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

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 493856
  • *Total Topics: 14514
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 4
  • *Guests: 88
  • *Total: 92

Facebook

Author Topic: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device  (Read 190501 times)

Offline antimony

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 217
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #510 on: September 14, 2017, 04:18:14 PM »
Hi antimony,

It sounds like you are referring to the original system that many of us worked with that required a "special" dead battery.  That idea was abandoned a couple of years ago because it just wasn't possible to keep a dead battery dead as you found out.

This is a thread about what David (Turion) is presently working on:

 http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/19774-basic-free-energy-device.html

The last several pages contain the information about his coils he is now using for his generator that speeds up under load.  This system uses a set of 3 batteries just like the original except all batteries are good batteries.  And he keeps another 2 batteries resting, one before and one after they go into the third position where they get charged.  There are a lot of details that really need to be attended to in order to get this system working like it should.  I don't have time to cover all of them so you need to read the thread and especially the last several pages.

The two most important details to remember are these:  This system will not work with little batteries, especially when everyone wants to draw more power from them than should be drawn.  Secondly, this system works much better if a pulse type motor is used between the primary series batteries and the charging battery.  The pulse motor can be used to power a generator which is where David is using his coils that cause the generator to speed up under load.

I have verified almost all of David's work except I just have not had time to work on his generator system with the coils that cause speed up under load or SUUL as David calls it.  I have gotten extremely long run times by using a system I designed which automatically swaps the batteries around to keep them all charged.  They will eventually start going down and that is why you also need the generator to add some charge from time to time and also power other loads.  If you can't power other loads then the system is pretty useless so that has been David's goal all along to be able to keep the batteries all charged and power some loads at the same time.

Somewhere in that thread is the information for the automatic battery swapping circuit I built and used.  I don't have time right now to dig through the thread to find it.  It may be linked to in this thread also.  I am not sure if I did that or not.

We do have a mutual friend that has been using the three battery system with swapping to greatly extend his ability to use his solar panels.  By using the solar system to keep his batteries topped up and swapping the batteries which actually allows him to reuse the power over and over he can now use his battery bank for days when there is no sun or very little sun.

Take care.
Carroll

Oh yeah, I didnt realize that. Then i will have to check it out then. :)

I used a regular brushed dc motor, but at the time I  thought about using a Bedini motor instead so I could charge batteries at the same time.
I know Turion is a fan of the Bedini tech, if I dont think of some other guy with a similar name.

I am going to check out the threads, and thanks to you for always taking your time to enlighten a dumb Joe like me. :)

And it is Nice to hear such positive things from you that i think of someone who doesn't just fall for claims people make like many others do.
People want to see "free energy " so bad that they are willing to believe whatever.
I am a little bit like that, but in the end you just have to take a unbiased look at it all, and then it more often then not turn out to be inflated.
You know what I mean? :)



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #510 on: September 14, 2017, 04:18:14 PM »

Offline SeaMonkey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1246
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #511 on: October 27, 2017, 11:35:38 PM »
Luc has put up an interesting video to show how he has
measured the Voltage/Cuirrent/Power distribution in the
three battery setup with a motor as the load.
  He's using
some innovative meters to perform the measurements
which adds much clarity to the loop.

Matt has critiqued the video by suggesting that Luc's
procedure is wrong and that his meters are lying.

Very strange critique.  I find nothing wrong at all with
Luc's measurement technique and his conclusions.

Offline SeaMonkey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1246
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #512 on: October 28, 2017, 11:29:12 PM »
To follow the discussion which has become quite interesting.

Jettis has voiced an observation which is technically sound.

But whether the inclusion of "make and break" devices or
pulsing devices into the loop makes it an "open loop" is
subject to verification.  Does, in fact, any anomalous or
excess energy manifest with that type of circuit?

With pulsing it is possible to recover some of what would
otherwise be "wasted energy" in the form of inductive
spikes from the motor load and divert them to a desired
storage device.  This will result in an increased efficiency
of the system which in the long term will extend "run times,"
but in itself would not be true "excess energy."  In time, the
system will discharge to such an extent that external energy
will be required to re-energize the batteries.

Never-the-less, it is an instructive exercise in maximizing circuit
efficiency.
 

Offline profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3929
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #513 on: October 31, 2017, 05:01:54 PM »
"In
time, the
system will discharge to such an extent that external
energy
will be required to re-energize the batteries."

You bet.the key word for today is deliquent deliquestent

Offline profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3929
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #514 on: October 31, 2017, 05:05:42 PM »
Or deliquent deliquestion

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #514 on: October 31, 2017, 05:05:42 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Dbowling

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 159
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #515 on: November 02, 2017, 05:10:23 AM »
Guys,
If I take a motor and connect it to a motor that is exactly the same and use it as a generator, the generator will put out voltage because the shaft is being turned, but not as much as it took to run the motor. Can we agree on that? 


In a motor that is being used as a motor, there is ALSO "generated" energy because the shaft is turning. Can we agree on that? Will it put out just as much as when it is used as a generator? A STOCK motor will not, as they take great pains to lose that voltage in whatever windings aren't being used at the moment. Perhaps a pulse motor connected differently is capable of utilizing this generated voltage.


In a pulse motor there is a coil collapse that puts out a spike. Can we agree on that?


In the 3 Battery System, does the input actually pass through the motor without ENTIRELY being "consumed" by the motor? I believe this to be true. In fact, I believe MOST of it goes through the motor.


I believe that the voltage that is input into the MATT MODIFIED PULSE motor passes through it and is joined by the generated voltage plus the collapse of the coil. All of which hits battery 3. Or maybe it is JUST the input voltage and the coil collapse. I don't know for sure.


I believe Luc's tests are going to prove what I have been saying all along, which I proved to myself 10 years ago but to which no one was willing to listen, including folks on THIS forum. And that is that you can get EXTENDED runs from this system.


Matt and I disagreed with Luc, and still do about his test setup (Batteries too small, no pulse motor) as well as his measurements. Not that the NUMBERS on his meters are incorrect. Only that they do not measure what he has STATED they measure, and that his understanding of what is going on is incorrect. Matt said his meters "lie." He said that because they are not telling him what he BELIEVES they are telling him, but it is NOT that the reading on the meter is incorrect. It is HOW he is measuring things. I have taken the liberty of copying the statement Luc made and pasting it here to point out our issue with what he said.


Luc stated: (the bold is my addition)


"If battery 1 & 2 are connected in series and are 12 volts each = 24 volts and the current is measured at 1 amp = 24 watts entering the motor and if battery 3 is at 12 volts and the current entering it is measured at 1 amp = 12 watts entering battery 3. So if we have 24 watts coming out from input batteries and 12 watts going in the charge battery it means half of the input power is being used by the motor and potentially half recovered by the charge battery."


My response:
We do not agree that half the input power is being used by the motor. It is our contention that even though 24 volts come out of batteries 1 and 2, there are 12 volts in OPPOSITION that "neutralizes" (for lack of a better work) 12 of those volts and all that enters the motor is the 12 volt difference. Which is why we say the motor is running on the "potential difference." That is our issue with the measurements Luc is making, not the numbers on the meters.



Luc again:


"12 watts to mechanical power and at best 80% if it is available at the motor shaft which means we have about 9.6 watts in mechanical power at the motor shaft which we can recover back to electrical if we attach a generator to it and can recover at best 80% if it = 7.7 watts and add it to the charge battery which gives a potential total of 19.7 watts recovered from the 24 watts put into the system."


My response:
I also disagree with all of his calculations about what is possible with this system. He is presenting numbers for an inaccurate build of a machine he does not understand and making assumptions about what can be done by connecting it to a generator, stating that a combination of a motor run on this system connected to a generator is only capable of recovering 19.7 watts of 25 watts expended.


I have lots of things I have done that move forward and far beyond these simple experiments. So does Matt Jones. I would bet anyone any amount of money they want to bet that you will find that a proper build of this system run between the positives will use FAR less than what is stated, and that a generator can be built that can exceed his estimate of what can be generated. I know because I have built such systems. I will not be sharing how I did it. I have put up with enough crap without introducing NEW concepts which no one is going to want to believe either.


But BUILD this system correctly and you will see what we have seen and can begin down the path we have been on for 10 years now.


Dave
« Last Edit: November 02, 2017, 07:40:00 AM by Dbowling »

Offline ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6047
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #516 on: November 02, 2017, 01:42:15 PM »
Dave
your support in all of this is Priceless , Luc has always agreed to test the setup as advertised [working on getting him all the bits and pieces].

He has his own methods too , and it seems that there will be much to see here as this moves forward.

nothing but gratitude here !!

respectfully
Chet K

PS
and just for clarity
Dave has even offered to assemble the motor to send to Luc for testing.




Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #516 on: November 02, 2017, 01:42:15 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Cadman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 194
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #517 on: November 02, 2017, 02:12:18 PM »
In the 3 Battery System, does the input actually pass through the motor without ENTIRELY being "consumed" by the motor? I believe this to be true. In fact, I believe MOST of it goes through the motor.

I believe that the voltage that is input into the MATT MODIFIED PULSE motor passes through it and is joined by the generated voltage plus the collapse of the coil. All of which hits battery 3. Or maybe it is JUST the input voltage and the coil collapse. I don't know for sure.
Dave

Dave,

One thing I remember from my study of generators and motors that strikes me as important is that as the armature coils move from positive to negative magnetic field, when they are in a middle point between the two, the coil that is changing polarity is short circuited at the commutator to remove the stored charge in that coil. The reasoning for that was to reduce sparking at the commutator brush.

Why destroy that charge? Why not use it instead?

Is that one of the things Matt accomplished when he modified the scooter motor design?

Cadman

Offline ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6047
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #518 on: November 02, 2017, 02:49:52 PM »
Small update
Carroll is checking his Matt Motor out and will be shipping it to Luc
also we are working on Getting the batteries to Luc too .


Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4903
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #519 on: November 02, 2017, 03:09:47 PM »
 author=Dbowling link=topic=4612.msg512583#msg512583 date=1509595823]



[/quote]

Quote
In the 3 Battery System, does the input actually pass through the motor without ENTIRELY being "consumed" by the motor? I believe this to be true. In fact, I believe MOST of it goes through the motor.

After spending a lot of money on this DUT,buying new automotive size batteries(all same brand and size),a new motor,and then a new inverter to replace the motor,and spending many hours/days on this system,i would think i qualify to add my input into this.

The answer to the above is no-not all the energy leaving the 24 volt bank is consumed by the motor. I would say closer to half.

Quote
Matt and I disagreed with Luc, and still do about his test setup (Batteries too small, no pulse motor) as well as his measurements. Not that the NUMBERS on his meters are incorrect. Only that they do not measure what he has STATED they measure, and that his understanding of what is going on is incorrect. Matt said his meters "lie." He said that because they are not telling him what he BELIEVES they are telling him, but it is NOT that the reading on the meter is incorrect. It is HOW he is measuring things. I have taken the liberty of copying the statement Luc made and pasting it here to point out our issue with what he said.

After viewing Luc's video a few time's,and going on what i measured during my tests,i believe Luc's meters are telling the truth.

Luc's statement
Quote: "If battery 1 & 2 are connected in series and are 12 volts each = 24 volts and the current is measured at 1 amp = 24 watts entering the motor and if battery 3 is at 12 volts and the current entering it is measured at 1 amp = 12 watts entering battery 3. So if we have 24 watts coming out from input batteries and 12 watts going in the charge battery it means half of the input power is being used by the motor and potentially half recovered by the charge battery."

Dave's response 

Quote
We do not agree that half the input power is being used by the motor. It is our contention that even though 24 volts come out of batteries 1 and 2, there are 12 volts in OPPOSITION that "neutralizes" (for lack of a better work) 12 of those volts and all that enters the motor is the 12 volt difference. Which is why we say the motor is running on the "potential difference." That is our issue with the measurements Luc is making, not the numbers on the meters.

Dave,this is exactly what Luc is showing.
Lets look at his numbers from his video in the screen shot below.

As you can see,the current value remains the same throughout the entire system,which is .44 amps.

Now,lets take the voltages from the meter reading the 24 volt battery bank(batteries 1&2),and from that we will subtract the voltage from battery 3.
So,the voltage across the motor is 25.46v - 12.53v = 12.93v
So the calculated power consumed by the motor is 12.93 x .44A =5.6 watts.

As Lucs meters only go to 1 decimal place on the voltage,we will do the same.

So Lucs meters are telling us that the motor is using 5.6 watts--and we have done this the way you asked,by subtracting battery 3 voltage from batteries 1&2 voltage.

So,as the total output from batteries 1&2 is 25.46@.44A=11.2 watts,and  if the calculation of the motors consumption is correct,then the power(in watts) going into battery 3 should be as follows (11.2 watts - 5.6 watts)= 5.6 watts.

If we look at the screen shot--what do we see? ;)

Quote
I also disagree with all of his calculations about what is possible with this system. He is presenting numbers for an inaccurate build of a machine he does not understand and making assumptions about what can be done by connecting it to a generator, stating that a combination of a motor run on this system connected to a generator is only capable of recovering 19.7 watts of 25 watts expended.


I have lots of things I have done that move forward and far beyond these simple experiments. So does Matt Jones. I would bet anyone any amount of money they want to bet that you will find that a proper build of this system run between the positives will use FAR less than what is stated, and that a generator can be built that can exceed his estimate of what can be generated. I know because I have built such systems. I will not be sharing how I did it. I have put up with enough crap without introducing NEW concepts which no one is going to want to believe either.


But BUILD this system correctly and you will see what we have seen and can begin down the path we have been on for 10 years now.

When did things change Dave,as this was the very system you had me build some time ago,and then the motor was replaced with an inverter. Back then,with the system Luc has,you said worked as claimed,but now it seems that the system is wrong to show the results you claim.

Even when we subtract the voltage from battery 3 from batteries 1&2 as you claim has to be done to get the consumption of the motor,the readings on Luc's meters are accurate and correct--there is no error there at all.

Perhaps it is not us guys that dont know how to take accurate power measurements of this system?. ::)

This is you claim at post 263
Quote: The longest run I have done so far is ten hours, but I have done long runs three days in a row without drawing down on my primaries. The load I am running on the system is twofold. First there is the inverter, which is only running 18 1/2 watts, which is what I need to run off the inverter to balance with the load I am running off the other half of the circuit, which is the motor. It is running another motor as generator and is pulling 11 amps at 12 volts per hour.
So if someone has an answer for how I can pull just over a hundred amp hours a day for three days in a row out of two 18 amp hour batteries and still have a full charge on my primaries, I would love to hear it. Otherwise I would submit that I am NOT full of crap and this is a working system. :


Well,it was after that comment that i went and spent all that cash on the things you said i needed,and i built the systems to your specifications at the time-->and got the same results Luc is showing.

But you claim to have pulled 100 amp hours from two 18 amp hour batteries,and still have full charge on your primary batteries after the 100 amp hours was drawn from them.

Now,i still have all that gear on the shelf,and even better,i now have far more accurate power measuring equipment.

So,what are the chances of getting this !updated! version of the system,as it seems that all my money was spent on building !a now! outdated system,that did not seem to work as claimed.

Quote
I believe Luc's tests are going to prove what I have been saying all along, which I proved to myself 10 years ago but to which no one was willing to listen, including folks on THIS forum. And that is that you can get EXTENDED runs from this system.

OK,so ten years ago you had a working system. So,in that case,the system you had me build should have worked as claimed ?  ???

This is all so confusing.

First the 3 battery and motor system was good,then it was no good,but then good 10 years ago,but then we had to swap out the motor for an inverter  :o
I built it as you stated,and i listened,but got negative results.
I then swapped out the motor for an inverter as you asked,but still the results were negative.

Now Luc is showing the very same results,on the very same system you had me build,and now he is measuring it wrong,and the system is also wrong  ???

Now we need a pulse motor?  ???


Brad

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #519 on: November 02, 2017, 03:09:47 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4903
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #520 on: November 02, 2017, 03:22:34 PM »
Dave,

One thing I remember from my study of generators and motors that strikes me as important is that as the armature coils move from positive to negative magnetic field, when they are in a middle point between the two, the coil that is changing polarity is short circuited at the commutator to remove the stored charge in that coil. The reasoning for that was to reduce sparking at the commutator brush.

Why destroy that charge? Why not use it instead?

Is that one of the things Matt accomplished when he modified the scooter motor design?

Cadman

There is no coil shorting by the commutator in a multipole PM DC motor as used in Daves DUTs.


Brad

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4903
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #521 on: November 02, 2017, 03:27:20 PM »
Small update
Carroll is checking his Matt Motor out and will be shipping it to Luc
also we are working on Getting the batteries to Luc too .

Ok,so when i spent all that cash on what Dave said i needed,it was an ordinary PM DC motor that was needed,then an inverter,then a combo of the two-->and now,now we need a !!MATT!! motor  ::)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rb9AZAIRQlU

Offline ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6047
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #522 on: November 02, 2017, 03:49:19 PM »
I think we need a bit more Patience

Luc is moving step by step and Dave and Carroll are helping too.
the good news is your Money will be well spent at the end of all this.

Hope things are goin well in Oz !!

Offline gotoluc

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2840
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #523 on: November 02, 2017, 04:28:17 PM »
Hi Brad (tinmam)

At this time I would prefer not to get in more debate until I've completed both tests. It's going to take several days or even weeks before we can conclude with any certainty.
I understand you're not agreeing with the discussion but I'm asking you to hold off a little for now.
There's been a lot of drama over all this and it has finally cooled down when they realized I'm doing the best I can with the components I have available to test with.

Thanks for your understanding mate

Luc

Offline Dbowling

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 159
Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #524 on: November 02, 2017, 06:42:05 PM »
Brad,
We started with 3 batteries and a stock motor. It was hit and miss. Sometimes it worked and sometimes it didn't. Some people NEVER got positive results. Some people got them some days and not others. But we could see from REPEATED testing that there were possibilities. We have since come to understand some of the factors that influenced our successes: Size of batteries and condition of batteries. Rotation of batteries was and is essential with the basic system.


When we replaced the stock motor with the Matt motor, the results became MUCH more consistent. I was getting positive results on nearly every run. Others were still hit and miss, but still getting better results, even with smaller or poor condition batteries, but very LITTLE luck with batteries that were BOTH poor and small. If you go back and look on the forum, there were VERY FEW people who even BOTHERED to build the Matt motor.


Then I asked Matt if there was a way to increase the voltage to the motor to increase the RPM, and he came up with the circuit for the addition of the boost module. At THAT point my results became positive every time. The system flat worked.


So we substituted an inverter for a pulse motor and that worked. But you could only run the inverter with 250 amp hour batteries because you had to have time to adjust the boost module and it had to be readjusted every time you switched batteries. Too much of a hassle, so we abandoned it.


There were lots of other folks who contributed ideas that made the system more stable and all of those were "part of the system" at one time or another, so depending on when I was posting, the "system" was different. Now it is pretty much stabilized. For a while anyway.


I can understand your frustration, but I have little empathy. How do you think I feel when I have had to argue with folks like YOU for TEN YEARS that this thing works when I have had working systems on my bench running my generator?


It sounds like you probably have everything you need to replicate Luc's test with a stock motor. If your batteries are GOOD and large enough, you should get the same results Luc is getting. When he finishes his testing he can share his results and you can make a decision. Then you can rewind the motor as a pulse motor and improve those results. Then add the boost module and improve them a second time.




Luc did a series of videos debunking this system, and I have not been kind to him because I felt he gave the attempt at replication NO chance at success. The use of small batteries and an off the shelf motor is NOT a recipe for CERTAIN success, and failure would only reinforce his opinion that his doesn't work. I didn/t want THAT! But at least he is rotating the batteries. I expect he will see extended runs, but not not very long at all. I would say I hope it is enough for him to explore this further, but I already know he is going to test it with larger batteries and a pulse motor. If he adds the boost converter I have every confidence he will see the results I would like him to see.


It is not worth continuing the argument about how Luc is measuring the system. You have your opinion based on what you know. I have my opinion based on what I know. All that REALLY matters is results. Let's wait and see what THOSE are. If I am right about THAT, perhaps I am also right about the measurements and my understanding of how this system works as opposed to what other people have to say.


Attached is the data from Luc's testing as of today, and he is not finished yet. He began with two charged batteries and a discharged batteries so about 120 watt hours of available power to run the  motor according to his statement. He has currently shown 160 watt hours of work performed and is not done yet. I will be interested to see what conclusions he draws at the end of his testing and what results he gets with a setup that has large batteries, a pulse motor and a boost module.


Dave



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device
« Reply #524 on: November 02, 2017, 06:42:05 PM »

 

Share this topic to your favourite Social and Bookmark site

Please SHARE this topic at: