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

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

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

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 894029
  • *Total Topics: 15711
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 4
  • *Guests: 14
  • *Total: 18

Author Topic: Confirmation of OU devices and claims  (Read 282969 times)

Offline rickfriedrich

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 446
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1110 on: July 10, 2019, 05:09:33 PM »
Nick,
I don't expect anyone to believe me or anyone.  They have to test things out for themselves.
The problem may not be with you, but as soon as I or anyone posts larger systems then many people are going to get hurt (at least with the rf systems). And the problem before that is that until people understand the basics they will really do some damage with the higher power stuff.
It appears you may be talking about the lower frequency systems. That is fine.
Presently I have no extra time to go off into various schematics as I am trying to begin working on a major new website and presentation that is very important. This will be all organized and highly useful. There is no point trying to put out bits and pieces here.
There is no one schematic. I have hundreds of systems and endless models. That is why I am trying to teach on the principles so that people can pick their flavor with the parts they have. I've never seen anyone approach this research systematically from a simplistic themes or principles approach. The only themes have been too technical or convoluted for most people to understand.

So it may be a few weeks before I can get into specific circuits. My only objective here is to try and encourage people to start at a proper foundation and try and understand the foundational principles and themes. There are some ongoing debates here along these lines and that is all I have time for, as I find it useless to address mistakes that are based on faulty foundations. Hopefully my presentation will make that all clear. It will be a work in progress and never can be perfect.

   
   Rich: Just so you know. I have never doubted you, or your shown devices.
   However, none of this is new for me, nor am I afraid of using higher power inputs, and looping the output back to the input.
I have been doing that for years.   I don't remember seeing any recent schematics of your solid state device that are similar to what you would like to see us build.And similar to what a.21 and itsu are trying to replicate,  to see for themselves if what you are trying tell us can be replicated.
   Maybe you can upload a recent diagram or schematic of your device. As otherwise, we can only guess at what you are doing and how your are doing it. Which can be part of the problem with building your type of replication.   I have not followed this thread from the start, just after I saw itsu going at it. So, I don't know all the facts concerning this or your type of build. Therefore, can you provide a schematic, if you have done so already, just repost it, please.
   If interested, here is a link to one of my Dr. Stiffler "diode loop" tests. https://youtu.be/BZsvtlA_Rgc
   My YouTube channel is under my name, Nick Zec. There you can see some devices that I've worked on over the years.
   And yes, my on going goal is to build a self running solid state device, that is useful, for me. I'm not interested commercializing it in any way. Nor am I any kind of troll, nor someone against free energy, just for the record.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1110 on: July 10, 2019, 05:09:33 PM »

Offline rickfriedrich

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 446
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1111 on: July 10, 2019, 05:35:18 PM »
This is partly true. It doesn't cover all the radiation that can be tapped or used as an influence to create energy gains. If it was then there would be no point to doing any of this, and I would not be able to power many more loads than the input, reduce the input to zero or negative, or multiply out as many outputs from each receiver coils as it becomes a transmitter. Yes, a lot of claims here. I just gave a hint of that in the video and picture. If all that is impossible then it will be interesting to try and prove that. The mainstream theory below is an oversimplification of what is going on. I'm not in a position to properly critique it as I don't want to commit to certain terminology yet and there are several things that are very complex. My focus, however, has always been to exploit the neglected realities and ignored processes. And in teaching on such matters one has to carefully quantify the limits that mainstream say exist and then show that which they ignore. So that is why I ask the kinds of questions I do. And I hope that people can answer them for themselves.
So what kinds of gains can we hope to experience in these kinds of setups? I see below, after the glow, a "but". But there is no completion of the contrasted idea of a saying that there is a difference with a series arrangement. I guess we will all have to experience that for ourselves or hope that G can finish that teaser point. Of course I am still waiting for G to tell us why he believes any real gains can be possible. Once he says that I'm sure all of you will just believe OU is possible and then you will be able to do something practical.  ::)

Hi Nick,
The many receiver antennas for a radio station are usually located far from the broadcast TX antenna wavelength wise. One full wavelength for a long wave (LW) station at say 200 kHz is 1500 m, for a medium wave (MW) station at say 1 MHz is 300 meter. So most receivers receive the so called far field of the TX antenna, many wavelength away from it and the electromagnetic coupling between the many RX and a single TX antenna can only be negligibly small.  This involves little overall power loss in
the TX antenna. One more thing: the received power in a ferrite antenna inside an AM portable radio for instance is but a few microwatts, the mixer and amplifier stages boost up this tiny level thousands time to drive a some hundred mW loudspeaker, using the battery power in the radio. All in all, the overall reflected load to the TX antenna from the many receivers is small.

However, when the RX antennas are close to the TX antenna, in the so called near field of the latter, within say a wavelength (this is mostly an unlikely situation for broadcast stations) the mutual coupling can greatly increase hence the TX power is influenced more and more. The power output of the radio station may get reduced. Notice though there can be control circuits to increase the output as a compensation to maintain nominal output, at the price of increased input power to the transmitter.
There were people tapping nearby broadcast station by erecting big sized antennas and used the received energy for feeding incandescent lamps back in the 20s and 30s, they were punished for stealing energy if they got caught. One reason broadcast antennas are not readily built very close to densely populated areas (other reason would be the very high near field radiation harmful to humans, animals etc). In the present setup discussed here the receiver coils are very close to the TX coil, within a small fraction of a wavelength. This inherently involves mutual coupling not only between the TX and RX coils but between the RX coils too. So basically adding more and more receiver coils would demand more TX power if the TX (antenna) circuit were a parallel LC circuit. But the TX circuit here is a series LC circuit driven from a function generator or from a gate driver IC.  Consider the impedance behaviour of parallel LC and series LC circuits in the function of frequency.
Will continue later.  If you have questions so far, please ask.
Gyula

Offline NickZ

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4971
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1112 on: July 10, 2019, 05:35:29 PM »
Yes all these things are to be considered as part of the experiments in the book. It is not my object to spoon feed students. That way they can discover other things that maybe no one has figured out yet. Depending on how you position the coils you can place hundreds of them around the primary (preferably at the 1.25MHz frequency) without drawing more from the input and while actually reducing it. And it is true that you can also do that wrong and decrease the loads while doing that. "Wrong" is relative to what you want to do. It took me 5 minutes to position all my coils around for that video. There was no attempt to tune for ideal positions. Would take a few hours to do that. But at the meeting I also showed how you can position the coils all around, which includes above and below the open sides of the primary.

   Rick:  Ok, so I have an air coil tuned to 1.2MHz. It's connected to two 12v batteries providing 24v DC to the driver circuit. This Tesla type of secondary coil then provides an output of about 4000v, at 1.2MHz.  What size do the receiver coils need to be?   Like I said, a schematic with all the component values, coil sizes and details would be nice.
   Gyula: Thanks for the reply. Yes, I am aware of the normal coupling issues with far and near field of a radio transmitter.
But, the idea here is to find the anomaly, and not the normal situation with transmitting radio waves.That was really my question.
  Remember what Wesley has mentioned, concerning transmitting electrical signals world wide. To be received and converted to use able electrical power, with little to no losses in signal. Millions of dollars invested in that updated Tesla type of technology.
There must be something to it... as we all know about signal losses over great distances. But, it's what we don't know, that may be important, in this case. Perhaps using a higher input, and placing the receiver coils further away may help. Or not?
   As itsu has shown a slight decrease in input power, while adding more coils onto the main coil, what makes this possible is the question at hand. And how many other coils can also tap into that near field, while dropping the input even lower, to actually obtain a higher output, than the input. Of course, that is still to be seen, replicated and shown. Whether one believes it, or not, is up to each person's discretion.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1112 on: July 10, 2019, 05:35:29 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4068
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1113 on: July 10, 2019, 09:06:44 PM »
...
   As itsu has shown a slight decrease in input power, while adding more coils onto the main coil, what makes this possible is the question at hand.
...
Hi Nick,
Please bear with me, I need to finish for today and go out for a short excursion. Will be back in a day's time and answer then. 

Gyula

Offline forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3943
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1114 on: July 10, 2019, 09:26:09 PM »
What about the setup Ruslan Kulabuhov proposed ? Some tidy coupled resonant circuits with the output stage having current in the same phase as input current . If output is loaded , current rise but still not influence the input. If the circuits are wireless coupled or by wires or cores is immaterial. I'd like to know if this is possible.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1114 on: July 10, 2019, 09:26:09 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Void

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2446
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1115 on: July 11, 2019, 12:46:37 AM »
   itsu, Gyula:   Why is there a difference when comparing a multi secondary coils pulsing system like what you've shown, to a radio station.   Does the radio station loose it's transmitting power depending on how many people's radios are tuning in to it?
   Why would adding more receiving coils, not work the same? But, it doesn't, normally, adding more coils bring down the total working voltage, and output at the load (led). WHY?  I ask.
   itsu, did placing coils inside of the main coil, help, or not? 

Hi Nick. There is a difference in the way things work and the way they should be analyzed
between the near field around coils and antennas, and the far field. The near field can roughly be
described as the space around a coil or antenna where self sustaining EM radiation hasn't fully formed.
Placing receiving coils within the near field of a 'transmitter' coil will cause loading on the transmitter coil.
The further away the receiver coil is away from the transmitter coil, the less power can be drawn from the transmitting coil.
Receiving antennas are normally well in the far field range of an RF transmitter, and do not load down the transmitter.
The power the transmitter is consuming is lost in the driver circuitry and the EM radiation from the antenna whether there are
any receiving antennas or not. At quite low frequencies, a coil will not radiate much EM radiation, so you are mainly concerned with
the near field.


Offline Void

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2446
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1116 on: July 11, 2019, 01:17:44 AM »
Itsu's video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9dLj5MrAHY
3 minutes in -  inserting a relay coil causes output to go UP and input to go DOWN.
WHY ARE WE IGNORING THIS!!!
It's like the forum has Cognitive dissonance

Hi a.king21. I have been busy with various other things and still am, so I haven't seen any
of Itsu's test videos here, but I will point out a common misconception in circuit arrangements such as you
described, which is the assumption that input power consumption should go up and down in direct relation to the amount
of output power being delivered to the circuit load.

That is not always the case however. In AC circuits we have the concept of impedance matching. Changing the output
configuration by adding or removing coils or changing coil windings or loads, etc., for example, changes the impedance
matching between the input circuitry and the output circuitry. This will cause the efficiency of the overall AC circuit
to change. If a change is made to a circuit arrangement which increases the overall circuit efficiency of the circuit,
you can potentially deliver more overall output power to your load(s) while seeing a drop in input power consumption.
This is due to increasing the circuit's efficiency by improving the input to output impedance matching.

However, such an increase in efficiency tells an experimenter nothing about whether the circuit is anywhere near COP =1, or not. That can
only be determined by properly measuring the overall circuit efficiency. Since making such efficiency measurements can sometimes be
tricky in AC circuits, the only really half decent reliable test of whether an OU experimenter may be anywhere near COP =1 or better, is to try to
self loop the circuit. Such a test setup bypasses any potential mistakes in measurements or mistakes due to incorrect assumptions or the experimenter
potentially overlooking other important factors which are throwing off their measurements. There are numerous ways that experimenters
can potentially be mislead by just looking at measurements alone (especially at lower power levels), so a self-looping 
arrangement becomes the only real practical benchmark way to separate the wheat from the chaff. We have all seen
where experimenters thought they were onto something really special only to find that it all falls apart when they try to self-loop
their circuit arrangement. :)

The first law of 'over unity' testing:
If you haven't tested your circuit arrangement using a self looping arrangement and left it to run for a reasonable
length of time (depends on power source being used and total power consumption), then you are not in any sort
of reasonable position to attempt to draw any definite conclusions about the circuit COP.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1116 on: July 11, 2019, 01:17:44 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline a.king21

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1613
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1117 on: July 11, 2019, 02:40:04 AM »
Void:  I agree entirely.

Offline Hoppy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4324
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1118 on: July 11, 2019, 09:48:52 AM »


The first law of 'over unity' testing:
If you haven't tested your circuit arrangement using a self looping arrangement and left it to run for a reasonable
length of time (depends on power source being used and total power consumption), then you are not in any sort
of reasonable position to attempt to draw any definite conclusions about the circuit COP.
Hi Void,
I would like to add that when the DUT is running from a battery supply, be aware of the current drawn as a percentage of the C20 rate of the battery. If the current drawn is very substantially less, than the C20 rated current for the battery, then the effective battery capacity is very substantially increased (ref Peukerts Law). This can result in what I refer to as 'stalling', where the battery terminal voltage appears to 'hang' steady for a long period of time. It is also possible that the battery terminal voltage will rise for a period of time, especially if the battery is sulfated to an extent, giving the impression that the DUT is running on free energy! It is in this situation, as well as heavily loaded situations on a battery, that vagaries appear and can very easily lead to false conclusions on the efficiency of a given DUT. Using low current LED's and big batteries, exacerbates this 'hanging' condition. Also, allowing high frequency voltages onto the battery supply rails without effective filtering, also results in vagaries leading to false conclusions.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1118 on: July 11, 2019, 09:48:52 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Void

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2446
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1119 on: July 11, 2019, 04:17:59 PM »
Hi Void,
I would like to add that when the DUT is running from a battery supply, be aware of the current drawn as a percentage of the C20 rate of the battery. If the current drawn is very substantially less, than the C20 rated current for the battery, then the effective battery capacity is very substantially increased (ref Peukerts Law). This can result in what I refer to as 'stalling', where the battery terminal voltage appears to 'hang' steady for a long period of time. It is also possible that the battery terminal voltage will rise for a period of time, especially if the battery is sulfated to an extent, giving the impression that the DUT is running on free energy! It is in this situation, as well as heavily loaded situations on a battery, that vagaries appear and can very easily lead to false conclusions on the efficiency of a given DUT. Using low current LED's and big batteries, exacerbates this 'hanging' condition. Also, allowing high frequency voltages onto the battery supply rails without effective filtering, also results in vagaries leading to false conclusions.

Hi Hoppy. Yes, I agree. Using a relatively high capacity battery with a small load at the output could
give the false impression that the battery is staying close to fully charged. Itsu avoids that
sort of problem by testing using super caps, I believe, which is good, but the super caps I have
are fairly leaky so not the best for that kind of testing. Maybe you can get a type of super caps these
days that have low leakage losses. Not sure. That would be great for testing if very low leakage
super caps are available.


Offline rickfriedrich

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 446
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1120 on: July 11, 2019, 05:18:32 PM »
This is why I always start my meetings with extended details on this exact information. If you can't understand the complexities of batteries you will not know how to evaluate a free energy system that uses batteries. I share all these details in many of my videos and expose the tricks and self-deceptions people do in videos and 5 minute tests. I have dealt with thousands of people on the old forums with this. This is old news but people still oversimplify batteries. I rarely find an engineer that has a proper understanding of batteries, so I never assume that anyone knows even the basics.

I usually start my videos with batteries at rest for a long time so people can see I am not manipulating voltages. I often draw attention to a trick some people pull along these lines. Here are two:

1. Someone loads down an input battery with a big load just before the video starts. Then they start the video and run the energizer kind of system with the same battery while showing a voltmeter on that battery. Guess what will happen? The voltage will slowly go up over the short time of the faked demonstration. Why does that happen. Well because the person is a deceiver. But this physically happens because there is a big voltage drop with the big load, and the battery is bouncing back to a resting voltage or stabilized place. The new load of the motor is relatively smaller so the bounce back is still taking place and showing a rising voltage. If they would run the video long enough you would see it eventually go down. So I always talk for a long time before I run any setup with batteries for this reason. Now you can understand one of the reasons to have long videos  :)  :o Not that I am trying to prove anything, but I am trying to give an example in that.

2. I have shared this for many years now, and probably say this on the phone every day. If a battery is sulfated it will rise in voltage because only a small portion of the plate is being charged. Once our dissolving of the sulfation takes place it will come back down before it goes up again (while slowly increasing the capacity). But tricksters who know this will show a big sulfated battery with fast increasing voltage and claim that this means it is really charging fast. When a visited a lab in south east Pennsylvania that charges people a lot of money just to see it, I found nothing working there but my motors. Then I was shown some old batteries that I was told charge up very fast. After looking at my motor connected to them for a few minutes I confirmed that this was happening and that the batteries had no capacity.

Don't believe the hype as I have always warned. These are two reasons why you cannot trust any video as proving anything. These are done without any editing manipulations.

But as for this line below: "This can result in what I refer to as 'stalling', where the battery terminal voltage appears to 'hang' steady for a long period of time." This takes place more or less at all discharge rates in most batteries, and not merely at less than the C20 rate. The lead acid battery has various plateaus in its discharge and charge curves. This changes with more and more usage with the Renaissance charging processes. For example, a 12V battery can often sit at 12.2V for a long while before it takes a dive more suddenly (when the load conditions remain the same). It can also hold the voltage above 10.5 and then dramatically drop of and the battery is done. This is why AH ratings are to 10.5V and inverters shut off at that point. But what we experience is a more linear voltage that starts with higher resting voltage and holds consistent voltage all the way down to zero to allow for real loading below 10.5V and up to 2 times the total real capacity of the battery (and loading it down to zero and cycling does not harm the batteries when they are properly charged). For example, I could drive my Porsche with 144V bank for 10 miles and the resting voltage, even after a day of resting, would be considered fully charged at 152V (like 12.66V battery). Then when I got to the 126V discharged place (not under load), which would be like 10.5V on a 12V battery, I would not worry about my batteries taking a dive as all my other friends in the electric vehicle club would. They would have to get towed home, while I would still drive many more miles with no substantial sudden dip of power.

Needless to say, I am not making any mistakes with batteries in my loading or calculations or metering. I know my batteries and their real capacitors and curves very well as I deal with them full time for 15 years now. Very few people bother to learn these basics and fewer still understand proper battery charging. All the rules of the battery bible, or Peter's video talk about such, do not apply with proper battery charging. There are no ideal battery charging voltages. There are no cycling limits or depth of discharge concerns with proper charging.

So you can rightfully dismiss other people's claims because they show no evidence of understanding these things, and actually show evidence of deceit or mistake in these matters. But I have been more vocal in educating people in these matters than anyone. My frequent and prolonged example of this is even considered annoying.

As for the black box video, if you are trying to imply that such mistakes were being made, this was not the case. I worked those batteries for 2 weeks charging and discharging them down to zero to fully evaluate them with resistive loads. They did not have any dips or plateaus, and they were only 14AH each. If they were 60 to 100AH batteries then you could bring this up as a real question. But the motor was drawing around 6W continuously for 1 hour while maintaining the same voltage after the initial voltage drop. It continuously charged another battery that started up from 11.8V resting and continued over 13V the entire time. The input battery did rise a little when the first or second 100W bulb was added to the 3 other 3W loads because it needed some slight tuning (as done with the RPM). You could also see the neon bulbs coming on because too much energy was coming back to the motor side and it was slightly unbalanced at that point. So the input battery charges up in that case when there was too much load.

This was done not over 5 minutes, but 1 hour so that people could see that this was not an example of plateaus, etc. It also showed that it was not a matter of sulfation as a sulfated battery has no real capacity and under load just drops and powers nothing. You cannot run a 14AH battery with a 6W motor load and 3W + 3W + 3W load for an hour and not see voltages drop. If you think otherwise then show us a video and explain how that could be. A 15W load will steadily drop the battery voltage down, and will certainly show immediate voltage drops with each load being added. But add a 100W load in addition and the voltage would certainly change for the lower. Then a second 100W bulb. That particular setup was made to power all the large LED modules (over 100W each, over 1000W total) in a office/shop while keeping both batteries in a balanced place.

I have demonstrated this at many meetings, and in the last three years I have often had all the parts open and running for two days straight. People bring in their Fluke meters and oscopes and measure everything. But I am not there to prove OU but rather to teach them how to do this. They will often bring in their setups and we will get them going properly. But I always spend several hours starting the first day with battery details and handouts on the subject.

As for high frequencies and impulse charging, it is also important to know that you can never effectively measure a battery while it is being impulsed. You can get a feel over time where a battery is at with the relative voltage readings of a particular meter after cycling it many times and properly loading it so that you know where it is at. But different meters will give different voltages depending on the nature of the pulse. And as I mentioned, pulsing LEDs without capacitors can also be tricky to evaluate. These bulbs all had filtering and capacitors to allow for a more constant load condition.

Hi Void,
I would like to add that when the DUT is running from a battery supply, be aware of the current drawn as a percentage of the C20 rate of the battery. If the current drawn is very substantially less, than the C20 rated current for the battery, then the effective battery capacity is very substantially increased (ref Peukerts Law). This can result in what I refer to as 'stalling', where the battery terminal voltage appears to 'hang' steady for a long period of time. It is also possible that the battery terminal voltage will rise for a period of time, especially if the battery is sulfated to an extent, giving the impression that the DUT is running on free energy! It is in this situation, as well as heavily loaded situations on a battery, that vagaries appear and can very easily lead to false conclusions on the efficiency of a given DUT. Using low current LED's and big batteries, exacerbates this 'hanging' condition. Also, allowing high frequency voltages onto the battery supply rails without effective filtering, also results in vagaries leading to false conclusions.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1120 on: July 11, 2019, 05:18:32 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline rickfriedrich

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 446
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1121 on: July 11, 2019, 05:27:15 PM »
Void,
They probably are needing proper forming. See my recent video on the subject:
https://youtu.be/2oN8wcM_nz8
If you contact the manufacture or look at the datasheet you can learn about this. If electrolytic capacitors sit for the good part of a year then they become uneven inside and will unevenly charge and also be leaky. They can also explode because of this.
Super caps are great because they are low ESR and charge and discharge fast. But they are limited in respect to their low voltage when you are dealing with higher voltage impulsing. So using a hv strobe cap in parallel can allow for the best of both worlds. But there is a science as to finding the ideal capacitor voltages to work with in relation to step charging and discharging...

Hi Hoppy. Yes, I agree. Using a relatively high capacity battery with a small load at the output could
give the false impression that the battery is staying close to fully charged. Itsu avoids that
sort of problem by testing using super caps, I believe, which is good, but the super caps I have are fairly leaky so not the best for that kind of testing. Maybe you can get a type of super caps these days that have low leakage losses. Not sure. That would be great for testing if very low leakage super caps are available.

Offline NickZ

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4971
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1122 on: July 11, 2019, 05:34:32 PM »
   The smaller 4AH 12v battery are cheap and will work, and can be used for testing purposes. Let that size battery run the device all night, then test its voltage, and amperage. If it's not dead in the morning, you have something. The one hour tests, using big car batteries is useless for demonstrations purposes, when lighting LEDs, or making short videos, (or long ones).
   A 10w incandescent bulb, would show the long term draw on the smaller battery, much better. As leds can light on a fraction of their rated voltage, and current. Even the 100w leds, still show some good light at much lower draws.
  The impedense also has to also be factored in, for higher efficiency, when using different coils and/or bulbs. But, that alone will not cause an OU situation.
   Placing a grid powered led next to the device's gated and boasted led, and pointing it to the camera a few feet away, will show the difference if there is any. It's not the best test, but it does work. As putting the negative probe of the scope probes on the coils, MAY affect the readings. Perhaps it may work using only the positive probe, although the signal will look somewhat messy. Let me know what you think, concerning the effect of scope probes, connected onto this type of device.

Offline Hoppy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4324
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1123 on: July 11, 2019, 06:47:08 PM »
Rick,
How do you measure the source battery capacity before and after a long demonstration to confirm no loss or perhaps a gain in stored energy? As you know battery terminal voltages are not a reliable indicator of battery capacity. Also, Do you demonstrate your procedure for this to your students before and after demos?

Offline AlienGrey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3476
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1124 on: July 11, 2019, 07:12:58 PM »
Rick,
How do you measure the source battery capacity before and after a long demonstration to confirm no loss or perhaps a gain in stored energy? As you know battery terminal voltages are not a reliable indicator of battery capacity. Also, Do you demonstrate your procedure for this to your students before and after demos?
I hate to be a cynic  ;D but unless you have a device that's capable of eather delaying the
humble electron to the finishing post than your grab circuit your never going to achieve much and that's a fact! Because that's what it amounts to.

 

OneLink