To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : ) help us to bring you our services at . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. 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 this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid


Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)




3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief







Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition



YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines


Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video




WaterMotor kit


  • *Total Members: 83954
  • *Latest: john_

  • *Total Posts: 525584
  • *Total Topics: 15645
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 6
  • *Guests: 33
  • *Total: 39

Author Topic: Tilley fraud test finally published...  (Read 4236 times)

Offline hartiberlin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7973
    • free energy research
Tilley fraud test finally published...
« on: May 14, 2006, 05:59:03 PM »
The Tilley mysterious blackbox seems to be just only
an permanent magnet alternator..... :P
not what Tilley claimed, an electrostatic device...
such a D*ckhead....he had us frauding all the time....


Analysis of Tilley Black Box and Electric Vehicle

Performed by

Dr. Saeed Foroudastan

Ken Garrett: research assistant

Engineering Technology Department

Middle Tennessee State University

P.O. Box 19

Murfreesboro, Tennessee 37132


Carl B. Tilley claimed to have designed and produced an apparatus the output of which would be three times greater than its input. The study below analyzes this claim and tests its validity.  It is believed that the claims of Mr. Tilley are intentionally fraudulent or grossly misguided.

Methods and Materials

The analysis of Mr. Tilley?s claims had to be broken down into two separate processes: the analysis of the black box and the electric vehicle (Delorian).


The analysis of the black box began with an examination of the plans in the patent application (No. 60/338,478, filed 12/04/2001). The following components were obtained and assembled with the black box according to the information listed in the patent (See figures 1 and 2.):  300A-50-mv shunt; Galaxy 2,000 watt continuous 4,500 watt peak DC to AC inverter; and an EverStart 31DCM 12v battery.



Once the unit was functional, a BX24 microprocessor and StamPlot plotting software were used to log the battery voltage and net current eight times per second until the battery reached a voltage of 11 volts?the lowest recommend discharge voltage for lead acid batteries.  The battery was recharged and discharged again.  During the second discharge, the results were logged using the same process as was used during the first discharge.  Finally, the black box and internal charging device were disassembled, and each component was inspected and reassembled.



For the analysis of the Tilley electric vehicle, twelve EverStart 31DCM batteries were purchased and charged using a Deltona 24v20A 3-stage microprocessor-controlled battery charger, two in series.  Fresh batteries were installed in the Tilley Electric Vehicle.  The amp meters on the dashboard of the vehicle were checked for accuracy using an Agilent 3631A 50-mv power source.  The vehicle was transported to the Nashville Superspeedway.  The vehicle was tested at 45 mph on the outside access road of the Speedway.  Tilley?s charger was activated once the vehicle reached 45 mph.  The vehicle was driven until the battery voltage was depleted to the point that the vehicle could no longer move.  The vehicle was returned to Middle Tennessee State University (MTSU).  The batteries were removed, recharged, and reinstalled in the vehicle.  The test was repeated without the use of the Tilley?s charger.  The car was retuned to MTSU, and the batteries recharged for return.




Part1: Test of the Black Box.

The first discharging of the battery using the Tilley black box depleted the battery in 62 minutes with an average net current of 32 amps (fig. 3).  The second battery discharge also used an average net current of 32 amps and depleted the battery in 64 minutes.  The cycling of the battery through one charge, discharge, and recharge marginally increased the efficiency of the battery.  This increase in efficiency most likely accounts for the slight difference in battery depletion time from the first test to the second.



During the inspection of the components in the black box, the alternator  (fig. 5) was inspected and compared to a standard alternator (fig. 4).  The internal energizing coil had been removed and replaced with a permanent ring magnet, eliminating the requirement of an energizing current to the coil.  Although slightly increasing the alternator?s efficiency, the modification limits the alternator?s ability to regulate voltage?the advantage of an alternator over a generator.  This particular modification is not unique to the Tilley black box.  Permanent magnet (PM) alternators by Hornet Power Systems can be purchased online. (See attached printout accessed at


Part II: Results from the Analysis of Electric Vehicle
During the first test of the vehicle using the Tilley charging device, the vehicle traveled 12.6 miles at 45 mph.  During the second test of the vehicle without the use of the Tilley charging device, the vehicle traveled 18 miles at 45 mph.

There is no possibility that the Tilley black box performs in a manner consistent with Tilley?s claims of a three-to-one ratio of output to input.  The testing of the unit produced results consistent with Ohm?s law, which states that the current in a circuit is directly proportional to the applied voltage and inversely proportional to the resistance of the circuit (I=E/R, where I=current in amps, E=applied voltage in volts, and R=resistance in ohms).  The wiring of the amp meter on the black box to indicate output rather than net current indicates either a gross misunderstanding of Ohm?s Law or an attempt to produce fraudulent 


To measure true system performance an additional meter must be installed between the battery and the inverter. The omission of this meter causes inaccurate results. The net power from the battery is not measured, only the power back to the battery. Measuring ONLY output from the battery and not input does not show true system performance. This omission implies that either the designer does not understand how to measure net power or is being purposely misleading. By adding an additional meter between the battery and the inverter and subtracting input from output will give an accurate reading of system performance. Our test shows that the system does not put out extra power. Eventually the system battery will discharge (depending on the external load).


In addition, the wiring of the gauges in the car to read an approximate three-to-one ratio of output to input regardless of the operational status of the charger is indicative of additional lack of understanding.


A2 is all that is necessary to measure output from the battery. By adding an additional amp meter (A1) the designer is able to show another amp reading that is not power back to the battery but power consumed by the motor. This meter will always show a reading that is greater than A2. The two meters will always show different readings even though the charging device is not present. Therefore the ratio between A1 and A2 is not a measurement of output verses input.

          Test Result Based Responses to Representations made by Carl Tilley to the Public

and (Potential) Investors



1.         The following representations were made during a story on WSMV-TV news:

            a.         Mr. Tilley had invented a device that he was using to power a car, a boat,

his home, the Tilley Foundation business location, and an ?all-terrain vehicle?


This statement could be true. We did not test these devices. The device  we did test cannot be used to power vehicles or homes more efficiently than conventional batteries.


b.            This device runs without any outside source of energy


The device uses power from a battery to operate. It attempts to recharge the battery while in operation, but does not produce enough energy to sustain its own operation.


c.             The device is an inexhaustible source of energy


The device is not self-sustaining or inexhaustible.


At other times the following representations were made by Mr. Tilley:


2.         The perpetual energy device stores and uses static electricity in a ?black box? to

create a force field that provides power.


This statement is false. A perpetual motion device is a device which creates as much energy as it uses. A perpetual motion device cannot create more energy than it uses. By the conservation of energy principle, a fundamental physical law, a system cannot produce more energy than it uses. Additionally, by the First Law of Thermodynamics, energy cannot be created from nothing. In a mechanical system, energy is always lost to friction, in the form of heat, which is why mechanical systems never achieve 100% efficiencies, and why perpetual motion devices remain a myth. The amount of energy inputted into the system is always less than the usable energy output. The rest of the energy leaves the system as heat.


The device tested uses a modified alternator (also known as a permanent magnet alternator) to store electrical energy as mechanical energy from an outside source. It does not create a ?force field that provides power.?


3.                  The perpetual energy device would be used for ?time portal theory and use?


This statement borders on science fiction, and has no relevance or credibility scientifically.



4.                  The perpetual energy device recycles electricity and is capable of powering a



?Recycling? implies that the device is using leftover electricity, or electricity that the building is not using and would otherwise be wasted. The device does not ?recycle? electrical energy, but instead converts the energy to mechanical energy using an electric motor, then back into electrical energy using an alternator and inverter. The process of converting electrical energy into mechanical energy with the motor is about 80% efficient. Converting mechanical energy back to electrical energy is nearly as efficient. In short, energy loss due to friction in the inverter, the motor, and the permanent magnet alternator reduces the overall efficiency of the system, and makes its use as a power source less efficient than just plugging an appliance directly into an electrical outlet of the building.


The Tilley modified alternator may output marginally higher power than an unmodified alternator, but the process of converting electrical energy to mechanical energy and then back to electrical energy will always be less efficient than using the original electrical energy directly.


5.         The perpetual energy device ?runs 24 hours a day?


This statement is ambiguous at best. Any device could run 24 hours a day if it has a power input. The device cannot run continuously without an external power supply and will eventually stop if powered by batteries alone.


6.         The perpetual energy device can power a building without the assistance of

Electricity coming to the building from any outside source.


 The device cannot run in a self sustaining mode, even with no external load.

Again the device will run down at a rate determined by the demand for power from the building.


7.         The perpetual energy device is able to run for 10 days straight [which is the

Minimal amount a group of Brazilian investors wanted to see it run before they

Bought the technology]


The device is not self sustaining. Any device could run for as long as there is input power. The device does not create more power output than input.


8.         The perpetual energy device converts battery power to current (DC to AC)


Direct current (DC) and alternating current (AC) describe two different types of current. In the device, the battery supplies 12V DC power to an inverter, which converts DC to AC power. There is very little energy loss associated with this conversion. The 115V AC power produced by the inverter is the typical voltage and current found in electrical fixtures in buildings. This power is supplied to the motor controller, which converts the AC power back into DC power for use with the DC motor within the black box device. Again, there is relatively little energy loss with this conversion. The motor is used to spin an alternator, which produces DC power. This process converts electrical energy to mechanical energy, and then back into electrical energy. These conversions suffer significant energy loss due to heat in the motor and alternator. The power from the alternator is then used to charge the batteries, creating a complete power loop.


This system, which converts DC electrical energy to AC energy, then back to DC energy, then to mechanical energy, then finally back to DC energy, is terribly inefficient. The battery is in essence trying to charge itself, but due to the inefficiencies of the system, it eventually completely discharges completely.


In our tests, the batteries completely discharged in 1 hour.


The device does convert DC power to AC power, but many devices, like the inverter used in this device, perform this same task.


9.         The perpetual energy device can use 250 watts and 125 watts of power from the

wall outlet and produce 10,000 watts that could be sold back to the electric



This claim represents a 40,000% increase in power output. As described above, the device cannot output more power than is inputted. In fact, the device outputs less power than is inputted.


10.       The perpetual energy machine can be used to power a vacuum cleaner, TVs,

microwaves, any kind of electrical appliances.


The device does not act as a power source, and requires external batteries. The length of time that the device can run will depend on how many batteries are used to store energy. The device does not create power. Batteries could power each of these appliances more efficiently than if the ?perpetual energy machine? where included in the system.


11.       The perpetual energy machine can be used to power a house


Again, the device is not a power source. It can be used to power a house with enough batteries, but batteries by themselves would be more efficient.


12.       The Delorean uses about 400 amps while attached to the perpetual energy



An amp is a measure of current, not power or power consumption. The Delorean requires a certain amperage, or current, to accelerate and maintain velocity. The required current is supplied by a source, the onboard batteries in this case.

The performance of the Delorean (TEV) is poor compared to other comparable electric vehicles.


13.       The perpetual energy machine attached to the vehicle is 99.6% efficient; it ran for

two years straight with the only problem being heating related; the problem was

solved by putting two motors in the car with 2 big fans attached; after running for

an hour with one motor the second switches on and allows the first motor (having

a temperature of 85 degrees) to cool off; a bump is heard with the motors switch


The heating related problem described above indicates that considerable energy is being lost to heat within the ?perpetual energy machine.? Electric motors loose most of their energy through mechanical friction and electrical resistance in their coils, both of which produce heat. For example, an electric motor that is 50% efficient will lose 50% of the input power to heat, and output mechanical energy equaling 50% of the electrical energy inputted. A device that is 99.6% efficient will lose 0.4% of its inputted energy as heat. A hot motor indicates an inefficient one and a hypothetical motor with an efficiency of 100% will theoretically not change temperature. Also the fact that the device is only 99.6% efficient contradicts his previous claims about his ?perpetual energy machine,? which ought to produce efficiencies well above 100%.


14.       When asked, ?What is the standard efficiency of an electric motor running off of a

battery or electricity? Tilley responded, ?Plane is pretty straight, but goes up a

little bit.?


I have no idea what he meant by this statement. Generally motors have an efficiency of 80 to 98%. A standard alternator has an efficiency of 78%. A modified alternator (with permanent magnet installed) will have about the same efficiency minus the power required to energize the coil (which is 2-4 amps at 12 volts depending on output required).


15.       The perpetual energy machine can produce a surplus of 3 million watts per month

in a house; this extra energy could be sold back to the electric company.


Surplus is defined as the amount of energy that remains when use or need is satisfied. In order to have a surplus, Mr. Tilley would use the power necessary to power his home and the generator device, and would then still have a remainder of 3 million watts per month. Again, this claim does not match our test data. The fact remains that the device does not produce more power output than input. 






The Tilley device that was tested did not perform as claimed in this collection of statements. The claims are ambiguous and misleading. Furthermore, there is no additional evidence or documents to support such claims. During the disassembly process it became clear that this device was assembled from common hand and power tools. The craftsmanship was poor and the misalignment of the motor to the modified alternator caused severe vibrations and noise. The cooling fan on the right side of the unit scrapes the sides on startup and shutdown, causing even more noise. The material for the outside of the device came from a highway construction sign. The unit appears to have been hastily constructed with little regard for safety and reliability.


It is concluded from observations and tests performed that the Tilley black box is not a ?perpetual energy machine.? The only component in the black box that was not a standard, off the shelf component is the GM alternator. The alternator was modified by replacing the coil with a strong permanent magnet. This modification is NOT an original idea. These types of alternators are commercially available. The benefit of modifying an alternator in this manner is that you do not need an external power source to generate voltage output. The disadvantage is that you lose the ability to regulate the output. Output is a function of rpm only. Replacing a coil with a permanent magnet simply converts an alternator to a generator. This does not cause efficiencies of 300%.


As stated, the conservation of energy principle and the First Law of Thermodynamics dictate that a device cannot produce more energy than is required to operate the device. In addition, both mechanical and electrical systems inherently suffer from loss of energy due to friction and resistance respectively, which makes 100% efficiencies impossible. Perpetual motion devices or systems are realistically impossible, and any claims to the contrary must be carefully scrutinized. Claims of system efficiency levels greater than 100% may be discarded without reservation.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Offline mikestocks2006

  • elite_member
  • Sr. Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 324
Re: Tilley fraud test finally published...
« Reply #1 on: October 01, 2006, 05:16:08 AM »
The above is in sharp contrast to this:
Chevrolet Blazer SUV to be converted to all-electric
along with the DeLorean...

Who's is right/truthfull? One is calling it a scam, the other one a success..who knows..

And now another test and validation in process?

Came across this.

Tilley Plans Week-Long Home Power Test for Free-Energy Generator
At least six qualified energy professionals will go to a remotely located modular home and garage that are powered exclusively by the Tilley Home Power system, to test the system for at least seven days, to verify that the fuelless technology works as claimed.

by Sterling D. Allan
Pure Energy Systems News
Copyright ? 2006


LEBANON, TENNESSEE, USA -- Imagine a power device that can continuously supply all of the energy needs of a home, 24-7-365, with no fuel input, harnessing a free energy source that is independent of the wind and the sun.  The same technology could be used to power a vehicle, eliminating the need to stop for fuel.

Carl Tilley, of Tennessee, claims to have just such a technology. He has been making such a claim for several years. But due to the lack of a believable demonstration, the new-energy-technology community has not believed this to be true.

Because of what has appeared to me to be substantial evidence of fraud, I have been among those writing polemical and negative coverage of Tilley?s work. Indeed, it was my story in September of 2002 about Tilley's demonstration of a DeLorean running on his technology at the Nashville Superspeedway that began for me what has ended up becoming a full-time project in reporting news about cutting-edge energy technologies. My coverage of the Tilley Foundation (ref, ref) comes up as the first or second item (ref, ref, ref) in Google searches on the subject.

Reopening a Case, and Diplomatic Relations

When I recently noticed dialogue on a discussion list alleging that Tilley had skipped town, I wanted to verify that such was the case before giving it any coverage. So, I picked up the phone and gave him a call. Carl Tilley responded that no, he has not gone anywhere. After he hung up on me a couple of times, surprisingly, we ended up talking for about an hour.

He let me know about a pending test he is planning, and actually invited my input on the 22-page document of protocols he has composed for those who will be performing the testing. He agreed to let me forward it privately to the New Energy Congress for their input; and further, agreed to allowing a story about the pending test to appear on the web in advance.

Wanting to prove once and for all, unequivocally, that his generator performs as he says it does, Tilley is putting the final touches on his experimental set-up in a very remote location near Cheyenne, Wyoming. Certifying the results ? whatever they turn out to be ? will call on the talents of at least six qualified professionals from fields of work and research related to energy.

Tilley expects this verification experiment to take place within the next month. The test will run at least seven days, and could go for as long as ten days. A video crew will be on hand as well, shooting a documentary about the study.

Testing a Very Full House

Tilley's intent is to prove that the device can run a home, and not just a ?green? one with minimal load. This will be a home with a high load: during the testing, all of these professionals and observers will be residing in this home and using the appliances. For water, they will rely on a well pump. The overall load will include use of all the ?normal? electrical devices such as a TV, VCR, DVD, lights, washer, dryer, a stove, and a dishwasher.

In addition, the Tilley generator itself continuously consumes 500 watts in the process of generating the energy to run the home.  The Tilley device itself, therefore, draws a total of 12,000 watt-hours each day, which is half the amount of the 24,000 watt-hours that Southwest Windpower says the average high-energy home consumes. So in such a setting of an average and fairly "typical" living scenario, the Tilley Home Device would need to be producing a third more energy than the 12,000 watt-hours needed, in order for it to be fed back into the machine to keep it going.

Isolated Setting Away from Power Grid

Before the professionals are brought onto the property for the test, the home-power device will be run for a week, to make sure the system operates properly and that it is ready for such a critical examination.

The location is 15 miles from the nearest town, the last eight miles being a dirt road, and is two miles removed from any utilities. The conclusions of the test will include statements from the local utility company certifying that utilities have never been run closer than two miles from the test location. The purpose of the remote location is to mitigate any claims that the energy might be coming from a hidden extension cord, or being transmitted wirelessly from the local grid.

Tilley has purchased and installed a 2,500 square-foot modular home and 1,800 square-foot garage on the 200-acre property for the purpose of the test. Even after this particular launch test, he intends to continue the studying the technology?s functionality and reliability.. The facility will also serve as a demonstration facility for pre-qualified parties.

The Agreement and Protocols

For brevity, Tilley's document refers to all these testing individuals as "professionals". The independent testers will include professors, engineers, scientists, and electricians, one of whom has been with the local utility company for thirty-five years. As professionals, they will be paid for their service.

Each professional must agree up front to allow his/her name and qualifications to be listed publicly with his/her conclusions. Each professional also agrees that the purpose of the test is limited to certifying whether or not the technology works. They are not to be determining how it works, which might violate the non-disclosure agreement.

Those "professionals" and observers who participate in this first major testing are being asked to not communicate with the outside during the seven days that they will be running the test. All of the professionals, the documentary crew, and a few observers, will be staying at the home, and in the garage.

Upon arrival at the location, the professionals will walk the property with the purpose of inspecting for possible hidden wires.

There are three conditions under which a contracted professional can withdraw from the test prematurely, or leave the premises once it begins. One would be that the system "produced such a superior power or maintained sufficient electricity to the test home that extended testing is not warranted." Another would be that "the system failed to power the test home," so no further testing is warranted. The third would be in the case of equipment problems, system breakdown, sickness or some other emergency.

Technical Details

The test set-up will involved a 120-volt AC inverter and a 240-volt AC inverter to handle the heavier loads imposed by the number of appliances, the well pump and the air conditioner. Combined, both inverters can supply 6,000 watts continuous power for the home and garage, and up to 10,000 watts surge capacity.

The inverters will be powered by six twelve-volt batteries, wired in parallel, that will receive continuous charge from the Tilley Home Device set-up, which will entail three different charging systems of around 19 pounds each. Next in the system after the batteries is a DC power system, followed by the inverters. An AC breaker box will come after the inverters, to prevent overload of the inverters. The Tilley devices are each run by a drive motor that is powered by an AC outlet.

In other words, the system is a self-feeding system, with energy left over for other appliances. As Tilley stated in his document: "It is basically like a car alternator that when you turn your motor on it charges your car battery, ...the exception [being that] there is no fuel required."

My Added Recommendations for Verifying Test

The professionals will be manually collecting data in addition to checking on the automated data collection that will be in place. I recommended that the professionals measure each segment of the system, not just what is coming after the inverters to the home. This includes regularly measuring the Battery Capacity of each battery.

Tilley's document calls for the professionals to take three readings each day. I recommended that he also have the professionals analyze each appliance in the compound to see whether it is functioning normally, and that they would measure how much energy it consumes while it is running. It would be good to also tally how often and for how long each appliance is used during the week of the test. A usage log should be posted next to each appliance, so that a record can be kept of when it is turned on, and when it is turned off.

Combined with the protocol Tilley set forth, I recommend that once the test is complete, the final report should include accurate numerical information on:

how much energy the Tilley device put out, and how much it consumed;
how much energy the batteries received, and how much came from them;
how much energy went into the inverters, and how much came out;
how much energy was consumed by the appliances in the house and garage, showing peaks and valleys, itemized into a log of individual device's energy consumption;
notation of any outages that occurred due to overloading the circuit breakers;
the exact duration of the test.
When complete, the certification documents should include:

certification signed by each professional that the results are accurate to the best of his or her knowledge;
certification by each professional that he found no other energy input source, including details of search techniques;
certification from the utility company that no utilities have been installed within two miles from the test location;
names and credentials of each professional.

Outcome, Marketing Plans, and Documentary Showing

If the test comes out positive, Carl Tilley anticipates that the Tilley Home Device could be made commercially available within a year. However, implementation of that plan is not directly in his hands anymore.

In 2004, with permission of the Tilley Foundation shareholders, he sold the rights to the technology to another entity, which will be involved in the licensing of the technology. That entity requested the removal of the website a few months back. (See archive.)

This test will mark the last event in a long series of events that the video documentary crew has been compiling. Tilley said that the agreement is that if the technology works, then the documentary will help prove that to the world. If it doesn't work, the party making the documentary is free to publish it as they see fit, within the stipulations of the non-disclosure agreement that protects the intellectual property. Tilley plans to sell rights to the documentary to a major media concern such as a network TV station.

This test scenario was spurred in part by a recent situation that Tilley described. He quoted a professor from Vanderbilt University, who had come to test the device, as telling him, "Yes, it does what you say, but there could be a magnetic field under the floor that could be powering this." To eliminate this possibility, the unit was then taken to the professor?s laboratory at Vanderbilt, but the 100 Watt inverter was inadequate and blew under the load.

Finally the professor said, "Until I know how it works, I can't say that it works."

This present test plan will allow a representative cross section of experienced and knowledgeable energy professionals an extended amount of time and full freedom, in front of video cameras, to use any and all forms of detection and data recording deemed necessary to examine every possible source of energy, and to come to a scientifically solid conclusion, once and for all.