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

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: 500698
  • *Total Topics: 14848
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 15
  • *Total: 17

Author Topic: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant  (Read 11040 times)

Offline SkyWatcher123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 787
Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« on: April 08, 2018, 05:52:40 PM »
Hi all, I have been testing this charger variant and testing different voltages.
Have been finding using higher and higher voltage inputs is increasing efficiency of power flowing through oscillator circuit and into the 12 volt tractor battery.
Will copy and paste results so far from other forum.

 I'm using all 11 strands in parallel as the oscillator primary in this latest test, with 2 diodes in parallel off the collector of transistor to 12 volt charge battery and using the ferrite tube core.
 I am now using my 400 watt boost converter as the input power supply, so i can raise the voltage even further to test any efficiency increases.
 When using an input voltage of 50.6 volts from power supply, the efficiency is 72.5 percent, of course not including flyback recovery, actual voltage shown flowing through oscillator is around 35 volts.
 On this latest test, using 60.1 volts from power supply, the efficiency has increased to
 77.5 percent, actual voltage shown flowing through oscillator is around 46 volts.
 These tests are tuned to use close to the same input wattage, by adjusting resistor values in oscillator circuit.
 I find these results promising, i will continue to raise the voltage by 10 volt increments and tune and share the data with you folks.
 I think this boost converter can only reach around 90 volts though.

The results at 70.2 volts dc input, is showing increased efficiency.
 The actual voltage through oscillator circuit is 57.2 volts at .07 amps.
 That is 4 watts flowing through the circuit into the charge battery and 4.91 watts being input.
 Efficiency is now 81.5 percent, not including flyback recovery.

Latest test using 80.2 volts dc input.
 The efficiency of the circuit has increased further.
 It has increased to 84 percent.
 Actual voltage through oscillator is 67.4 volts.
 Current flowing through circuit is .06 amps.
 Also had to wire another neon in series with neon across transistor collector, because the higher voltage was causing it to conduct.
 I also have a capacitor in parallel with each of the resistors shown in the circuit drawing, it helps to adjust frequency and lower input.
 Also, I'm finding the circuit to charge very efficiently, have been using a 12 volt led bulb to discharge the 12 volt battery and observing watt hours used, then can compare to watt hours placed back in and so on.

Your thoughts on these results are very welcome, not much interest at the other forum apparently.
peace love light :)
Here is pic of coil on left and latest circuit drawing.

 

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3788
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #1 on: April 09, 2018, 12:56:47 AM »
Hi Tyson,

You have been doing an excellent job on optimizing most component values in this circuit. Also, you use a relatively
good HV switching transistor, the only 'issue' I can mention would be its rather low hFE, DC current gain of 8 to 10
at around 1 to 4A collector current range, from data sheet: http://www.wakamatsu.co.jp/waka/2sd1878.pdf

You wrote about currents flowing through the circuit in the range of 60-70 mA or so, I assume this is an average
value and the peak collector current for the transistor must be higher than this of course.
 
With a more modern switching transistor like ZTX857 for instance, the DC current gain ranges from 100 to 300
for around 0.5A or from 15 to 25 for 2A collector current, from data sheet:
https://www.diodes.com/assets/Datasheets/ZTX857.pdf   
This is a 300V, 3A (5A peak) switching transistor with very low collector-emitter saturation voltage:
50mV (max 100mV) at 500mA collector current, this is better than the 120-130mV at the 0.1 to 2A
collector current range for the 2SD1878.

Question is what benefits such a transistor would bring versus the presently used one? The 23 kOhm base bias
resistor could be in the 100-200 kOhm range or so and the 15 kOhm could be in the 50-100 kOhm range or so I think.
It is possible the DC pre-bias role of the 23 kOhm resistor would become obsolote i.e. there would be no need for
any resistor at that place, due to the much higher hFE value.
Another advantage would be the lower dissipation in such transistor due to the much lower saturation voltage.

I think these two better parameters would bring a minimum of 3 to 4% increase in overall efficiency.

Price for this transistor is here and notice it has no integrated diode across the collector-emitter and while
you could use a fast diode there, maybe it would not be needed at all.  The 2SD1878 type has got a built-in diode
because of the intended task for horizontal line output stages in television receivers of the 80s and 90s.
https://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/diodes-incorporated/ZTX857/ZTX857-ND/92594
Of course there are other switching transistor types with more or less similar parameters than the ZTX857.

Thanks for showing these results.
Gyula

Offline stiplanet

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #2 on: April 09, 2018, 01:46:32 AM »
hello good job I am interested in your tests but I would like to know what are the objectives you want to achieve and what are the advantages of this technique, I want to understand what it will serve, thank best regard

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #2 on: April 09, 2018, 01:46:32 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline SkyWatcher123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 787
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #3 on: April 09, 2018, 02:53:59 AM »
Hi gyulasun, thanks for the positive words.
I am using the 2SD1878, because it's what i had on hand (salvaged) at the moment, since i fried my audio transistor i was using.
I will look at what transistors i can get, that are similar to what you describe, any improvements in efficiency is what i need.
I wonder if the built in diode is causing any loss of charging efficiency, i can't see how it would though, unless it somehow conducts when the transistor is not conducting.

Hi stiplanet, Thanks for the reply.
The main function of this circuit setup, is to pulse charge a battery using the current flowing through an oscillator coil.
Then, use the flyback recovery of the coil to try and increase efficiency further and also help to reduce sulphation of battery and increase capacity.
The objective is to charge the battery with the highest throughput efficiency.
Then if the recovery can exceed the power input, then when using a battery for input, we may be able to swap batteries and gain charge in both batteries, which is why the tests to gain the most efficiency with this type of split negative setup.
Though the main goal is an efficient charger that can make a battery last for many more cycles than a typical, off the shelf charger. Which limits the peak charging voltage and in far less cycles, will cause the battery to sulphate and die.
peace love light

Edit: I've just about maxed out my boost converter at 90 volts. Highest efficiency is 85% with this coil arrangement.

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3788
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #4 on: April 10, 2018, 12:06:31 AM »
Hi SkyWatcher123,

Regarding other transistor types, you could look for types used in electronic ballast circuits in CFLs, in projector lamp
driving circuits  and the like and you may find such with gutted lamps but the electronic circuit inside may have
remained good. It is possible though that the older types will have a low value hFE so you would need to pre-bias the base.

I do not think either that the built in diode would be an issue.  When the transistor is off, the built in diode between
the collector and emitter immediately becomes reverse biased from the DC supply voltage appearing across it and
the kickback pulse (flyback) coming from the coil will also appear in reverse direction.  In case the coil has conditions for
ringing like an LC circuit, then the diode may have a chance to conduct, this is not the likely case in your circuit.

Gyula

Hi gyulasun, thanks for the positive words.
I am using the 2SD1878, because it's what i had on hand (salvaged) at the moment, since i fried my audio transistor
i was using.
I will look at what transistors i can get, that are similar to what you describe, any improvements in efficiency is what i need.
I wonder if the built in diode is causing any loss of charging efficiency, i can't see how it would though, unless it somehow conducts when the transistor is not conducting.
....

Edit: I've just about maxed out my boost converter at 90 volts. Highest efficiency is 85% with this coil arrangement.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #4 on: April 10, 2018, 12:06:31 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline SkyWatcher123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 787
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #5 on: April 10, 2018, 05:48:20 AM »
Hi gyulasun, thanks for the reply and the helpful information.
I found an NTE331 NPN in my salvage stock, it has a much higher current gain. I tested it and did not notice much difference in performance, though i did not remove the prebias connection.
If i remove the prebias and it still oscillates, do you think it will be more efficient.

An observation i just made, using the tv transistor.
I removed the ferrite tube core, which doubled the watts input, so i progressively lowered the input voltage from the boost converter to around 37 volts, while keeping similar input watts as all previous testing.
The efficiency lowered to 64%.
I think with this split negative setup, if we go too low with the current flowing through the coil oscillator and into the charge battery, the battery does not charge as quickly and at such high voltage, the battery load test starts to reduce in duration to 12.5 volts, which is where i end each discharge test.
So, even though the efficiency is higher for the higher voltage circuit, it is not always of benefit with this device arrangement.
The best configuration in my opinion, will be the one that charges the battery with the least input, while the battery recieves this charge with the highest efficiency.
The circuit is flowing .17 amps at the moment, whereas previously, it was using .06 amps at the higher voltage input.
The battery charges better and more efficienctly with a higher current flow.
peace love light

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3788
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #6 on: April 10, 2018, 10:23:47 PM »
Hi SkyWatcher,

This post will be a long one...  :D   You wrote
"If i remove the prebias and it still oscillates, do you think it will be more efficient."

Yes it will, how much more, this can be estimated only partially because the collector-emitter waveform is
not known: removing just the 23 kOhm, the dissipated power in it could fully be saved. But this surely involves
the readjustment of the 15 kOhm resistor too.  Sometimes a transistor with such low hFE is difficult to use in a
self starting oscillator, higher supply voltage helps on this.       
First consider the base current via the 23 kOhm:
(80.2V-12.6V-0.7V) / 23 = 66.9/23 = 2.9 mA  and the dissipation in this resistor is 66.9*2.9 = 194 mW this would not
be consumed from the power supply. Also, the transistor would not have an idle current during the oscillator OFF times,
so this consumption would also be missing.  2.9mA*hFE would be the idle collector current, let's say the hFE would be
8 with your tv transistor, then collector current, Ic would be 2.9*8 = 23.2 mA.
At OFF times the collector emitter DC voltage may be 80.2-12.6=67.6V and with the 23.2 mA collector current, the
dissipation would be 67.6*23.2=1568.3 mW BUT because we do not know the duration of the OFF time during the
periodic oscillations we cannot reduce the 1.5W by the actual duty cycle in this oscillator to get the average dissipation,
the 1.5W dissipation would be correct for a continuous operation, not for an oscillating operation.
So you would need a oscilloscope to see the collector-emitter waveform. Now if I assume the average dissipation were
say 1/10 of 1.5W, then this 150 mW + 194 mW= 344 mW would be saved when you could omit the pre-bias resistor
due to the use of a transistor that has a higher or high hFE value. 

To estimate how the saturation voltage for the transistor during the ON times may influence efficiency, we would need
to know the ON time of the oscillator when collector current would flow, this would cause a certain dissipation in the
function of the saturation voltage and of course in the function of the collector current. So again the voltage waveform
across the collector and emitter would be needed.

Ideally, the ON time for the oscillator transistor should be as short as possible. This is because of the value of the
L/R time constant for your coil has 'something' to do with the DC resistance loss of your coil and also with the recovery
loss of capturing the flyback pulses. IT is very good you use multiple wires in parallel for the main coil, this automatically
reduces wire loss.

You would need to know the L inductance of your coil that has the 272 milliOhm resistance. Suppose, for simplicity,
it has 27.2 mH inductance with the ferrite tube cores. This would give an L/R time constant of 0.0272/0.272 = 0.1 sec
i.e 100 ms. What this means and how the ON time could be chosen to this constant to get the smallest coil loss,  please
read member 'verpies' post here:
http://overunity.com/7679/selfrunning-free-energy-devices-up-to-5-kw-from-tariel-kapanadze/msg352483/topicseen/#msg352483   
If you do not understand something with his text, I try to help.

Notice that if you remove the ferrite core from the coil, the inductance goes down hence the L/R also changes to a lower
value too, so that one would have to reconsider the ON time BUT the question is how the ON time can be controlled?

Well, in this circuit, this can hardly be done (to end up with less coil loss) because of the 'rigid' (not readily controllable)
feedback in the oscillator. A good solution would be to use a very low power variable duty cycle oscillator (like a CMOS
555 timer) to drive the base of the transistor and seek for the best efficiency possible.

Needless to say, that even with such duty cycle optimization, one has to face a trade-off because the too short ON time
(that yields less and less loss and involves a decreasing amount of input power) goes together with recovering less and
less captured flyback energy from the coil (smaller input current involves less stored energy in the coil).
In this situation the only means to reduce this trade-off is to increase input supply voltage to increase input power hence
increase the amount of the captured energy too.

What you observed as an increasing efficiency when you increased the supply voltage was very probably due to a near
ideal ON time - coil time constant relation to have a minimal coil loss. This you achieved with increasing the time constant
by reducing the R resistance of the coil i.e. you reduced the denominator in the L/R quotient and you inserted a ferrite core
into the air cored coil, this latter also increased coil time constant.

So if you remove the core, you go towards the higher coil loss possibility, unless you are able to adjust the ON time too to
partially compensate for that.  (In this case you reduce L hence time constant also reduces.)

I agree with your opinion on what the best configuration would be and the thoughts above may help achieve or approach
that.  Probably you would still need the core for the coil but you need to reduce a little the inductance wrt the 80.2V supply
voltage position by using less number of cores and / or inserting them partially and thus reducing supply voltage too. 
Or you may find the 170 mA input current for the coil is quasy very good for the charging, then try to stay near to it but
remove some number of turns till you approach similar input current range with the ferrite cores inserted. 
(This latter helps increase time constant hence reduce loss provided the ON time remains nearly similar for the cases.)
And try to find a switching transistor having a higher hFE  than the present tv transistor (the ZTX type would be ideal in
this respect, together with its very low saturation voltage). 

Gyula

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #6 on: April 10, 2018, 10:23:47 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Ed morbus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #7 on: April 11, 2018, 08:55:21 AM »
SkyWatcher123  thanks for sharing
Have you tested with more output diodes

Offline SkyWatcher123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 787
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #8 on: April 11, 2018, 07:06:10 PM »
Hi gyulasun, thanks for the in depth response and information, i will try and implement some of that information.
Though the idea of removing the prebias, thinking about it, i'm not sure how it would start oscillating without it, with this circuit design.
The ideal on time information is most helpful, you're probably right, the higher voltage was adjusting that.

As of now, using 37 volt total input at .17 amps, it is charging the battery the fastest for the same input watts as previous higher voltage tests, no ferrite core at the moment.
And i have 56 Kohm resistors in each of the resistor positions, the prebias resistor has .2uF capacitor in parallel and the feedback resistor has .22uF capacitor in parallel.


Hi Ed morbus, thanks for replying.
With the 80 volt input setup, i did try the 2 diodes in series, it raised the input a little and noticed heat in them, could not tell if charging increased much.
With 2 diodes in parallel, input was lower and no noticeable heat in diodes.
What are your thoughts Ed, do you think more diodes in either series or parallel would be of benefit.
peace love light


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #8 on: April 11, 2018, 07:06:10 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3788
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #9 on: April 11, 2018, 07:53:43 PM »
Hi,

You need not remove the prebias if the oscillator needs it to start with that low hFE tv transistor (I hinted on this problem). And now the 56 kOhm consumes less than the 23 kOhm.

Gyula

Offline SkyWatcher123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 787
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #10 on: April 11, 2018, 07:59:38 PM »
Ok, after a couple charge/discharge cycles with the 37 volt input, the efficiency is almost 100%, if we just calculate what is flowing through the actual circuit, compared to the watt hours given back by the battery.
However, the total efficiency is close to the efficiency between the total input watts, relative to the actual watts flowing through the circuit, which is around 65% range.
I will make further tests with higher voltage, to see if i can get the battery to charge efficiently that way.
I should make you folks aware, the battery i'm using for these tests is actually not in the greatest condition, it is the one from our lawn tractor, so i will have to make these tests again on my good condition battery also.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #10 on: April 11, 2018, 07:59:38 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline SkyWatcher123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 787
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #11 on: April 12, 2018, 08:54:55 AM »
Hi all, just want people to know, battery charging/load test efficiency results are looking much better with the good battery.
Will run a couple more cycles tomorrow and share the data, then i will try higher voltage inputs as well.
Getting tired now.
peace love light

Offline seychelles

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 423
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #12 on: April 12, 2018, 09:41:40 AM »
HI MY 2 BOBS WORTH . THE BIGGEST PROBLEM YOU ARE FACING IS,
THE BATTERY.. I RECKON YOU SHOULD USE APPROPRIATE CAPACITORS REPLACING THE BATTERIES..

Offline SkyWatcher123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 787
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #13 on: April 12, 2018, 05:46:24 PM »
Hi seychelles, thanks for the reply.
Yes, am aware of the battery charging efficiency, probably why Bedini, Turion, etc. use a bunch in parallel, to lower those losses.
And Bedini used those giant telephone tower batteries i think, that had ultra low resistance, closer to the ultra capacitors battery capacitors you are suggesting.
peace love light

Offline seychelles

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 423
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #14 on: April 12, 2018, 06:11:15 PM »
GRAPHENE SUPER CAP../BATTERY,, CHECK OUT THIS GUY..https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4AkVj-qnJxNtKuz3rkq16A

 

OneLink