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

A-Ads

MN LiveCoach

Masternodes Live Coaching

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 Members: 83458
  • *Latest: Neta160

  • *Total Posts: 512855
  • *Total Topics: 15261
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 3
  • *Guests: 14
  • *Total: 17

Author Topic: To be deleted  (Read 15932 times)

Offline nul-points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • Doc Ringwood's Free Energy blog
Re: To be deleted
« Reply #120 on: December 16, 2018, 04:22:08 PM »
thanks for the update, Itsu

average readings (apart from their lower values) still suggest that our circuits are different (ie. your Isupply and Iin are similar, whereas my values show that Ifb as the difference between Isupply and Iin)

ok, so it doesn't look like the missing energy is being radiated significantly

yes, i use the same method for 'NO feedback' tests


np

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: To be deleted
« Reply #120 on: December 16, 2018, 04:22:08 PM »

Offline itsu

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1829
Re: To be deleted
« Reply #121 on: December 16, 2018, 04:31:05 PM »

NP,

Hmmm,  i would of thought that you would be pleased with my average results as according to me they present
exactly what you were saying (or do i understand you wrong?).

My average values are:

Isupply = 4.07mA,
Iin        = 4.74mA,
Ifb       = 0.80mA

so indeed like you say, "Ifb as the difference between Isupply and Iin"  well, almost.

Itsu

Offline nul-points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • Doc Ringwood's Free Energy blog
Re: To be deleted
« Reply #122 on: December 16, 2018, 06:43:40 PM »

hi Itsu

ah ok, i must have seen that the feedback current RMS value looked like the previous table (approx 2mA) where the math wasn't identified (just labelled as current(mA) and thought that value hadn't changed - my apologies!

yes, those values are a closer fit to the pattern of the circuit behaviour


thanks
np

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: To be deleted
« Reply #122 on: December 16, 2018, 06:43:40 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline nul-points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • Doc Ringwood's Free Energy blog
Re: To be deleted
« Reply #123 on: December 17, 2018, 01:00:43 AM »
QUESTION2: Do the capacitor supply draw-down tests support the general comparison seen on this circuit when using another method (eg. scope math)?
ANSWER: Yes they do...

the 1F (nominal) supply capacitor was identified as having an actual capacitance of 1.111F, using the draw-down time for a 681 ohm resistor (and then using online calculation)

the start and end values for charge on the 1.111F cap for the tests was as follows:-
4.0V  4.444Coulombs
3.4V  3.777Coulombs

The total value of charge transferred was:
  (4.444 - 3.777) = 0.667Coulombs = 667mCoulombs


runtime for circuit WITHOUT FEEDBACK: 68.4s
667mC => 667mAs / 68.4s = an average Isupply of 9.75 mA for 68.4s

runtime for circuit WITH FEEDBACK: 90s
667mC => 667mAs / 90s = an average Isupply of 7.4mA for 90s


the CSR traces show that charge transferred from the supply is comparable for both cases:
WITH FEEDBACK: positive pulse (14.6mA for 9.6us) = 137.24uC
WITHOUT FEEDBACK: positive pulse (10.6mA for 12.72us) = 134.8uC

BUT in the 'WITH FEEDBACK' case, 24.4 uC are ALSO transferred BACK to the supply to be re-used;
whereas in the 'WITHOUT FEEDBACK' case, NO charge is recycled

the result is that the runtime of the 'WITH FEEDBACK' lasts around 20-30 % longer, with the same average power delivered by the supply to the circuit throughout - ie. some of the total energy converted is recycled to perform approx 20-30% more work

it appears that this 'WiThFeedback' circuit is able to gather energy which would otherwise have been dissipated and lost, and re-use it to do extra work

energy is conserved - work is not!


np
« Last Edit: December 17, 2018, 12:19:23 PM by nul-points »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline itsu

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1829
Re: To be deleted
« Reply #124 on: December 17, 2018, 10:47:55 AM »

NP,

nice analysis, i like it.

Quote
it appears that this 'WiThFeedback' circuit is able to gather energy which would otherwise have been dissipated and lost, and re-use it to do extra work


But, to my understanding, considering your: "gathered energy which would otherwise have been dissipated and lost"  this dissipated energy also did work to get dissipated.

Not sure yet in which form (heat, light, radiation), but it was doing work then.


So would you not say that you utilized this "dissipated and lost energy" by using feedback and so improving on the overall efficiency (input versus work done) of the circuit?


Itsu

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: To be deleted
« Reply #124 on: December 17, 2018, 10:47:55 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline nul-points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • Doc Ringwood's Free Energy blog
Re: To be deleted
« Reply #125 on: December 17, 2018, 11:18:28 AM »
thanks Itsu, appreciated

i understand what you're saying


before i reply, i should make it clear to other visitors that although i'm saying this whole arrangement is > 100% efficient, that relates to total work done (which is one or more kinds of conversion of energy) - all the usual losses apply (I^2R loss, heat loss, etc)

no laws of physics are broken here  - energy is not (and cannot be) created

god might disagree!  :)


i agree that the dissipation of the 'packet' of energy which was temporarily stored within the circuit (without feedback) is doing work (ie. it is still converting that part of the energy which was supplied) - this part of the energy, however, is not being converted into work as part of the circuit - and, at the moment, we don't know by what route it is leaving the system. my guess is that it is converting to heat, or other radiation

the WithFeedback circuit is also storing this part 'packet' of the total energy supplied, just the same, but because the coil field collapse is trying to maintain its original current flow when the transistor switches off the supply, it finds a suitable current path which just happens to be arranged to feedback this current, from the elcap, thro' the secondary, thro' the feedback LED, thro' the battery and back to the elcap

this reverse current is just a standard recharge current for the battery and so some of the recycled energy gets stored in the battery to be available for re-use by the circuit

the value of total work which is done by the 'mysterious', disappearing energy packet, will be the same value as the work done by that packet within the feedback path of the WithFeedback circuit, in the elcap, coil winding. feedback LED & battery

i guess its a bit like using a water-fuelled fuel cell - the fuel supply is water, the cell converts energy from water into Work, Heat, and... water

we could collect the water output and feed it back in with the water input supply and increase the efficiency of the whole system


...but hey, i'm just this guy called nul-points - what do i know?  :)

np
« Last Edit: December 17, 2018, 03:02:24 PM by nul-points »

Offline Void

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2370
Re: To be deleted
« Reply #126 on: December 18, 2018, 07:28:22 PM »

before i reply, i should make it clear to other visitors that although i'm saying this whole arrangement is > 100% efficient, that relates to total work done (which is one or more kinds of conversion of energy) - all the usual losses apply (I^2R loss, heat loss, etc)

Hi nul-points. I have already explained that based on the proper measurement approach that Itsu took
with his scope, it is clear that this circuit arrangement is not showing any indications of OU.
Your circuit analysis is incorrect due to your misunderstandings of AC circuits.
Just want to make sure no one is mislead here. All the best. :)


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: To be deleted
« Reply #126 on: December 18, 2018, 07:28:22 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline nul-points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • Doc Ringwood's Free Energy blog
Re: To be deleted
« Reply #127 on: December 18, 2018, 08:53:15 PM »
Your circuit analysis is incorrect due to your misunderstandings of AC circuits.
Just want to make sure no one is mislead here. All the best. :)

hi Void, welcome back

i'm happy to let the members here make up their own minds about the behaviour of this circuit

i find it intriguing that you think this unbalanced biphasic waveform, where the 1st pulse is generated by the draw of the circuit on the DC battery supply, and the 2nd pulse is generated by the action of the coil field-collapse and stored energy in the connected elcap (generating recharging current back through the battery) would be best treated by AC circuit analysis

you're welcome to your opinions, of course - and everyone else is welcome to theirs, too


np

Offline Void

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2370
Re: To be deleted
« Reply #128 on: December 18, 2018, 09:15:03 PM »
i find it intriguing that you think this unbalanced aphasic waveform, where the 1st pulse is generated by the draw of the circuit on the DC battery supply, and the 2nd pulse is generated by the action of the coil field-collapse and stored energy in the connected elcap, generating recharging current back through the battery, would be best treated by regular AC circuit analysis

Hi nul-points. I don't think that at all. I said Itsu's measurement approach is correct (as far as I can see anyway). 
Itsu's measurement approach takes into account what is happening dynamically in the
primary power consuming components in the circuit and should be giving a fairly reasonably
accurate indication of the average power consumption of those components, as long as his current probe
is measuring reasonably accurately that is. It doesn't matter if there are feedback currents or very spiky
wave forms with positive and negative swings or whatever else, this measurement approach will take them into account,
based on my understanding and quite a lot of prior experience in making my own measurements on similar types of circuits
with similar types of complex waveforms.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: To be deleted
« Reply #128 on: December 18, 2018, 09:15:03 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline nul-points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • Doc Ringwood's Free Energy blog
Re: To be deleted
« Reply #129 on: December 18, 2018, 10:40:29 PM »

Your circuit analysis is incorrect due to your misunderstandings of AC circuits.
Just want to make sure no one is mislead here. All the best. :)

this is the quote of yours i was addressing - don't try to change the subject please!

you said my circuit analysis is incorrect due to my misunderstandings of AC circuits

i say this circuit generates its own unsymmetric biphasic pulses

 - its not driven by an externally generated AC waveform

 - its not necessary, or appropriate, to use AC analysis

but then you ought to know that, based on your "understanding and quite a lot of prior experience in making [your] own measurements on similar types of circuits with similar types of complex waveforms"

Offline Void

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2370
Re: To be deleted
« Reply #130 on: December 18, 2018, 10:51:04 PM »
Sigh...  ::) :o  :D  ;D   


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: To be deleted
« Reply #130 on: December 18, 2018, 10:51:04 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline nul-points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • Doc Ringwood's Free Energy blog
Re: To be deleted
« Reply #131 on: December 18, 2018, 11:47:05 PM »
Sigh...  ::) :o :D ;D


...and don't think you're going to get round me with that crazy, whispering in my ear, trick!

Offline nul-points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • Doc Ringwood's Free Energy blog
Re: To be deleted
« Reply #132 on: December 18, 2018, 11:50:55 PM »
Ladies andddddddd Gentlemen....   it's the 'nul and Void' Show






(apologies - *somebody* had to say it)

Offline Void

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2370
Re: To be deleted
« Reply #133 on: December 19, 2018, 02:42:00 AM »
it's the 'nul and Void' Show

Good one. :)


Offline NickZ

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4565
Re: To be deleted
« Reply #134 on: December 19, 2018, 02:49:42 AM »
   Efficiently conserving energy is one thing, but, most of the time it's not enough to self run a device,
 though. Right?
   But isn't the idea to do more "work" than is provided for? In some type of "open circuit", that allows for tapping into extra energy, from wherever? Yet, the illusive source of extra juice seams to be very difficult to obtain, and harder yet to prove. In any case that's what I'm still working on, on my own, no direction home. Hate to be alone...   Using the Dr. Stiffler " double diode loops" ideas, and seeing where it wil take me. Tricky road to say the least.But, it does concern giving a portion of the output, back to the input (24v battery inputs). To see what you have mentioned about efficiency. However, that is not my goal, until a device can self run, with no outside man made source, at all. An ongoing work in progress for me, still.

 

OneLink