Language: 
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 : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) 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:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
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 OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

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

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

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

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 894374
  • *Total Topics: 15729
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 1
  • *Guests: 6
  • *Total: 7

Author Topic: Basic Free Energy Device  (Read 28572 times)

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Basic Free Energy Device
« Reply #45 on: July 22, 2015, 05:13:09 AM »
I am back from spending time helping my recently widowed mother get her house in shape to sell, so now I have time to spend on this while working on other major projects.


First, here is the really discouraging part for me. I brought this here for people to replicate a simple little device that costs less than $10.00 in parts if you have a few batteries lying around, and yet not ONE person here bothered to build it and report positive or negative results. Just a bunch of naysayers posting that it won't work.


There are several folks who HAVE built this and are posting positive results on the other forum and though emails directly to me.


I got four brand new deep cycle lawn and garden batteries today. If you hook a Motor to a battery, do you get to count the motor as a load? If the motor is then used to turn a generator which runs a light do you get to count the light as a load? I am running both a motor and a light with power produced from this system.

I'm going to hook the whole setup up for a few seconds and let it run long enough to get an RPM reading on the motor running the generator with my light bulb as a load. Then I am going to hook that same motor up to a power supply and adjust the volts and amps on the power supply until the motor is running at the EXACT same rpm. That will tell me EXACTLY how much power  SHOULD BE consumed by the motor to turn the generator with the light at a load at this rpm.. I know that power ISN'T being consumed by the motor...it is passing THROUGH the motor to the charge battery, but it should be fair to count it as power the system "uses" since any OTHER system would use that much power to run the motor. To that we can add the output of the generator into the load. Those two added together are the total power "produced" by the system. If the batteries can power the motor and power the small light while maintaining their charge and their CCA rating, is that enough to prove there is something to this? I believe it SHOULD be, but who knows what the skeptics are going to say. I know the first thing they will say is that the output to the light bulb is not constant and we need to measure it CONSTANTLY, or what the TOTAL output to the light is. They will also say that the rpm's of the motor fluctuate so we don't have an accurate measurement of what the motor is using. In other words, anything to drag attention away from the fact that the motor is running and the light is running and the voltage and CCA on the batteries are going UP instead of DOWN. I am not going to argue with you people about looping. If YOU want to take the time to try and figure out a way to loop this system, go for it. I am perfectly content to have a setup that keeps all my batteries charged and runs my generator for free. If that is not good enough for you, sorry.

Dave
I am sorry to hear of your loss and your mother's loss.  IIRC, the issues with your idea were explained at least several times to you.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Basic Free Energy Device
« Reply #45 on: July 22, 2015, 05:13:09 AM »

Offline Dbowling

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 166
Re: Basic Free Energy Device
« Reply #46 on: July 22, 2015, 05:27:02 AM »
Mark E. Thanks for the sentiment. I appreciate the thought.
Yes, the "issues" have been explained to me at length and from several directions. And since no one here seems interested in actually building and seeing for THEMSELVES, I won't bother to post here anymore. I tried. I don't have time to beat my head against the wall here just to try and get someone to listen. It is not MY loss. I will spend my time on the other forum and with people who have built and are getting results as we work to improve the circuit. I will continue to report my results there and those that are interested can follow along. But arguing here is a total waste of my time. And I would rather waste it on researching something none of you believe works.

Offline citfta

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 904
Re: Basic Free Energy Device
« Reply #47 on: July 22, 2015, 12:53:00 PM »
I have a question for the members of this forum.  Why does this forum even exist?  I joined it several years ago and then after a few months I just quit coming here because of all the naysayers.  When Dave brought his idea back here again I started coming here again to see if anything had changed.  I am considered a naysayer myself on the other forum because I ask tough technical questions.  There is nothing wrong with asking technical questions to try and understand what is going on.  But this forum seems to only want to put down whatever someone posts without even trying to investigate the claims.

I have been working with Dave as have several others for a few YEARS now on this project.  Dave may not have the technical expertise to correctly answer all the technical questions but he does have a system that works better than anything else I have worked with.  Do you want to call it OU?  Well how long does it have to run without running the batteries down before you call it OU?  A week?  A month?  A year?  If you never even start investigating his claim you will never know will you.

Dave has been extremely open and honest about all his research and efforts.  He will quickly tell you about his failures as well as his successes.  That is how he has gotten as far as he has with this project.  He shares his ideas and several of us test them along with Dave and we share our results.  He now has a system that seems to want to run a motor with no loss of power from the batteries.  The next step is to connect that to a highly efficient generator to see just how much power we can draw from the system without the batteries going down.

He came here to share his system with anyone wanting to see for themselves what he was doing and had accomplished.  All he got in return was a bunch of people that turned up their noses at his project and told him it couldn't work without even trying anything. 

If you have technical questions about how to get the system to work I will try to answer them or Dave may although I wouldn't blame him if he never came back.  If you just want to rant about how it can't work I won't waste my time arguing with you either.  Your loss for being so pig-headed.

Respectfully.
Carroll


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Basic Free Energy Device
« Reply #47 on: July 22, 2015, 12:53:00 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Basic Free Energy Device
« Reply #48 on: July 23, 2015, 10:31:58 PM »
Mark E. Thanks for the sentiment. I appreciate the thought.
Yes, the "issues" have been explained to me at length and from several directions. And since no one here seems interested in actually building and seeing for THEMSELVES, I won't bother to post here anymore. I tried. I don't have time to beat my head against the wall here just to try and get someone to listen. It is not MY loss. I will spend my time on the other forum and with people who have built and are getting results as we work to improve the circuit. I will continue to report my results there and those that are interested can follow along. But arguing here is a total waste of my time. And I would rather waste it on researching something none of you believe works.
David with all due respect:  In the several years that I have known you to be pursuing this idea you have never shown measurements that contradict theory or otherwise show an energy gain.  Nature just is what it is.

Offline shylo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 540
Re: Basic Free Energy Device
« Reply #49 on: July 23, 2015, 11:16:09 PM »
I've done many runs and still am, you definitely get longer runs with the 3BGS.
No OU but longer run times, more bang for your buck so to speak.
It's so simple to test just try it, what is there to lose?
artv

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Basic Free Energy Device
« Reply #49 on: July 23, 2015, 11:16:09 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline sm0ky2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3340
Re: Basic Free Energy Device
« Reply #50 on: July 24, 2015, 04:47:48 AM »
is the motor a load? yes
is the generator an input? yes
^^^^ those two balance each other.
the motor is not using any significant energy when you are turning around and generating it back
is the light a load? if you don't count the motor, then yes. otherwise you're double counting the same energy....
and forgetting to subtract the input from the generator.
 it doesn't matter what the motor and generator are doing. you don't even need to count them.

you can observe the system strictly from the perspective of batteries and light bulb
energy in, energy out.
when the energy in the initial batteries, is less than the energy used by the light bulb + the energy in the re-charging batteries
then you have something.
until then, you are fooling yourself, or trying to fool others,.

" you get longer run times"
longer run times than what? running an unloaded motor?
running the motor under the generator load, without re-charging the batteries ?
 



Offline citfta

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 904
Re: Basic Free Energy Device
« Reply #51 on: July 24, 2015, 12:48:57 PM »
If you have two 12 volt U1 batteries connected to the original 3BGS that Dave worked with and they power an inverter for 5 hours that is lighting a 120 volt 100 watt light bulb and the batteries don't show any loss of voltage does that mean anything at all to you guys? The batteries were also powering a motor that had no load on it.  The U1 batteries are the size used in lawn and garden tractors.   They only have a CCA of 200 to 300 depending on the brand.  I don't have any info on the AH rating but size wise it is probably in the 35 to 45 range.  I only saw this one time with my own testing.  Dave said from the very beginning his system was unstable.  So he has been working for all these years trying to find a way to stabilize the system to be able to repeat the power gains and make it a usable system.  He now believes he has found that. 

By the way I am not some young kid at this.  I am 69 years old and have worked in electronics since I was 14.  I KNOW how to read a meter.  I KNOW that battery voltage alone is not a good indicator of power used.  I KNOW those batteries should have shown a drop in voltage but they didn't.

Carroll

PS: A side benefit of the original 3BGS is that is was a very good way to recondition batteries.  It cleaned the sulphation from the old batteries fast than any other method I have used.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Basic Free Energy Device
« Reply #51 on: July 24, 2015, 12:48:57 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Basic Free Energy Device
« Reply #52 on: July 24, 2015, 09:18:28 PM »
Well, let's see. First of all how many Joules of energy are contained in 2 12 volt, 45 A-H batteries fully charged? The nominal 12 volts should actually produce an unloaded terminal voltage of something over 13 volts, but let's disregard that for the moment.

12 v x 45 A-H = 540 Watt-hours per battery.
540 Watt-hours x 60 minutes/hour x 60 seconds/minute = 1,944,000 Watt-seconds or Joules per battery, so the two together will have 3,888,000 Joules of stored energy.

Now let's see how much energy it takes to run an inverter powering a 100 watt light bulb for 5 hours. 100 Watts is of course 100 Joules per second.

100 Joules/second x 60 seconds/minute x 60 minutes/hour x 5 hours = 1,800,000 Joules... less than half of the energy stored in the 2 batteries in the first place.

If an OTS inverter is only 65 percent efficient, that means that 1,800,000 Joules/0.65 = 2,769,231 Joules would be required to provide that output. Still much less than the 3.9 megaJoules stored in the batteries.

The current required to run the lamp at a true 100 Watts of output power will be 100W/120V = 0.83 Amps output. With a 65 percent efficient inverter this would require around 154 Watts input to the inverter, and at 12 volts this means 154W/12V= 12.8 amps.


But we have a pair of 45 A-H batteries in parallel, so we have 90 A-H at 12 V available. 90 AmpHours/12.8 amps = a little over 7 hours. It is entirely possible that the batteries would still read an opencircuit terminal voltage of 12 volts or more after only  5 hours running at that load.


Please check my work, I'm not that good at doing math over the internet.


But the batteries are also running an unspecified "unloaded" motor! How convenient.

Offline citfta

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 904
Re: Basic Free Energy Device
« Reply #53 on: July 25, 2015, 12:09:52 AM »
Hi TK,

You obviously have not even looked at the circuit of the original 3BGS.  The batteries are in series with each other and in series with the motor and in series with the inverter.  There also a "dead" battery in parallel with the inverter.  The "dead" battery is connected in reverse polarity to the other batteries.  In other words the negative of that battery is connected to the negative of the first of the two that are in series and the positive is connected to the other side of the motor.   The motor was an unmodified scooter motor.  The unloaded current though it is about 1 amp depending on how heavily the inverter is loaded.  You also over looked the part where I said the battery voltage at the end of the run was the same as at the beginning of the run.  They didn't start out at 13 volts and end at 12 volts.  They started at about 12.8 if I recall correctly and ended at 12.8.  I am sure they ended at the same voltage as they started.  I know the math doesn't add up to the batteries maintaining the same voltage for the whole run but they DID.  If you guys aren't interested that is fine but don't try to tell me I don't know how to judge what I have seen.

Carroll

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Basic Free Energy Device
« Reply #53 on: July 25, 2015, 12:09:52 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Basic Free Energy Device
« Reply #54 on: July 25, 2015, 12:23:58 AM »
Hi TK,

You obviously have not even looked at the circuit of the original 3BGS.  The batteries are in series with each other and in series with the motor and in series with the inverter.  There also a "dead" battery in parallel with the inverter.  The "dead" battery is connected in reverse polarity to the other batteries.  In other words the negative of that battery is connected to the negative of the first of the two that are in series and the positive is connected to the other side of the motor.   The motor was an unmodified scooter motor.  The unloaded current though it is about 1 amp depending on how heavily the inverter is loaded.  You also over looked the part where I said the battery voltage at the end of the run was the same as at the beginning of the run.  They didn't start out at 13 volts and end at 12 volts.  They started at about 12.8 if I recall correctly and ended at 12.8.  I am sure they ended at the same voltage as they started.  I know the math doesn't add up to the batteries maintaining the same voltage for the whole run but they DID.  If you guys aren't interested that is fine but don't try to tell me I don't know how to judge what I have seen.

Carroll
Not to be patronizing, but if anyone draws conclusions without performing appropriate measurements, then frankly they are in no position to attempt to judge what they have seen.  Batteries mystify many people and voltage based measurements have allowed some such as Bedini to collect significant sums of money for more or less worthless junk for decades.  I know that appropriate testing protocols were suggested to David years ago and he did not see fit to employ them.

Many batteries, particularly lead acid batteries cannot be reliably be evaluated for capacity be terminal voltage. This is particularly true where voltage spikes occur.  Capacity can be evaluated by running them down into any:  a resistive, constant current, or constant power load.  Ditto if one wants to measure the charging energy: integrate the applied voltage and current.  Perform any experiment you like, but measure power to reasonable accuracy, say: +/-3%, for each phase, including the initial charging of the batteries from complete discharge, operation of the device under test, and then depletion of the batteries back to complete discharge, and then apply the book keeping.  What you will find no matter what you do is that you will be hard pressed to get even 2/3s the energy back out of the batteries that you put into them.  Why?  Because lead acid batteries have a 60% - 65% round trip energy efficiency.  Anything that you add on top such as 12V - 120VAC inverters will only serve to reduce the total efficiency.

Offline Dbowling

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 166
Re: Basic Free Energy Device
« Reply #55 on: July 28, 2015, 12:08:15 AM »
Well, let's see. First of all how many Joules of energy are contained in 2 12 volt, 45 A-H batteries fully charged? The nominal 12 volts should actually produce an unloaded terminal voltage of something over 13 volts, but let's disregard that for the moment.

12 v x 45 A-H = 540 Watt-hours per battery.
540 Watt-hours x 60 minutes/hour x 60 seconds/minute = 1,944,000 Watt-seconds or Joules per battery, so the two together will have 3,888,000 Joules of stored energy.

Now let's see how much energy it takes to run an inverter powering a 100 watt light bulb for 5 hours. 100 Watts is of course 100 Joules per second.

100 Joules/second x 60 seconds/minute x 60 minutes/hour x 5 hours = 1,800,000 Joules... less than half of the energy stored in the 2 batteries in the first place.

My original 3BGS setup was three 7.5 amp hour batteries running a small electric motor. So lets apply your math to that setup. And just to reduce the arguments, we'll assume there was 14 volts in each of the three batteries (even though one was "dead"). 14v x 7.5AH = 105 Watt hours per battery. 150 Watt-hours x 60 minutes/hour x 60 seconds/minute = 540,000 Watt-seconds or Joules per battery, so three batteries would have 1,620,000 Joules of stored energy.


If I ran a 100 watt light bulb 24 hours a day for ten days.... 100 Watts is of course 100 Joules per second. 100 Joules/second x 60 seconds x 60 minutes times 24 hours per day x 10 days = 86,400,000 Joules consumed as compared to 1,620,000 Joules AVAILABLE. That alone would be COP 53. The problem of course is that I did NOT run a 100 watt light bulb. I ran six of them, 24 hours a day for ten days. And during the daylight hours I ran my shop vac, electric drills, and anything else electrical that I could come up with, showing all my friends and family what this thing could do. At one point the voltage on the primaries went up to over 19 volts and it scared the crap out of me. The actual circuit I did not share at the time.  I slept on a cot next to the thing the entire time and my oldest son was there much of the time helping me. Why go to such extremes?? Because on the tenth day I flew to California and paid a patent attorney $10,000 NON REFUNDABLE to initiate a patent search and begin the patent process. I took the setup with me to demonstrate it to him and it all fit in a small suitcase. I wanted to be DAMN sure I really had something before I forked over that kind of money. When I returned home and hooked the system up again, it did not work. I immediately called the attorney and he was KIND enough to refund $7,000.00 of my money which he did not have to do. I have spent the last 8 years of my life attempting to repeat those results. I have gotten runs of a week. I have gotten runs of a couple days. And quite often I have gotten runs of several hours where the primaries do not drop or actually gain voltage, but I have not been able to replicate the original run. You have no reason to believe my story, and I could really care less. I know what I saw. Do you REALLY think your "numbers" and whining about how I collect my data are EVER going to convince me that I didn't see what I know I saw?


I would have to agree that over the years as I have shared data, I may not have used the "proper" collection methods, but I know what I am looking for and if I ever find it, I will know it when I see it, so data has never been of real concern for me. I'm looking for the great while whale, so measuring minnows along the way hasn't really been of interest to me.


I am waiting for Lowes to get in some batteries. I have already purchased 5 but need 6. Then I will put this new circuit to the test.


Dave

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Basic Free Energy Device
« Reply #55 on: July 28, 2015, 12:08:15 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Dbowling

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 166
Re: Basic Free Energy Device
« Reply #56 on: August 07, 2015, 04:20:40 AM »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCfmkQ0_zBk
That's all you get. That is a "Basic" Free energy device. It will put out more than it takes to run. Use a pulse motor. Saves input. Run it between the positives and recover 80% of the input. The output can be increased, but not giving how to do THAT away. Even without the output increasing and even without running this on a pulse motor or between the positives it is still COP>1. Not by much, but it is. The 35 volts @ .7 amps from each coil is more than the extra amp draw it takes to run the motor with the other coils connected. And I think I was really being fair when I said it put out .7 amps. If you watched the video it was at .69 for a split second, and went up as high as one amp output. If you DUMP all the power the gen outputs into a storage device rather than running load with it like I was doing in the video, you are home. Without that light there, it will run on just over 5 amps at 13 volts. You get THAT much output from two coils if you are NOT running loads with them and just collecting the power. It can be made to speed up under load so there is NO additional amp draw when you load up the additional coils, but not giving THAT away either. Lots of folks on the forums have shown how to do it. Believe them or don't. I do, and I've seen it. I've DONE it with this generator. I even posted a video of it a long time back. One of my very first videos of my very first version of this generator. With what I have shared so far on this thread, you can put together a COP>1 device. That was all I promised we would show you. I hope you will build it and show what you've built. You MIGHT get some more help. But I promise you this. Anybody who comes on here just asking questions without having built something aint a gonna get nuthin. Have fun. Ok, let the naysaying begin. LOL
Dave

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Basic Free Energy Device
« Reply #57 on: August 07, 2015, 08:13:39 AM »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCfmkQ0_zBk
That's all you get. That is a "Basic" Free energy device. It will put out more than it takes to run. Use a pulse motor. Saves input. Run it between the positives and recover 80% of the input. The output can be increased, but not giving how to do THAT away. Even without the output increasing and even without running this on a pulse motor or between the positives it is still COP>1. Not by much, but it is. The 35 volts @ .7 amps from each coil is more than the extra amp draw it takes to run the motor with the other coils connected. And I think I was really being fair when I said it put out .7 amps. If you watched the video it was at .69 for a split second, and went up as high as one amp output. If you DUMP all the power the gen outputs into a storage device rather than running load with it like I was doing in the video, you are home. Without that light there, it will run on just over 5 amps at 13 volts. You get THAT much output from two coils if you are NOT running loads with them and just collecting the power. It can be made to speed up under load so there is NO additional amp draw when you load up the additional coils, but not giving THAT away either. Lots of folks on the forums have shown how to do it. Believe them or don't. I do, and I've seen it. I've DONE it with this generator. I even posted a video of it a long time back. One of my very first videos of my very first version of this generator. With what I have shared so far on this thread, you can put together a COP>1 device. That was all I promised we would show you. I hope you will build it and show what you've built. You MIGHT get some more help. But I promise you this. Anybody who comes on here just asking questions without having built something aint a gonna get nuthin. Have fun. Ok, let the naysaying begin. LOL
Dave
In the configuration that you demonstrated, the device is about 24% efficient:  13V * 8A in, IE 104W and 35V * 0.7A out, IE 24.5W.  I believe you when you say that you can load more coils and the extra load doesn't reflect to the input.  What's happening is that you are improving the efficiency.  Things won't get interesting until your continuous load power approaches your continuous input power.  Unless the universe starts operating very differently than we have come to know:  as the load power gets to be significantly more than half the input power, incremental increases in load power will show up as larger and larger increases in input power.  Once you get to the maximum efficiency point of the system, load power increases will reflect larger increases in input power.

BTW, a flexible coupling like this will get rid of that chatter:  http://www.northerntool.com/shop/tools/product_14085_14085?cm_mmc=Google-pla&utm_source=Google_PLA&utm_medium=Hydraulics%20%3E%20Hydraulic%20Couplings&utm_campaign=Northern%20Tool%20and%20Equipment&utm_content=3011&ci_src=17588969&ci_sku=3011&gclid=CIC8r9WklscCFUNhfgodt58I6g

I have also found these DMMs to be pretty well.  They are less than $10. each shipped and sold by many vendors:  http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/151434838855?lpid=82&chn=ps.  TK has found that they are more sensitive to RF noise than the red DMMs that Harbor Freight sells for about $5. each and sometimes gives away for free with a minimum purchase, but otherwise work pretty well.  You can also find cheap on eBay dedicated dual display voltmeter / amp meters with shunts for less than $6. http://www.ebay.com/itm/DC-100V-10A-Voltmeter-Ammeter-Blue-Red-LED-Amp-Dual-Digital-Volt-Meter-Gauge-EA-/261979928515?hash=item3cff3877c3  A couple of these and a 5V wall wart could make your instrument wiring and viewing a lot easier without putting a big hole in your wallet.




Offline citfta

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 904
Re: Basic Free Energy Device
« Reply #58 on: August 07, 2015, 12:50:22 PM »


I have also found these DMMs to be pretty well.  They are less than $10. each shipped and sold by many vendors:  http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/151434838855?lpid=82&chn=ps.  TK has found that they are more sensitive to RF noise than the red DMMs that Harbor Freight sells for about $5. each and sometimes gives away for free with a minimum purchase, but otherwise work pretty well.  You can also find cheap on eBay dedicated dual display voltmeter / amp meters with shunts for less than $6. http://www.ebay.com/itm/DC-100V-10A-Voltmeter-Ammeter-Blue-Red-LED-Amp-Dual-Digital-Volt-Meter-Gauge-EA-/261979928515?hash=item3cff3877c3  A couple of these and a 5V wall wart could make your instrument wiring and viewing a lot easier without putting a big hole in your wallet.


If you had actually built something instead of telling everyone else they are doing it wrong you would know digital meters don't work worth a nickel on this system.  The readings just bounce around all over the place and don't give any kind of usable readings.  We have used both and the analogue meters are much better at giving an accurate picture.  By the very nature of a dampened needle we get a good average of the pulses no matter what the shape or duration of the pulses.  We could use a digital storage scope with math functions to get a better picture but that wouldn't mean much to most people.  For our purposes the analogue meter is the best choice.  I have everything from a Fluke to the give away meters from Harbor Freight and the simple analogue panel meter is the best for this type of measurement.

Carroll

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Basic Free Energy Device
« Reply #59 on: August 07, 2015, 02:09:54 PM »
If you had actually built something instead of telling everyone else they are doing it wrong you would know digital meters don't work worth a nickel on this system.  The readings just bounce around all over the place and don't give any kind of usable readings.  We have used both and the analogue meters are much better at giving an accurate picture.  By the very nature of a dampened needle we get a good average of the pulses no matter what the shape or duration of the pulses.  We could use a digital storage scope with math functions to get a better picture but that wouldn't mean much to most people.  For our purposes the analogue meter is the best choice.  I have everything from a Fluke to the give away meters from Harbor Freight and the simple analogue panel meter is the best for this type of measurement.

Carroll
Digital meters only bounce around when the signal  energy has a lot of content between a few Hz and 20Hz.  Above 50Hz even cheapy DMMs average very well all the way to the MHz.  You will only see issues with digital meters if the crest factor is very large.   If you do have content in the few Hz to 20Hz range, that is easily taken out with a passive low pass filter.  For work with typical DMMs: 150K ohms and a 1uF polyester capacitor make a very clean, low-leakage 1Hz cut-off filter.  Those parts together cost less than $1. in single quantities:  Digikey EF2105-ND are $0.68 for one, and less than $0.50 each if you buy ten.

If you are driving pulses and have reactive circuits, then you have a different measurement problem.  You will not obtain an accurate measure of real power by separately measuring the average voltage and current with any kind of meters.  In that case you will need to obtain or construct a power analyzer.  A digital scope with multiplication capability can generate the instantaneous power.  If the scope has advanced math or CSV export then energy can be integrated on the scope in the former case or in a spreadsheet in the latter case.


 

OneLink