing happened and my buddy and I kind of walked away and were talking about things for about 10-15 minutes when the motor suddenly started. We only had one meter so we were measuring the voltage across battery 3. It would show 24 volts. It would go down to about 18 volts and the motor would start running. The voltage across battery 3 would continue to go down to around 7 volts and the motor would stop running. The voltage on battery 3 would immediately jump to 24 volts, and the cycle would repeat itself over and over. My assumption at the time was that I needed to keep battery 3 from charging, so I connected the inverter to it and began hooking up loads. It was a 350 watt inverter and I plugged in as many loads to it as I could until it began beeping and the red light went off. I ran it for several weeks before loading it all in a suitcase to take to California to see a patent attorney. It never worked again. Karma, obviously.
[size=78%]
[/size]
[size=78%]
[/size]
My only clue to why that battery worked is the belief that if you flip the magnetic polarity in a battery you get this kind of unlimited energy. I STILL experiment with that setup on an almost daily basis,but it has nothing to do with how we are running our present circuits.[size=78%] [/size]

Offline seychelles

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 380
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #453 on: June 14, 2016, 08:00:11 PM »
So what is the exact circuit that you use  please..


Offline dieter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 951
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #454 on: June 14, 2016, 08:41:29 PM »
Maybe tk,mh & co naysaid it to death. In a metaphysical way...

Maybe there was some resonance, only with very specific cable properties? Some resonant pickup of your floormates 1'000'000 kW Radio transmitter? Or of some subway power lines?

Maybe the battery was accidently tritium doted and lead oxide acts as a direct beta decay converter? Or any other radioisotope BTW. , actually you could measure that, unless halflife was short.

Actually, uranium contamination of lead ore doesn't sound too unrealistic to me, and by heating uranium, tritium is released, with 12 years halflife IIRC. Maybe this happened before? Esp. when it happens only very few times, it may slip trough modern battery production methods.

Then again, those beta converters are rather weak.

I feel sorry for you dude. Karma can be nasty.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #454 on: June 14, 2016, 08:41:29 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline SeaMonkey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1223
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #455 on: June 14, 2016, 09:55:20 PM »
Dieter,

You raise some very interesting possibilities. ;)

Your thought processes are intriguing. 8)

There is an answer to the question of mysterious
"free energy."  Few have found it. :o

It is not where it is thought to be... ::)

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4770
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #456 on: June 15, 2016, 01:40:20 AM »
The problem here,is that it is going to be very hard to get accurate power measurements with a high amount of inductive spikes-such as the inverter has.
We can do !on the fly! measurements with some degree of accuracy,but it is not going to be 100%.

I have carried out 4 test run's now,and used different measuring methods for each,and in all test,the inverter consumes and dissipates the same amount of energy,and the remainder of that supplied by the 24volt bank,is returned into the 3rd 12 volt battery-->no free lunch found yet.

In saying that,battery 2(the one connected in series with battery 1,but in parallel with battery 3)dose retain a higher voltage than battery 1(the lead battery in the series connection).So there is obviously energy also being returned to battery 2-along with battery 3,and i suspect it is because of the reason i gave some posts back. But even so,this energy is accounted for,when we are using the series voltage of battery 1 and 2 to make our input power calculations.

I have however,found the exact reactions to that of Davids original circuit he took to the patents office,in that i found a battery for the battery 3 position,that resulted in explosions of current being sent through the circuit--as seen in second video i posted here on the subject. I am not sure why this happens,but i suspect some sort of instantaneous chemical reactions taking place within the dead battery-->i will look further into this.


Brad

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #456 on: June 15, 2016, 01:40:20 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7585
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #457 on: June 15, 2016, 06:13:53 AM »
The problem here,is that it is going to be very hard to get accurate power measurements with a high amount of inductive spikes-such as the inverter has.

Brad

Your comment is nonsense and it's a farce because I already told you that your comments were ridiculous and you intentionally ignored what I said.  Like I told you before, I haven't been on a bench in 25 years, I have never used a DSO, but I could still spin circles around you on a bench with my eyes closed.  Let's do some spoon feeding.

Look at your DSO capture from the current sensing resistor attached to this posting.  You think those are "inductive spikes" and the inverter is acting like a reactive load?  That doesn't make the slightest stitch of sense at all.  Why would the inverter draw power from the battery with "inductive spikes" and look like a reactive load?  WHY?

Look at the undershoot on the "inductive spikes."  The reasonable assumption at this point in time is that it's the inductance in the interconnect wiring and the power resistor that you are using to monitor the current that is causing the undershoot, and it has nothing to do with the inverter itself.  After all, if we assume that it is a train of current pulses going into the inverter, when the inverter shuts off the pulse suddenly, there will be inductive ringing associated with that event in the interconnect wiring.

It appears that the inverter is drawing power from the battery in a continuous train of current pulses, that's all.  Each current pulse will be at the applied voltage for a certain amount of time at a certain current level.  If for the sake of argument you assumed that the current pulses were all identical (just as an example), then with your DSO you could measure the energy in a single pulse, and multiply that by the pulse frequency, and voila you have measured the power draw of the inverter with your DSO.  And there is nothing even remotely inductive or reactive associated with that power draw from the battery.

What is the double sine wave pattern in the spikes?  How long have you been using a DSO and watching other people on the forums use DSOs?  That sine wave pattern has the classic signature of an aliasing pattern because you are under-sampling the waveform.  It's a total fake-out, the sine wave pattern isn't even there, it doesn't exist.  All you have to do it turn up the time base and you should see less spikes, and the sine wave pattern should disappear.

The output of your inverter is 240 VAC at 50 Hz, correct?  So the period for a full AC sine wave cycle is 20,000 microseconds.  Look at your DSO capture, it covers 750 microseconds.  I believe that your load is a good old fashioned tungsten filament light bulb.  Right now I am assuming that you have no idea at all where the under-sampled DSO capture lines up relative to the inverter's output sine wave.  For sure, since the light bulb is a resistive type of load, the inverter is outputting a lot of power at the sine wave peaks.  But right now you don't have the slightest idea how the current pulsing input on the inverter responds to the variable power demand by the inverter output over the full cycle of the 50 Hz AC sine wave.

So in summary, it would appear that the inverter draws power from the battery in a train of current pulses.  You haven't properly captured the pulse train or the individual pulses.  You have no idea what happens on the input when the inverter is drawing much more power at the peaks of the sine wave output.  Do the pulses get more frequent, or does the pulse train remain at the same frequency but the pulse width itself is modulated, or does something else happen?  You have no idea right now.

MileHigh

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4770
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #458 on: June 15, 2016, 06:56:27 AM »
Your comment is nonsense and it's a farce because I already told you that your comments were ridiculous and you intentionally ignored what I said.  Like I told you before, I haven't been on a bench in 25 years, I have never used a DSO, but I could still spin circles around you on a bench with my eyes closed.  Let's do some spoon feeding.

Look at your DSO capture from the current sensing resistor attached to this posting.  You think those are "inductive spikes" and the inverter is acting like a reactive load?  That doesn't make the slightest stitch of sense at all.  Why would the inverter draw power from the battery with "inductive spikes" and look like a reactive load?  WHY?

Look at the undershoot on the "inductive spikes."  The reasonable assumption at this point in time is that it's the inductance in the interconnect wiring and the power resistor that you are using to monitor the current that is causing the undershoot, and it has nothing to do with the inverter itself.  After all, if we assume that it is a train of current pulses going into the inverter, when the inverter shuts off the pulse suddenly, there will be inductive ringing associated with that event in the interconnect wiring.

It appears that the inverter is drawing power from the battery in a continuous train of current pulses, that's all.  Each current pulse will be at the applied voltage for a certain amount of time at a certain current level.  If for the sake of argument you assumed that the current pulses were all identical (just as an example), then with your DSO you could measure the energy in a single pulse, and multiply that by the pulse frequency, and voila you have measured the power draw of the inverter with your DSO.  And there is nothing even remotely inductive or reactive associated with that power draw from the battery.

What is the double sine wave pattern in the spikes?  How long have you been using a DSO and watching other people on the forums use DSOs?  That sine wave pattern has the classic signature of an aliasing pattern because you are under-sampling the waveform.  It's a total fake-out, the sine wave pattern isn't even there, it doesn't exist.  All you have to do it turn up the time base and you should see less spikes, and the sine wave pattern should disappear.

The output of your inverter is 240 VAC at 50 Hz, correct?  So the period for as full AC sine wave cycle is 20,000 microseconds.  Look at your DSO capture, it covers 750 microseconds.  I believe that your load is a good old fashioned tungsten filament light bulb.  Right now I am assuming that you have no idea at all where the under-sampled DSO capture lines up relative to the inverter's output sine wave.  For sure, since the light bulb is a resistive type of load, the inverter is outputting a lot of power at the sine wave peaks.  But right now you don't have the slightest idea how the current pulsing input on the inverter responds to the variable power demand by the inverter output over the full cycle of the 50 Hz AC sine wave.

So in summary, it would appear that the inverter draws power from the battery in a train of current pulses.  You haven't properly captured the pulse train or the individual pulses.  You have no idea what happens on the input when the inverter is drawing much more power at the peaks of the sine wave output.  Do the pulses get more frequent, or does the pulse train remain at the same frequency but the pulse width itself is modulated, or does something else happen?  You have no idea right now.

MileHigh

I see you have decided to follow me to this thread-just to post more dribble.
It would seem that you are once again making idiotic comments based around assumptions.
No,the CVR is not inductive,nor do i think you have taken the time to look at the circuit to see as to how the spikes you see actually form. Perhaps you missed the constant current draw seen on the scope trace as well.
Do you even know how this inverter opperates?-my guess is no.

So please stop posting dribble on something you know nothing about.

You running rings around me on the bench is laughable,as you wont even answer my challenge on a JT build off,because you know i would wipe the floor with you.

If you want to join in,then dust off that bench,and start experimenting.  If your not prepared  to do that,then run along,as your words carry no weight around here anymore,and you are no help in finding the answers David and the rest of us here seek.


Brad.

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7585
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #459 on: June 15, 2016, 08:13:47 AM »
Brad:

These are your initial comments about the current waveform:

Quote
Below is a scope shot across a CVR,showing the input current wave form to the inverter.
As you can see,it is the same as a pure sine wave inverters input wave form.
These are the spikes those on the other forum are speaking of on the input,that is one of the reasons that this setup works as claimed-!i believe!?.
As the batteries will only see the input side of the inverter,and not the output side of the inverter,i am at a loss as to why it has to be a pure sine wave inverter?,as battery regulation has nothing to do with the output of the inverter.

You also said this about the waveform:

Quote
The inverter is quite reactive--see scope shot below across CVR to inverter input.

It looks to me like you are confusing standard back-EMF spikes from a coil, with the current spikes that represent the way the inverter is drawing current from the battery feed.  That's why you are saying "quite reactive" and "high amount of inductive spikes."  Assuming that's true, you can see how you made a huge mistake.  You led yourself down a garden path, and took your followers on this thread along with you down that path, with the result being that you and your followers were all lost with respect to how the input side of the inverter draws power from the battery. 

The only reason that I came here is because you refused to respond to the initial comment I made on the other thread so as to not disturb this thread.  I was hoping that you would take a second look at the way the inverter was drawing power from the battery and document it properly so that you and your peers and would all be properly informed about how the input side of the inverter actually worked.

"Dribble" and "idiotic comments" my ass.  You are bluffing.  Just the fact that you refuse to address anything technical in my posting says it all.  For the benefit of yourself and your peers on this thread you need to understand how the input side of the inverter draws current from the battery because that directly affects how the third battery in the charging position gets charged.  If you had listened to me and shown initiative and redid your current sensing resistor measurements and posted what looked like good credible data for yourself and your peers I would not even be here.

MileHigh

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #459 on: June 15, 2016, 08:13:47 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4770
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #460 on: June 15, 2016, 12:49:18 PM »
Brad:

These are your initial comments about the current waveform:

You also said this about the waveform:

  and "high amount of inductive spikes."  Assuming that's true, you can see how you made a huge mistake.  You led yourself down a garden path, and took your followers on this thread along with you down that path, with the result being that you and your followers were all lost with respect to how the input side of the inverter draws power from the battery. 

  I was hoping that you would take a second look at the way the inverter was drawing power from the battery and document it properly so that you and your peers and would all be properly informed about how the input side of the inverter actually worked.

"Dribble" and "idiotic comments" my ass.  You are bluffing.  Just the fact that you refuse to address anything technical in my posting says it all.  For the benefit of yourself and your peers on this thread you need to understand how the input side of the inverter draws current from the battery because that directly affects how the third battery in the charging position gets charged.  If you had listened to me and shown initiative and redid your current sensing resistor measurements and posted what looked like good credible data for yourself and your peers I would not even be here.

MileHigh

Quote
Below is a scope shot across a CVR,showing the input current wave form to the inverter.
As you can see,it is the same as a pure sine wave inverters input wave form.
These are the spikes those on the other forum are speaking of on the input,that is one of the reasons that this setup works as claimed-!i believe!?.
As the batteries will only see the input side of the inverter,and not the output side of the inverter,i am at a loss as to why it has to be a pure sine wave inverter?,as battery regulation has nothing to do with the output of the inverter.

And what is wrong with what i stated above?

Quote
It looks to me like you are confusing standard back-EMF spikes from a coil, with the current spikes that represent the way the inverter is drawing current from the battery feed.

looks to me that you have put your foot in your mouth again,and made some more incorrect assumptions ;).

Quote
That's why you are saying "quite reactive"

Reactive-->showing a response to a stimulus.
-->acting in response to a situation rather than creating or controlling it.

Quote
The only reason that I came here is because you refused to respond to the initial comment I made on the other thread so as to not disturb this thread.

Then you obviously did not get the message ::)
I did not wish to respond to your comment--i told you i was done with you and your stupidity.
But now--now you come here to start your shit all over again-->please go away-you have no reason at all to be on this thread.


Brad

Offline hoptoad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 996
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #461 on: June 15, 2016, 01:33:45 PM »
snip...
Then you obviously did not get the message ::)
snip...
LOL. Reminds me of a friend who often resorts to the expression, "There's no need to repeat yourself. I'm not deaf, I'm ignoring you".  :)


Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7585
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #462 on: June 15, 2016, 01:40:30 PM »
Brad:

You are an amateur comic with the trotting out of the dictionary definition for "reactive."  You didn't have to respond to me at all.  All that you had to do was redo that ridiculous farce of a current measurement and get it right and present good data to your peers.

MileHigh

Offline hoptoad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 996
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #463 on: June 15, 2016, 01:57:42 PM »
snip...
Like I told you before, I haven't been on a bench in 25 years, I have never used a DSO, but I could still spin circles around you on a bench with my eyes closed.  snip..

MileHigh
A bold claim that will never be proven by you without visible evidence of bench activity to back it up.


Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7585
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #464 on: June 15, 2016, 02:22:57 PM »
A bold claim that will never be proven by you without visible evidence of bench activity to back it up.

Sure, that's the ticket.  I have done tons of analysis over the years and anybody that knows their stuff could easily qualify me.  In fact, my skills are already known and you are just bluffing.  Your real issue is Brad's failed attempt to measure the current input of the inverter.  Forget about some meaningless deflection by challenging me.  If you want to do something sensible, encourage Brad to redo his measurement and get it right because right now nobody knows how the input of the inverter works.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #464 on: June 15, 2016, 02:22:57 PM »

 

Share this topic to your favourite Social and Bookmark site

Please SHARE this topic at: