Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Solid States Devices => solid state devices => Topic started by: Dbowling on July 03, 2015, 10:08:33 AM
-
I have been posting over at Energetic Forum for several years now, but when I first ran across what I called the 3BGS or Three Battery Generating System, I first showed it here. Nobody believed me, but that didn’t keep me from working on it for the last eight years. Lots of folks have gotten the same results I got, but the problem is, it’s sporadic and undependable. But working with it has led me to something that DOES work consistently, which leads me to the purpose of this post. I thought I owed folks here at least an update.
I have said that we need several parts for a Basic Free Energy Device
1. Pulse Motor
2. Generator
3. Run it on a 3BGS type circuit on the potential difference
4. A flywheel to smooth things out and store energy.
In reference to the 3BGS, I had a thought a while back about the fact that since the motor increases the voltage coming from the two batteries in series before it gets to the 3rd battery, which is part of what allows the 3rd battery to charge, perhaps we could somehow boost that voltage with some kind of simple boost circuit. With that in mind, I asked Matt Jones if there wasn't a way we could boost the voltage coming out of the motor to REALLY charge battery 3, and he came up with a circuit which I have been playing around with for a while now. I get different results depending on the "Boost Module" I am using and the voltage that hits battery 3.
I have two batteries in parallel as my 3rd battery and two primaries in series. The goal for me has been to
1. Run a motor
2. Turn a generator
3. Use generated voltage to power a small load
4. Keep the primaries from discharging too far down
5. Charge the secondary (parallel) batteries quickly
6. Switch positions of the batteries in series and the batteries in parallel…like with a Tesla switch
7. See what kind of extended run times I can get with this kind of setup.
What I am seeing is that I can get increases in my charge batteries that are greater than the losses in my primary batteries while still running a motor as generator and powering a small load. If I continue to rotate batteries, I end up with increased charge in ALL batteries while running the motor and powering a load.
The simple boost module I am using is here: [/font]
http://www.ebay.com/itm/171151982059?_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT (http://www.ebay.com/itm/171151982059?_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT)
A video of the setup I am running is here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuUTtdMqeyA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuUTtdMqeyA)
Before you tell me the motor is making horrible noises, I know it is. It was a motor I burnt up doing some other experiments, so I was using it until I got new ones in the mail. They arrived two days ago.
Here's some data for you
Run time 30 minutes. (These are with the NEW motors)
Battery #1 Start 12.45 End 12.22 After 1 hour rest 12.39
Battery #2 Start 12.43 End 12.23 After 1 hour rest 12.37
Battery #3 Start 12.41 End 12.76 After 1 hour rest 12.48
Battery #4 Start 12.41 End 12.85 After 1 hour rest 12.54
Rotate pairs of batteries
Run time 30 MORE minutes
Battery #1 (Moved to 3rd position) End 12.67 After 1 hour rest 12.55
Battery #2 (Moved to 4th position) End 12.67 After 1 hour rest 12.52
Battery #3 (Moved to 1st position) End 11.15 After 1 hour rest 12.44
Battery #4 (Moved to 2nd position) End 12.31 After 1 hour rest 12.50
If you look at the voltages, ALL batteries gained in voltage.
During the run, the stock razor scooter motor was powering a second razor scooter motor used as a generator. That generator was outputting 12 volts at .45 amps to the load, which was a 12 volt electric fan rated at .8 amps. (but only drawing.45)
At a MINIMUM, that's 5.4 watts of power used to run the fan plus 48 watts of power used to run the motor turning the generator, for a total of 52 watts of power used with ZERO losses to the batteries...in fact, a GAIN in voltage. I think that might qualify as COP>1. What do you think?
I believe this shows what is possible. There is still lots of experimenting to be done here. The output voltage of the boost circuit should be experimented with to see what produces the best results. There should be a hundred people taking a look at this.
Will it work long term? I have no idea. Will it kill the batteries? I have no idea. But when you can run a motor for 8 or 9 hours for free, that's a pretty decent first step.
A friend of mine has been running with only TWO batteries instead of FOUR, and he has been getting some good results. Yesterday he sent me an e-mail with what he said was "disappointing results" for his run that day. He ran for 9 hours and broke even instead of getting an increase in voltage on his batteries. I told him there were people on the forum who would wet their pants if they could get a motor to run for 9 hours for "free." He has had MANY runs where the voltages climbed with just two batteries, but he has not been putting a load on his motor, and has been using a much smaller brushed dc motor. If I remember correctly, he has used a couple different motors and gotten better results with the bigger motor, but I will let him report his OWN results. [/font]
If you do runs with loads that don't pull your primaries too far down, they will recover well, and if you rotate the batteries between runs you are going to see an overall gain on the voltages in your batteries. Don't take my word for it. Set the silly thing up on YOUR bench and check the results with YOUR meters.
Just so you know, we have a pulse motor design that gets even BETTER results, but that’s a subject for another day. There is also a few ideas we have for a generator, but let's get on the same page with this circuit first. You can find me here on Energetic Forum
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/19774-basic-free-energy-device-24.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/19774-basic-free-energy-device-24.html)
or dvd.bowling@gmail.com
-
Thanks for sharing your GREAT results. I think what you are doing is switching the
batteries to different positions to get each one charged. The current from running
the motor has to pass through the dead battery, thus charging it FOR FREE.
BRILLIANT.
.
-
I appreciate the supportive comment, and am VERY familiar with the diagram you showed, because it is what got me started, but if you watched the video and looked at the schematic I posted, this is more like a Tesla switch. There are two positions for the batteries. Position 1: Two batteries in series and position 2: two batteries in parallel. I am going from two batteries in series through the boost converter to up the voltage, then through the motor, which acts as a generator and increases the voltage another couple volts, then into the two batteries in parallel. I ran it for two weeks, flipping the batteries back and forth. The voltages in my batteries continued to edge up slightly, and I was powering a load the entire time. Then had to go out of town for almost a month. I am only in town for the rest of this week and then have to leave for another week. When I get back, it is my intention to use a larger motor, larger generator and larger batteries to do a run of several weeks continually powering some loads and see just what this thing can do. I already know the generator runs for FREE, so everything it creates is in excess of what is used by the system. I'm asking for some people to replicate and let folks know if this is for real or if I'm just blowing smoke. I know what I see on my bench with my meters. What do YOU see on YOUR bench?
Dave
-
Hi David,
Thanks for your update. I commented way back when you first posted on this subject. It appears that you are still assuming that battery final rest voltages for both partially charged and partially discharged batteries can be compared to accurately represent capacity gained or removed during a test run. This is clearly not the case.
-
I agree with you. It is not just the voltage that needs to be measured but the battery capacity. To do that I use a Cen-Tech digital battery analyzer. It measures capacity, charge and resistance in the batteries both before and after test runs.
But over 8 years of doing this has shown me that NO TESTING will ever be completely accurate when applied to an unconventional circuit such as this. The only way I know for sure I have something is to measure the VOLTAGE AND AMPS used to run a load connected to the output of the generator driven by the motor I am running. This is a completely SEPARATE CIRCUIT from the circuit used to run the motor and the output of the generator can be measured by conventional means. . When the load I am running from the generator has used more watts than what is available in all of the batteries combined (which are connected to the motor circuit), and the batteries continue to function and show full charge or greater charge than when I began, and I continue to power loads and exceed the watts available by two or three or four or five times, then I believe I have something. You may believe I do not, and that is your choice. I am not here to argue as to whether I have something or not. I present it for those people who are interested in actually building the thing and either replicating my successful results, or revealing me to be a fraud of the highest order. I am not going to debate this with people who have not built and tested this device, so consider this my last response to those who want to insist it can't be for real. I could care less what you think and I will not waste my time on you. No hard feelings guys. But I have been down this road before and almost let the naysayers talk me OUT of ever working with this setup. At this point in my life I have seen too many test results and powered too many loads to fall for that again. I can tell almost to the minute how long a fully charged brand new battery will power one of the set loads I am using, and when I exceed that by many times, I don't NEED meters or gauges or tests to tell me something is going on. Believe or don't. Build it or don't. Not my problem. I gave you a gift. What you do with it now is up to you.
Dave
-
Could this be replicated using smaller batteries and motors ? That would make it less expensive.
-
I believe so. One of the people replicating is using a much smaller motor, although he is getting better results with the larger motor.
-
would rechargeable 9volt batteries have a similar effect?
-
I have no idea. The batteries I have been using are 12 volt 220 CCA Lawn and Garden Batteries. Those are the only batteries I have tried it with. You're on your own with anything else. Any sized brushed DC motor should work. You're just going to have to try it and see. The boost circuit is like $3.00, so not much of an investment.
-
Nice circuit and presentation.
If this is indeed "free energy" then the only real test is to self loop the device.
I agree that testing battery conditions can be problematic and folks here, and elsewhere, will never agree on what is really going on.
If you self loop it to charge itself while running...and it continues to run beyond what it should be able to do, there is your proof.
Just a suggestion to you from someone that has seen many devices that appeared to be overunity, but in fact were not at the end of the day.
Best of luck to you with your device and I hope it works like you think it does.
Bill
-
There is no need to self loop the device. As long as the batteries are rotated, it continues to run. As long as it is running it produces usable power. Sometimes I wonder if people even bother to read what I post. This thing will ALWAYS need batteries because that is what supplies the power to run. The output of the generator will always be less than the power required to turn the motor that is running the generator. You cannot loop the generator output back to run the motor. The output of the generator and the circuit that runs the motor are two separate circuits. We are running the motor off the potential difference between two sources of energy, and recycling that energy. It cannot be looped, but it doesn't NEED to be. The circuit that runs the motor is self sustaining. The generator circuit provides usable power. TWO separate circuits. Build it and you will see, or just keep TALKING and wasting oxygen. Sorry to be rude, but I have had my fill of people who haven't built this thing telling me what it can't do and what I need to do to prove it works. I don't need to do ANYTHING. I shared this with everyone, but I could give a crap whether you believe it works or not, and I could care less whether or not you choose to build it. I have given you everything you need to build this successfully. I have projects of my own to attend to, like the motor and generator to be used with this circuit, so you'll have to excuse me if I don't stay around to hold anyone's hand. Good luck all. I am done here.
-
"power recycling" seems to be an interesting topic these days.
several unconventional set-ups, such as this one, have shown that there may be something here worth investigating.
if at the very least, we learn something we didn't know about where the power goes after it runs to "circuit ground".....
the batteries/capacitors care about two things: voltage potential between two points, and resistance.
These two things can be positioned such that the "total power capacity" we experience from our human perspectives, is completely independent from the experience the battery has from ITS' perspective.
whether you reverse-bias the voltage so that the current flows into the charging battery, or you reverse bias the resistance so current builds up from within,
I think the best way to accurately measure this, is indeed through the load. Using the manufacturer specs on the batteries as a base-line
for Energy Input.
Load consumption is your output, regardless of the state of the 3 batteries at any given point in the system.
The motor/generator system has its own in/out with losses, and is simply an additional load that can be ignored for the purpose of looking at the system as a whole. call it an "inefficiency" that will present itself in the final In / Out analysis.
For instance, the battery is 12v, and let's assume it has capacity of 11 Amp hours, that gives you 132 Watt-hours x 2 batteries
= 264 Watt-hours of energy.
If your load measures lets say... 250 Watt-Hours when the system finally drains, then you know the motor/gen consumed a good part of the remaining 14 Watt-hours of electricity. The rest being resistive/heat and EMF losses in the circuit wiring.
If your load consumes more than the 264 Watt-hours (and enough to negate a small capacity remaining in the "dead battery",
and the system is still running, then We take a look at whats going on in each step of the system.
-
There is no need to self loop the device. As long as the batteries are rotated, it continues to run. As long as it is running it produces usable power. Sometimes I wonder if people even bother to read what I post. This thing will ALWAYS need batteries because that is what supplies the power to run. The output of the generator will always be less than the power required to turn the motor that is running the generator. You cannot loop the generator output back to run the motor. The output of the generator and the circuit that runs the motor are two separate circuits. We are running the motor off the potential difference between two sources of energy, and recycling that energy. It cannot be looped, but it doesn't NEED to be. The circuit that runs the motor is self sustaining. The generator circuit provides usable power. TWO separate circuits. Build it and you will see, or just keep TALKING and wasting oxygen. Sorry to be rude, but I have had my fill of people who haven't built this thing telling me what it can't do and what I need to do to prove it works. I don't need to do ANYTHING. I shared this with everyone, but I could give a crap whether you believe it works or not, and I could care less whether or not you choose to build it. I have given you everything you need to build this successfully. I have projects of my own to attend to, like the motor and generator to be used with this circuit, so you'll have to excuse me if I don't stay around to hold anyone's hand. Good luck all. I am done here.
Whatever dude.
Nice talking to you.
Bill
-
Thanks for sharing your work here again David. I'm just throwing in here that those 220A or 230A Lawnmower batteries can be had for less than $20 each at Walmart. Well worth it for this sort of project and a way better price with a lot more power than gel cell batteries tend to have.
-
Forgive me if this is a foolish question, but I ask if this project can be based on capacitors instead of batteries.
I makes state of charge assessments straightforward.
-
Forgive me if this is a foolish question, but I ask if this project can be based on capacitors instead of batteries.
I makes state of charge assessments straightforward.
Yes, I have seen this type of thing using capacitors instead of batteries.
but discharge times are shortened drastically. Super-caps may be an option, they have a much slower discharge.
the important factor is the perspective of the stored charges, not so much in how we store them.
-
Forgive me if this is a foolish question, but I ask if this project can be based on capacitors instead of batteries.
I makes state of charge assessments straightforward.
That is a good idea Paul. I doubt that this fellow will take your suggestion however as it appears he left in a huff after I made a polite suggestion to try self-looping. On any device, if there is more out than in, self-looping would be possible and end all discussion. He evidently does not want to do that and I suspect that I know why.
The super cap idea would certainly be better than using batteries for sure. I have found that super caps seem to like the high spikes that devices like this put out and I think they store them more efficiently than does a battery.
Bill
-
I've used cordless drill batteries , I've used LAB's, I've used super caps , no matter ,the run times are definitely longer.
I just wish I knew how Tinman was running his latest so I could use it with the 3BGS.
It's so simple to set-up give it a try.
artv
-
Dbowling, can you please provide a better schematic?
-
or at least can someone post the schematic he's talking about please!?
using the parts he's talking about..
-
spirit,
I already posted the schematic at the end of the video, but it is attached. The boost circuit can be found here http://www.ebay.com/itm/171151982059?_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT (http://www.ebay.com/itm/171151982059?_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT) NOTICE there is NO connection to the Ground Out on the Boost circuit. That is correct.
Bill,
Can you connect the output of a generator to the motor running it and loop the system? That is what you are asking me to do here, and it won't work here either. So for the THIRD TIME, this device is comprised of TWO SEPARATE circuits.
One is the generator circuit....and do as you will with the output of THAT.
The other is the circuit that runs the motor. It requires (for now) batteries. If those batteries are connected as I suggest, and rotated as I suggest, the system (or at least for the purposes of demonstrating that this is for REAL) is self sustaining. The batteries, as they are rotated, begin to slightly increase in charge. Now, I have NO DOUBT, that with continued use over a long period of time the batteries WILL drop off a little in charge, at which point you WOULD need to tap some of the generated output to top them off. But that would require a more complex circuit, as would automatic switching of the batteries. In fact, if you want to get "real" about this setup, you need THREE sets of two batteries, because the batteries that have just been charged need to rest.
But I brought to this forum the most simple example I possibly could of this circuit that costs the LEAST amount of money to replicate in the hopes that many folks would become interested and replicate the thing. I have on my bench a setup that has a 12 coil generator run by a razor scooter motor (Not a stock motor as I suggested here, but a modified pulse motor that I rewound) that I have spent over $2,000.00 developing, and it needs to be rebuilt yet again to address the last of the issues I have been attempting to solve in order to build the most efficient system possible, and it will run on this circuit with the modifications I talked about....automatic switching and topping off the batteries. In fact, the thing is so big and the magnetic lock between the magnets and coil cores is so great, that additional circuitry had to be designed to run it as a motor until it is up to speed and the pulse motor can take over, and then it switches to the generator mode. But I didn't bring THAT monster to this forum. I brought the simple device that anyone can build for proof of concept. Or they can save the $3.53 plus shipping that a boost module will cost them and miss out on the opportunity to learn a few things about running loads on the potential difference like Tesla showed us with the Tesla switch, which is basically what this is. This works. Whether YOU choose to believe it or not really doesn't matter. SOME people will, and they will build it.
Already folks are replicating it and having success...http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/19774-basic-free-energy-device-24.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/19774-basic-free-energy-device-24.html)
So the train is leaving the station. Get aboard or don't. Your choice. There will be another one along later, so you can always jump aboard then.
I apologize for seeming so abrupt. I get tired of arguing about this stuff because I have a working model on my bench and the people who argue with me never do. They never bother to build and put their OWN meters on it before dismissing what I am trying to show them. Just so you know, a well built Tesla switch (at least the one in the Benitez patents) will demonstrate a COP>6 or GREATER, but eventually the batteries begin to lose a little. With the addition of a small solar panel to keep the batteries topped off on sunny days, they can be made to run a hell of a long time and provide usable power. The problem is, to get the power output up where you can run....say a house, the cost for batteries is way beyond what most researchers are going to spend. I just spent $1,500 for eight 250 amp hour deep cycle 6 volt batteries to use in my testing, and would need to spend probably 5 or 6 times that to produce the power to run a house, and then how long will those batteries last? Who is going to spend THAT kind of money? In my opinion, THIS setup is better.
-
The problem is, to get the power output up where you can run....say a house, the cost for batteries is way beyond what most researchers are going to spend. I just spent $1,500 for eight 250 amp hour deep cycle 6 volt batteries to use in my testing, and would need to spend probably 5 or 6 times that to produce the power to run a house, and then how long will those batteries last? Who is going to spend THAT kind of money? In my opinion, THIS setup is better.
Yes, batteries are expensive and need to be maintained in good condition and I'm not sure that your system will in the medium to long term allow the batteries to remain in good condition. Time will tell for those that embark on this project. Thanks again for giving us a detailed update of your progress.
-
I'm doing extended runs right now to try and determine the long term effects on the batteries. I only have four batteries, (I need my new 6 volt batteries to run my big generator for experiments on it, so they are not available for testing here) so using 230 CCA lawn and garden batteries that are old, old, old, so I do not have the opportunity to charge a set and switch in a new set while the charged set rests. . Therefore I am letting the batteries rest for one hour between runs as I switch them in position. After each 30 minute run, and after rest, I measure each battery with the Cen-Tech digital battery analyzer, recording the standing voltage, resistance, CCA value and battery capacity. Then I switch the two in series to parallel and the two in parallel to series and run it for another 30 minutes. I call this two stage process a "Cycle" since the two sets have each been in both positions (providing power to the circuit or being charged by the circuit) I am currently on the 5th cycle and hope to get one more completed before leaving town in the morning. I will be gone for a week. I will continue the process when I return and complete cycles until my Analyzer shows either that the batteries are no longer usable, or that they have reached their max capacity and max charge. Just so you know, the volt meter was showing these batteries to be down around 12.3-12.5 range when I began this and I did NOT charge the batteries up to max with the charger. I figured either this would support my belief or show I have lost it. I CONTINUE to power a second motor as a generator with a load on it that is a 12 volt fan pulling .45 amps.
Since the runs are each 30 minutes long and two runs make a cycle. Five cycles is five hours.
I have run a 12 volt fan pulling .45 amps for 5 hours. which requires 27 watts of output
I have run a razor scooter motor turning a generator at 12 volts pulling 4 amps for five hours, which requires 240 watts
So far I have pulled 267 watts of power from this system. By no means is that close to what is available in the batteries
-
Since the runs are each 30 minutes long and two runs make a cycle. Five cycles is five hours.
I have run a 12 volt fan pulling .45 amps for 5 hours. which requires 27 watts of output
I have run a razor scooter motor turning a generator at 12 volts pulling 4 amps for five hours, which requires 240 watts
So far I have pulled 267 watts of power from this system. By no means is that close to what is available in the batteries
David,
A power consumption test of this type requires careful current and voltage monitoring for accuracy. Are you actually drawing a constant 0.45 amps over the full 5 hours and how is the supplied voltage to the motor varying?
-
I have an amp gauge and a clamp on amp meter. I have used both. I have several volt meters. I do not sit there and watch the batteries for the entire 30 minutes of the run, but I do check them every few minutes. You are correct in that there are fluctuations in the amp draw reading. I am trying to be conservative in stating that it is drawing .45 amps. I believe it is probably drawing higher, but 4.5 is the LOW I have seen so far during my checks of the meter. The voltage seems consistent at 12+ volts. I realize there is a range there but as long as it doesn't go down to 11 or up to 13, I am calling it 12.
I have found that there is a BIG difference in voltage readings between what the battery analyzer shows and what my meters (3 of them) show when I check battery voltages at the end of a run. All three meters, and they are different brands, all show higher voltage readings than the battery analyzer, so I'm going to go with its reading as I HOPE it is the most accurate.
I am putting together a spread sheet of the data from the battery analyzer and after I get back from Arizona (leaving in the morning for a week) I will continue with trying to kill these batteries by continuing to run the same load while switching the batteries back and forth. The batteries will have rested for a week, but there isn't much I can do about that.
I will be at a place that is off the grid, so no internet access. I can check in here, but won't have anything to post as far as data goes. Can answer any questions though.
-
I have an amp gauge and a clamp on amp meter. I have used both. I have several volt meters. I do not sit there and watch the batteries for the entire 30 minutes of the run, but I do check them every few minutes. You are correct in that there are fluctuations in the amp draw reading. I am trying to be conservative in stating that it is drawing .45 amps. I believe it is probably drawing higher, but 4.5 is the LOW I have seen so far during my checks of the meter. The voltage seems consistent at 12+ volts. I realize there is a range there but as long as it doesn't go down to 11 or up to 13, I am calling it 12.
I have found that there is a BIG difference in voltage readings between what the battery analyzer shows and what my meters (3 of them) show when I check battery voltages at the end of a run. All three meters, and they are different brands, all show higher voltage readings than the battery analyzer, so I'm going to go with its reading as I HOPE it is the most accurate.
I am putting together a spread sheet of the data from the battery analyzer and after I get back from Arizona (leaving in the morning for a week) I will continue with trying to kill these batteries by continuing to run the same load while switching the batteries back and forth. The batteries will have rested for a week, but there isn't much I can do about that.
I will be at a place that is off the grid, so no internet access. I can check in here, but won't have anything to post as far as data goes. Can answer any questions though.
David,
Thanks for your reply.
If there are any reasonably frequent fluctuations in the supply to the motor, these would need to be recorded, as they will have a significant affect on the overall result as you are just relying an occasional meter reading. In any case, a better recording method would be to use a data recorder to produce a data set where an accurate average current and voltage and thus power consumption over the full run time can be obtained.
-
I will have to read up on my scope and see if it can store results. For some reason I think it can, but I have never tried to do that. I also have requested a quote on a DC-3VA DC-3VA Two Channel DC Voltage and Current Logger. Don't know how much they want for that.
The big issue is that there is NO WAY to accurately measure the voltage being used to run the motor, since it is running between TWO POSITIVES. The closest I can come is to put that same motor connected to that same generator running the same load on a power supply and increase the voltage until the rpm's of the motor are the same as when it is running on the system. So that will ALWAYS be an approximation.
-
Dbowling, a DMM will measure the voltage difference between two positives or two negatives or two anythings, just contact the two DMM lead points to the two potitions to be measured and the readout displays on the screen. However the voltage applied your motor will be changing all the time, but that is not an issue because all batteries change voltage during operation. Which is why we can take multiple measurements then average or whatever. Comparing in to out at any stage is valid.
If you are using batteries and want to know the total in v out then all you need to do is measure the real power dissipated by the load over a set time and the total real power to recharge the batteries.
The problem would seem to be that you are using batteries that are not in good condition and so therefore the power required to restore the batteries initial SOC is not possible because the batteries SOC is always changing as using the battery improves it's condition.
If you believe that somehow the batteries are manufacturing energy or drawing in energy then proving it will be very difficult.
Mainly because it isn't happening as there is no mechanism for that to happen.
Lead acid batteries even in bad condition can hold a considerable amount of potential energy (put there by charging), batteries in bad condition will just deliver the power in a different way to a good set of batteries, the power may come in a trickle for a while then suddenly provide good current and power for some time then reduce to a trickle again.
Unless you can show the effect with valid measurements, or continue to power a useful load without charging the batteries beyond the possible stored energy of the set of batteries then there is nothing to see here.
You've got three batteries and a small motor, and for some years now you can still not determine if the setup is over C.O.P. = 1.0.
How long will you say the setup is over C.O.P. = 1.0 without any evidence. 10 years, 20 years ?
Come on ! honestly, get a grip, the effect you are seeing can be explained in a couple of ways at least and has been already. Other people as well as myself have seen the effect first hand.
Applying a load to a bad battery can in some cases cause a bad to suddenly begin to give up some of it's stored energy while at the same time not affecting the battery terminal voltage or even causing it to increase. These effects are not new or difficult to understand.
I see no video demo's from you. Only words. Where is the evidence the effect even happens for you again ?
As for the "can't measure the voltage between two negatives" that's just rubbish. If there is a voltage difference present it can be measured with voltage measuring devices.
..
-
Dbowling, a DMM will measure the voltage difference between two positives or two negatives or two anythings, just contact the two DMM lead points to the two potitions to be measured and the readout displays on the screen. However the voltage applied your motor will be changing all the time, but that is not an issue because all batteries change voltage during operation. Which is why we can take multiple measurements then average or whatever. Comparing in to out at any stage is valid.
If you are using batteries and want to know the total in v out then all you need to do is measure the real power dissipated by the load over a set time and the total real power to recharge the batteries.
The problem would seem to be that you are using batteries that are not in good condition and so therefore the power required to restore the batteries initial SOC is not possible because the batteries SOC is always changing as using the battery improves it's condition.
If you believe that somehow the batteries are manufacturing energy or drawing in energy then proving it will be very difficult.
Mainly because it isn't happening as there is no mechanism for that to happen.
Lead acid batteries even in bad condition can hold a considerable amount of potential energy (put there by charging), batteries in bad condition will just deliver the power in a different way to a good set of batteries, the power may come in a trickle for a while then suddenly provide good current and power for some time then reduce to a trickle again.
Unless you can show the effect with valid measurements, or continue to power a useful load without charging the batteries beyond the possible stored energy of the set of batteries then there is nothing to see here.
You've got three batteries and a small motor, and for some years now you can still not determine if the setup is over C.O.P. = 1.0.
How long will you say the setup is over C.O.P. = 1.0 without any evidence. 10 years, 20 years ?
Come on ! honestly, get a grip, the effect you are seeing can be explained in a couple of ways at least and has been already. Other people as well as myself have seen the effect first hand.
Applying a load to a bad battery can in some cases cause a bad to suddenly begin to give up some of it's stored energy while at the same time not affecting the battery terminal voltage or even causing it to increase. These effects are not new or difficult to understand.
I see no video demo's from you. Only words. Where is the evidence the effect even happens for you again ?
As for the "can't measure the voltage between two negatives" that's just rubbish. If there is a voltage difference present it can be measured with voltage measuring devices.
..
He won't listen to you. My first post here suggested self-looping as a way to really see what was happening and he replied that this was impossible, which, of course it is if you have less out than in. Anything else is just empty words.
Bill
-
Ok Farmhand,
I posted the schematic of what I am running. You tell me what kind of meter to use and where to connect it to accurately measure the watts of power being used by the motor in this circuit (that is driving the generator.) Once you have shared that, I will be happy to hook up the meter and post results. I can also post video of the thing running if that will make you happy. I am keeping a spread sheet of the results I have gotten so far, and I'm happy with them. I DO intend to purchase some brand new batteries when I come back from this trip, just for this setup, so I will be able to start a run from scratch, record the data, and determine the effects on the batteries as I continue to run loads. I also have established that at least ONE of my scopes will record data, so I can record the generator output in volts and amps during the course of a run. And if you have an accurate way to measure the voltage used by the motor in the setup, as you claim, then we will have some accurate data won't we?
You are incorrect in your statement that I have been running the 3BGS for 8 years and have never established whether or not it is COP>1. You can get extended run times out of the batteries using that system. Period. I have seen that on any number of occasions. And by the way your quote "can't measure the difference between two negatives IS rubbish... and was also never made by me. What I actually said was "there is NO WAY to accurately measure the voltage being used to run the motor, since it is running between TWO POSITIVES." I believe that may also be incorrect, but if we're going to quote each other. let's be accurate.
-
Bill,
I responded to you already. I'm sorry that the meaning of my words was not something you were able to understand.
-
.
-
The big issue is that there is NO WAY to accurately measure the voltage being used to run the motor, since it is running between TWO POSITIVES. The closest I can come is to put that same motor connected to that same generator running the same load on a power supply and increase the voltage until the rpm's of the motor are the same as when it is running on the system. So that will ALWAYS be an approximation.
the point of reference to be measured is the two contact terminals of the motor.
from your human perspective, there is two positive poles of the batteries. but from the motors point of view, there is only the difference in voltage between the + and - terminals.
for instance, if one series batteries show you 24v, parallel ones show you 12v,
then what the motor sees is something like 24 - 12 = 12v
the current is a bit more complicated. because of the orientation of the batteries, there is less resistance in the opposite direction of the voltage potential. so the current builds up a capacitance, until it can overcome the difference in resistance, then current spikes into the batteries and they take on an amount of charge.
this will show on the scope as a change in voltage drop across the motor, though change in current may be harder to analyze because of the sample rates and the way the inductance varies over time with the reverse-bias current of the charging batteries. if your meter has a capacitor tester, you can check the capacitance of the motor circuit, that may shed some light on the mathematical side of that part of the circuit.
but even things like wire orientation can make a big difference with how the motor responds to change.
I believe you will find it harder to accurately measure or calculate the exact energy flow through that part of the circuit.
its better to take a step back and black-box the thing, measure your output to the load vs total battery capacity.
that will tell you your average I/O energy values more accurately.
once you can verify that the load consumes more than the batteries have available, without recharging them.....
then you can justify the further time and expense of taking a real look at the motor / battery interactions.
-
So basically you are affirming my statement that it is difficult to measure exactly how much power is consumed by the motor in this setup. A statement that was misquoted by Farmhand and then termed "rubbish".
I agree that measuring the power output of the generator IS the most accurate thing that can be measured, but that discounts the fact that there is a motor running here that is consuming power the entire time, and to say that a comparison of the power output to what is left in the batteries is what determines the worthiness of this setup completely ignores that part of the equation.
That is the same as saying that if I have a motor running off a single battery that is turning a generator I only get to count the power produced by the generator as what the system produced without taking into consideration that the motor powering the generator consumed energy that the system was responsible for producing also.
But that's ok. It will come down to the data, and people can make their own judgements. From what I have seen on the runs I have done so far, the CCA on these old batteries is slowly going up a bit and the voltage is slightly increasing over time, even though I continue to power loads. But I'm throwing all that out the window.
My proposal is this:
When I return from this trip (on the way to the airport in just a few minutes) I will begin with a brand new set of batteries. I will use SMALL batteries so that my expense is less, and it can be more easily replicated. I will do shorter runs so that the C20 rate on the batteries is not exceeded, and possibly smaller loads.
But I will record the voltage and the CCA measurement after every run. If the meter shows that the CCA on the batteries is maintained and the voltage is maintained despite the fact that I am running a motor turning a generator and running a load, that should be proof enough for anybody that there is something to this. I will keep a record of the output of the generator ONLY as the "Output" of the system. Does that sound fair enough? That SHOULD be enough to indicate that the motor is running "for free" if the system is able to maintain.
But let's be clear about something. My interest in this system is NOT and has NEVER BEEN that it outputs MORE energy than is input. My interest has been that it is able to maintain the batteries at NEAR the initial voltage despite the fact that the motor has been running the entire time. With a two coil generator connected to a stock motor pulsed with an external commutator, we had the motor running on a path of 40 watts and the generator was producing 90 watts but better than 80% of what the motor was consuming was recaptured by the "charge batteries." I have video of that. It was NOT my design, but I replicated it and verified the results. And then I built a monster unit that I am still testing. By the way, I would post that video, but it is not mine to share. And I took no video of my replication. I do, however have video of my big monster machine running and I have posted video of THAT at energetic forum on several occasions. One of those videos shows me lighting two 120 volt bulbs from a wall plug, measuring the volts and amps, then running those same two bulbs off my generator powered by the razor scooter motor producing equal voltage and amps off of one coil, then shorting out a second coil to show that when I did so, it would speed up. That was the FIRST generation of my generator, which has been rebuilt and modified a number of times since then. Unfortunately, I did NOT also show the volts and amps used to run the motor, since it was running on THIS kind of circuit and I couldn't figure out a way to show how much was being consumed by the motor. Anyway. I can post that video when I get back. No time. Leaving for airport now.
-
HI ALL MY CONTRIBUTION THE SWITCHING CIRCUIT WITHOUT
DISCONNECTING THE BATTERY TERMINAL AND CAN BE AUTOMATIC..
-
STEP 1
-
STEP 2
-
Bill,
I responded to you already. I'm sorry that the meaning of my words was not something you were able to understand.
I was not talking to you, I was talking to Farmhand but, I guess, just like self-looping, you were not able to grasp that concept either.
Bill
-
HI ALL I AM PLEASE TO SEE THAT MANY PEOPLE HAVE TRIED AND
PROVED THAT THIS CIRCUIT WORKS. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW
IT WORKS BUT WHEN I LOOK AT THIS CIRCUIT I WAS THINKING HOW
THE HECK CAN I DO THIS WITHOUT DISCONECTING THE BATTERIES ,
AND VOILA IS THE CIRCUIT AS ABOVE. NOW IF AFTER SO MANY YEARS WE
CAN NOT TELL IF :) THE THREE BATTERIES ARE FULLY CHARGED AFTER THE
PROCESS WE SHOULD ALL GO BACK TO KINDER GARDEN..PEACE LOVE
-
seychelles,
You have drawn a nice switching circuit, but that is not what Dave is using. Look at his post #20. That is the circuit he is using. He is using 4 batteries and the booster is connected to the motor not the generator. Your circuit will give you some long run times but it won't give the same results as the circuit Dave is using. You also need to know that the flywheel and pulsing the motor are a key part to getting this to work correctly. But you can get very long run times without the flywheel or pulse motor.
Respectfully,
Carroll
-
I was not talking to you, I was talking to Farmhand but, I guess, just like self-looping, you were not able to grasp that concept either.
Bill
How do you propose that Dave self-loop his device? His batteries are staying charged so where does he put the output back into the input to self-loop? You want him to overcharge his batteries?
Respectfully,
Carroll
-
I agree that measuring the power output of the generator IS the most accurate thing that can be measured, but that discounts the fact that there is a motor running here that is consuming power the entire time, and to say that a comparison of the power output to what is left in the batteries is what determines the worthiness of this setup completely ignores that part of the equation.
That is the same as saying that if I have a motor running off a single battery that is turning a generator I only get to count the power produced by the generator as what the system produced without taking into consideration that the motor powering the generator consumed energy that the system was responsible for producing also.
maybe Bill is right on you missing the point, but I'm going to give this one more try...
if the motor and generator were identical, energy consumed by the motor is exactly the same as energy output by the generator.
Minus the losses - i.e.: friction, heat, back-EMF, and other inefficiencies in the conversion.
I believe you said you rewound at least one of them, so this equality must be adjusted to account for change in voltage and current, inductance, capacitance, resistance changes.
However, they can still be treated as separate from the system as a whole. or at least ignored for the sake of black-box analysis.
the output from the generator is a reflection of the consumption ( or load) on the motor.
If you have added additional load to the same motor, that changes everything, but otherwise
it doesn't matter what the motor is consuming at any point in time, or over time at all......
The generator output, if compared to the drain on the batteries over time will tell you every detail of whats going on inside the rest of the circuit.
reverse foyer transform of a loop around the outside of the device, can describe an equivalent circuit of the inside.
I don't expect you to understand this,
so I will say again - the output of the generator is a reflection of the consumption of the motor.
if your motor has anything close to today's standard of DC motor efficiency, the difference between the two is rather small, resulting from losses.
Also - FYI: if you put your meter between two +'s, what you will see is the difference between the two.
for instance, 24 on one side, 12 on the other, you will measure 12v between the two.
the larger one being the + terminal
voltage is hardly ever known. What we know is voltage difference between two points.
one of those points is often our perspective circuit ground, so we assign a numerical value to the voltage based on that,
in reality everything can be sitting at a true potential of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of volts with respect to a point at true 0v
-
HI CARROL THE CIRCUIT IS ADAPTABLE TO THE SITUATION ONLY FEW DIFF
IS THAT THE BATTERY BEING CHARGE IS TWO BATERIES IN PARALLEL..
AND ONE THING I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY HIS BOOSTER HAS ONLY THREE
THREE CONNECTIONS..THE MOTOR IS TURNING RIGHT WHY NOT TURN GEN
THEN BOOST TO INCREASE VOLTAGE TO CHARGE THE TWO BATTS BEING
THE MAIN POWER SOURCE.. :)
-
Hi seychelles,
I think you could probably boost the generator output to charge the primary batteries. However the purpose of the boost circuit as Dave is using it is to increase the speed of the motor and it also helps to maintain the voltage going to the motor when the primary batteries start to drop in voltage as they slowly discharge. By using the boost circuit on the motor Dave is able to keep the output of the generator at a steady level. By rotating the batteries Dave has found there is no need to charge the primary batteries other than just by rotating them. Also John Bedini has said several times that you shouldn't try to charge batteries at the same time you are discharging them. Also Matt Jones has reported that you get the best results by not swapping the batteries until the charge batteries are fully charged. I hope this information is helpful. I am sure Dave will be able to answer better when he is able to respond. He and Matt have put in thousands of hours on this system. I have also worked on it when I had some spare time.
Respectfully,
Carroll
-
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 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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
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
-
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 ?
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
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
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCfmkQ0_zBk (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
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCfmkQ0_zBk (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.
-
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 (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 (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
-
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.
-
MarkE
[size=78%]Do you REALLY think that most people who work on this stuff in their garage are going to have the kinds of meters you are talking about? We want folks to replicate this and see for themselves, and MOST people aren't going to spend the money.[/size]
[size=78%]I have five digital meters and four analogue meters. I have two scopes and several other meters. I got a brand new RMS meter yesterday. There is a digital output of volts and amps on the front of the power supply I was using to power the thing. So I have measured the inputs and outputs with quality meters and with my scope. What the Harbor Freight meter showed is close enough. I also have a bunch of those panel meters with different ranges, and for rough calculations they are just fine. [/size]
I have several of the couplings you mentioned. I don't recall seeing ones that joined different sized shafts, and I know the center piece of different sized ones is also a different size. But I will look again.
As for input vs output and this thing only being 35% efficient. (I THINK that's what you said, and can't look back while in "response') I know you don't believe the circuit I posted works, but I still say we can recover better than 80% of the power used to run the motor. IF that is true, does it matter that more amps are pulled through the motor to run loads (from one source) and deposited in a storage device (battery) on the other side? Nope. Because then you switch those two out and do it all over again. But even if that were NOT true. I can run this unit on 5 amps (with no load) at 12 volts or 60 watts (and I say I can recover 80% of THAT..), and produce 300 watts that can be dumped into caps or batteries and THEN used to power loads from there. That has ALWAYS been my intention. I never intended to use this as a direct generator to run lights or loads. Collect all the voltage and run it through a step down transformer to increase the amps to a point where batteries will charge and I believe it is worth the time to explore what is here. If that will not work, I guess this is a bust.
Dave
-
MarkE
[size=78%]Do you REALLY think that most people who work on this stuff in their garage are going to have the kinds of meters you are talking about? We want folks to replicate this and see for themselves, and MOST people aren't going to spend the money.[/size]
[size=78%]I have five digital meters and four analogue meters. I have two scopes and several other meters. I got a brand new RMS meter yesterday. There is a digital output of volts and amps on the front of the power supply I was using to power the thing. So I have measured the inputs and outputs with quality meters and with my scope. What the Harbor Freight meter showed is close enough. I also have a bunch of those panel meters with different ranges, and for rough calculations they are just fine. [/size]
I have several of the couplings you mentioned. I don't recall seeing ones that joined different sized shafts, and I know the center piece of different sized ones is also a different size. But I will look again.
As for input vs output and this thing only being 35% efficient. (I THINK that's what you said, and can't look back while in "response') I know you don't believe the circuit I posted works, but I still say we can recover better than 80% of the power used to run the motor.
I relied on your figures of: 13V 8A on the input after the initial 20A plus transient and 35V 0.7A output. For that to be valid both the input and output need to be steady state or resistive. Otherwise, we cannot multiply the average voltage and average current and obtain an accurate answer.
IF that is true, does it matter that more amps are pulled through the motor to run loads (from one source) and deposited in a storage device (battery) on the other side? Nope. Because then you switch those two out and do it all over again. But even if that were NOT true. I can run this unit on 5 amps (with no load) at 12 volts or 60 watts (and I say I can recover 80% of THAT..), and produce 300 watts that can be dumped into caps or batteries and THEN used to power loads from there. That has ALWAYS been my intention. I never intended to use this as a direct generator to run lights or loads. Collect all the voltage and run it through a step down transformer to increase the amps to a point where batteries will charge and I believe it is worth the time to explore what is here. If that will not work, I guess this is a bust.
It is like anything else: You need to measure the input and output power faithfully. Then you will know what you have. If neither is pulsating, or if both are resistive, then measuring average voltage and average current with meters and multiplying to get power is fine. If that is not the case, then you need to perform AC power analysis by multiplying the instantaneous current by the instantaneous voltage which will give you a signed result and then you average that result to find average power. You would need to do that on both the input and the output.
Dave
-
The input to the motor with no load attached to the generator is 5 amps at 13 volts. In the video it showed about 8 amps input, but that was because of the light that was attached as a load on the generator when I started it up. I did that for a demo only. The load on the motor will be a constant because I do not HAVE to put a load on the generator. I did it because people insist on seeing the amp draw under load. But I will NEVER put a load on this generator in real life. I will simply take the power it generates when all the coils are connected, which I have done MANY TIMES since I first fired up the first version of this thing almost two years ago now, and dump it into batteries or caps and run my loads off of them. Thats about 65 watts input of which I can recover, (Whether anyone believes it or not) better than 80%. So in reality, this machine will run on about 13 Watts of "consumed" power.
The generator, when you look at the output of the coils to a storage device, will output 25 watts per coil as I demonstrated. That's 300 watts to be collected. That is a constant output as long as you do NOT run a load, which will of course affect the motor. There are ways to increase production from the coils without compromising the low amp draw, and I am working on those, but will probably not be posting that here. You can also run it with a pulse motor and decrease the input required because a pulse motor can be run as a generator during the off cycle. There are many, many ways to improve this. My earlier version would speed up under load, but changing the coil cores changed some things, and now I need to change the coils. Lots of rewinding to do if I still want it to speed up under load. I need to invest in a coil winder!!
I am far from done with this, and I learn more every day about what will and won't work.
Dave
-
The input to the motor with no load attached to the generator is 5 amps at 13 volts. In the video it showed about 8 amps input, but that was because of the light that was attached as a load on the generator when I started it up. I did that for a demo only. The load on the motor will be a constant because I do not HAVE to put a load on the generator. I did it because people insist on seeing the amp draw under load. But I will NEVER put a load on this generator in real life. I will simply take the power it generates when all the coils are connected, which I have done MANY TIMES since I first fired up the first version of this thing almost two years ago now, and dump it into batteries or caps and run my loads off of them. Thats about 65 watts input of which I can recover, (Whether anyone believes it or not) better than 80%. So in reality, this machine will run on about 13 Watts of "consumed" power.
Why do you talk about "dump it (power) into batteries and caps" as though driving power into charging either is different than driving power into a resistor or light bulb?
The generator, when you look at the output of the coils to a storage device, will output 25 watts per coil as I demonstrated. That's 300 watts to be collected. That is a constant output as long as you do NOT run a load, which will of course affect the motor.
This is where you need to be careful that your measurements are valid. If for instance you can draw 300W continuous from something where you supply say 100W continuous in, and you are not consuming matter/energy in the device (fuel) then you would have a free energy device. That is something previously unknown.
From a measurement standpoint the first thing you want to do is understand what your voltage and current look like with respect to time at both the input and output. That will drive what you need to do to get accurate measurements. If the voltage and current are both DC or almost entirely DC with some minor ripple, then life is easy and you can use meters to measure the voltage and current and just multiply the two to get power. If the voltage and current are AC or mostly AC then you will get an accurate measure of the power from multiplying average (actually rms but for simple waveforms we can easily correct) voltage and current only when the load is purely resistive. Even this will have problems with error budgets if the load is very reactive, because the real power will be buried beneath a much larger reactive power, and even small measurement errors of the overall values translate to large errors relative to the small real power. For examples of people who have gotten this wrong look at Bill Alek. For the past couple of years he has thought that he would have market ready product in another three six months and it just keeps pushing back, because his measurements are bonkers.
A simple way to circumvent difficult and complex measurements is to insert low loss low pass filters between the power source that the thing you are testing on the input side, and between the output side and any intended load. With an appropriate low pass filter then you are back to measuring DC and meters will work just fine.
There are ways to increase production from the coils without compromising the low amp draw, and I am working on those, but will probably not be posting that here. You can also run it with a pulse motor and decrease the input required because a pulse motor can be run as a generator during the off cycle. There are many, many ways to improve this. My earlier version would speed up under load, but changing the coil cores changed some things, and now I need to change the coils. Lots of rewinding to do if I still want it to speed up under load. I need to invest in a coil winder!!
I am far from done with this, and I learn more every day about what will and won't work.
Dave
Have fun pursuing your investigations. There should always be joy in experimenting and learning things. My recommendation to you is that if you have not already done so, take a look at your waveforms to see what your measurement situation is.