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 Members: 82512
  • *Latest: hhoready

  • *Total Posts: 497797
  • *Total Topics: 14734
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 21
  • *Total: 23

Author Topic: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant  (Read 10172 times)

Offline SkyWatcher123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 730
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #45 on: April 29, 2018, 10:02:04 PM »
Hi all, finished the charge/load test on the solely aum oscillator circuit, using only the flyback recovery through 2 parallel diodes, using 33 volt input, total average watts input, 3.63 watts.

The charge transfer efficiency was lower, around 81 percent, though probably more like in the upper 70 percent range, because the input power increased a little, around the final 1-2 hours of charging.

So splitting the negative, through the oscillator coil, is indeed, much more efficient at charging batteries.

Also, for long term normal battery charging, the rene/aum circuit, or the rene/sucahyo circuit, is probably best, to avoid any potential of the battery turning into more like a capacitor, which would not be compatible with the majority of loads.
Comments welcome.
peace love light :)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3616
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #46 on: April 29, 2018, 11:48:20 PM »
Hi SkyWatcher,

Thanks for all your efforts and for sharing the results.

The so-called 'splitting the negative' charging circuit is expected to charge with a higher efficiency
than the flyback recovery alone because the switching transistor connects a lower voltage battery
in parallel with a higher value voltage source so charging happens during the switch ON time and
also during the switch OFF time.

Keep up the good work.

Gyula

Offline SkyWatcher123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 730
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #47 on: May 03, 2018, 04:36:01 AM »
Hi gyulasun, thanks for the positive words.
Yes, that about sums it up, pulse on charges and pulse off still charges battery and helps remove any sulphate buildup on plates.

I tested the rene/aum circuit with 20 volt input and was around 90% efficient.
So, 90% or higher is the base line for this circuit.

I do wonder, if charging a lower voltage charge battery, would yield higher efficiencies.

Perhaps a large bank of 1.2 volt nimh cells in parallel, or 6 volt lead acid batteries.

I think the charge battery voltage, that is limiting our useable oscillator voltage, plays a large factor in limiting the efficiency, maybe.
Thoughts welcome.
peace love light :)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #47 on: May 03, 2018, 04:36:01 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3616
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #48 on: May 03, 2018, 08:10:41 PM »
Hi SkyWatcher,

I think the different battery types need charging treatments, methods that do not ruin them on the long run. 
Maybe pulse charging does not fit to all type of batteries universally and the amplitude of the pulse current
should be well controllable, to find the best 'treatment' for any given battery type. 
An interesting pulse charge test with a Nickel-Cadmium battery is worth knowing of:  http://jnaudin.online.fr/html/scalchrg.htm   

If you wish to charge a lower voltage battery, then the amplitude of the pulse current can become higher
than when charging a higher voltage battery in the same oscillator circuit.  This is because you simply increase
the voltage difference between the input supply and the battery to be charged and higher voltage can drive
higher charge current into a lower voltage battery. (Here would come into play a variable duty cycle control
possibility or a variable voltage source for the input supply as you have it.) 
So far you have adjusted and achieved the best conditions for charging the given or chosen battery and found
the favorable input supply amplitude empirically (and other parameters of course) where overall efficiency was
above 90%, at the given duty cycle your circuits ran.
It is very likely that when charging the lower voltage types like 1.2 V or say 6V, you would need to find again
the optimal input supply amplitude so that their voltage difference should drive the optimal amplitude charge current.

If you have means in your circuit setup to control the two charging currents during the ON and OFF times, then
most probably the overall efficiency would be over the +90% efficiency range, no matter what voltage level the
charging battery has. Such means include the variable supply voltage source to establish the correct charge current
for the oscillator ON time and the turns ratio of the transformer and / or voltage doubler at the secondary to set
the charge current for the oscillator OFF time. This way the low voltage battery types could not be the limiting factor
in efficiency.
You mention a bank of battery cells  in parallel  for the low voltage battery types while charging: care should be used
here if there are differences between the cell voltages and / or internal resistances because in that case charge currents
would vary for the individual cells. 

Gyula

Offline SkyWatcher123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 730
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #49 on: May 05, 2018, 06:08:36 AM »
Hi gyulasun, thanks for the good information.
I am going to try the full wave voltage doubler with this rene/aum circuit, using 8 strand primary, and 4 strand secondary, connected to the doubler.
Since my amp meter readings on the previous tests using the voltage doubler may not have been accurate, meaning reading too high.
Will do charge/load test to know true charge transfer efficiency as usual.
The only thing about using the voltage doubler, I think the spike desulphating function would be much reduced, so this design would be for more normal pulse charging.
peace love light

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #49 on: May 05, 2018, 06:08:36 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3616
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #50 on: May 05, 2018, 02:38:42 PM »
I agree,  and a separate switch ought to be used (as Bedini and others did) to pulse charge a battery
from the puffer capacitors of the voltage doubler.   

Offline SkyWatcher123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 730
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #51 on: May 06, 2018, 06:54:19 PM »
Hi gyulasun, thanks for the positive words and helpful intent as always.

The voltage doubler with this rene/aum circuit was not very good, stopped test early it was so poor.
Not sure if the discharge switch you metion would help.

peace love light
« Last Edit: May 07, 2018, 03:34:52 AM by SkyWatcher123 »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #51 on: May 06, 2018, 06:54:19 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline SkyWatcher123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 730
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #52 on: May 07, 2018, 03:34:17 AM »
Deleted.

Hi all, i erased the last circuit, because even though the circuit works fine, something about it must have been off.

The charging of my previous test was far better, i will post that circuit, the one that gave 90% load test efficiency at 20 volt input.
peace love light
« Last Edit: May 07, 2018, 06:05:46 AM by SkyWatcher123 »

Offline SkyWatcher123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 730
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #53 on: May 07, 2018, 06:58:07 PM »
Hi all, this circuit version seems to charge the best, 93% load test efficiency.

It seems like it needs the resistor and capacitor in parallel on the PNP emitter line, to charge efficiently.

So i lowered that resistor value and added more capacitance and the efficiency increased.

The transistors run cold, so no waste there.
peace love light :)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #53 on: May 07, 2018, 06:58:07 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Ed morbus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 119
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #54 on: May 07, 2018, 07:19:17 PM »
Thanks for sharing   :D

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3616
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #55 on: May 07, 2018, 09:55:20 PM »
Hi SkyWatcher,

You wrote in Reply #51: "The voltage doubler with this rene/aum circuit was not very good, stopped test early it was so poor. Not sure if the discharge switch you mention would help."

Well, the additional switch and its control circuit would certainly increase overall complexity of your charger. And this additional switch should dump the collected and stored flyback energy from the doubler capacitors to the 12V charging battery: the switched pulsing current could help in desulphating in a similar way like in your above circuit. However, this extra switch should be operated during way less time than the full OFF time of the oscillator transistor, so its timing would be critical to let the flyback pulse created and captured in the capacitors, and only then discharge the capacitors into the 12 V battery via the extra switch.  So may not be worth the trouble or the additional circuitry cost. And without such switch in that charger, the charging process happens directly from capacitors and the shock-wave-like pulsing a flyback spike provides is completely missing, it is absorbed by the capacitors, this mostly explains the low efficiency.

Regarding your latest circuit above, you can estimate the power loss in the 220 Ohm emitter resistor if simply check the DC voltage across it by a DMM. Probably the AC component across it is mostly shunted by the 320 nF capacitor so the DC voltage squared and divided by 220 Ohm would give the power loss in it pretty well. Say the average emitter current is 20 mA, then the loss in it would be 88 mW, if the average current would be 50 mA, the loss would be already 550 mW, etc.
Then you could confront this loss and overall efficiency with the earlier circuit shown in your Reply #33 where the emitter resistor had a 2 Kohm value, shunted by 100 nF in the same circuit as the one above and the boost converter voltage was set to 30 V.   
Probably you used the same transistors in both circuits. These tests nicely show that tweeking / adjusting the circuits for the best performance is a must and you nicely solved these.  Have you tried using a 100 Ohm instead of the 220 Ohm in the above circuit?   :)

Let me notice that you already found the load test efficiency of the Rene/Aum circuit to be 93.5% (Reply #44) but with 40 V supply input. Probably you had the 2 kOhm emitter resistor in it then I wonder? 
Then came your test on the Sucahyo/Rene circuit combination where there is no emitter resistor to waste any power and the duty cycle was probably even less than had been earlier in the Reply #33 circuit. 

Just trying to sum up some of your results.  Thanks for your efforts.

Gyula

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #55 on: May 07, 2018, 09:55:20 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline SkyWatcher123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 730
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #56 on: May 08, 2018, 12:58:49 AM »
Hi ed morbus, you're welcome.
Hi gyulasun, thanks for the helpful reply.
There is 2 volts across that 220 ohm resistor, so 9 milliamps at 6.7 volts or less, making 60 milliwatt loss.

Yes, thanks for summing things up, since I've been posting many different circuits, It might get confusing.
As far as using a 100 ohm resistor on the PNP emitter line, I would have to try it and see.
Though based on my test of the circuit i deleted, that had nothing on that PNP emitter line, the charging efficiency dropped off for some reason.
Maybe because the base of the NPN was drawing a lot of power unnecessarily and robbing charging power, or the on time was made longer with nothing in that emitter line.
Yes I'm aware of the circuit in reply #44, am just testing different input voltages to see what may be more efficient.

I do notice that with resistor and capacitor on PNP emitter line, the amperage increases a little as the battery charges up to 15.55 volts, which is the peak I'm charging it to.
Though with nothing on that line, amp input goes down a little more, when battery reaches peak charge voltage.
I will try the 100 ohm resistor on the emitter line for next test at 20 volt input and see what we get.
peace love light :)

Offline Belfior

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 306
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #57 on: May 08, 2018, 09:34:01 AM »
Hi SkyWatcher,

You wrote in Reply #51: "The voltage doubler with this rene/aum circuit was not very good, stopped test early it was so poor. Not sure if the discharge switch you mention would help."

Well, the additional switch and its control circuit would certainly increase overall complexity of your charger. And this additional switch should dump the collected and stored flyback energy from the doubler capacitors to the 12V charging battery: the switched pulsing current could help in desulphating in a similar way like in your above circuit. However, this extra switch should be operated during way less time than the full OFF time of the oscillator transistor, so its timing would be critical to let the flyback pulse created and captured in the capacitors, and only then discharge the capacitors into the 12 V battery via the extra switch.  So may not be worth the trouble or the additional circuitry cost. And without such switch in that charger, the charging process happens directly from capacitors and the shock-wave-like pulsing a flyback spike provides is completely missing, it is absorbed by the capacitors, this mostly explains the low efficiency.

Regarding your latest circuit above, you can estimate the power loss in the 220 Ohm emitter resistor if simply check the DC voltage across it by a DMM. Probably the AC component across it is mostly shunted by the 320 nF capacitor so the DC voltage squared and divided by 220 Ohm would give the power loss in it pretty well. Say the average emitter current is 20 mA, then the loss in it would be 88 mW, if the average current would be 50 mA, the loss would be already 550 mW, etc.
Then you could confront this loss and overall efficiency with the earlier circuit shown in your Reply #33 where the emitter resistor had a 2 Kohm value, shunted by 100 nF in the same circuit as the one above and the boost converter voltage was set to 30 V.   
Probably you used the same transistors in both circuits. These tests nicely show that tweeking / adjusting the circuits for the best performance is a must and you nicely solved these.  Have you tried using a 100 Ohm instead of the 220 Ohm in the above circuit?   :)

Let me notice that you already found the load test efficiency of the Rene/Aum circuit to be 93.5% (Reply #44) but with 40 V supply input. Probably you had the 2 kOhm emitter resistor in it then I wonder? 
Then came your test on the Sucahyo/Rene circuit combination where there is no emitter resistor to waste any power and the duty cycle was probably even less than had been earlier in the Reply #33 circuit. 

Just trying to sum up some of your results.  Thanks for your efforts.

Gyula

I saw a video where a dude charged MO caps with 230V AC and then connected his 12V batteries to the caps. Caps showed 230V before the batteries were connected and then 12.6V DC when the batteries were hooked up. He also said this helps with the battery desulphating. Was this guy full of shit or does this help make your batteries last longer when constantly charged?

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3616
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #58 on: May 08, 2018, 06:06:23 PM »
Hi SkyWatcher,

Well, if you have 2V DC across the 220 Ohm emitter resistor, then the emitter current is 9 mA indeed and the loss is 9mA*2V = 18 mW or so.  I do not get how you mean the voltage of 6.7 V or less and the 60 mW loss, would you tell.
Regarding the 100 Ohm emitter resistor, maybe it is not really needed to go to as low as that now that we know about the 18 mW or so loss in a 220 Ohm resistor there: while any loss is a loss, less than 20 mW loss could already be negligible in the overall setup if most other things are ok.  And if you could use transistors with higher hFE features, the emitter current could be less, hence so could be the current.


Hi Belfior,

Unfortunately I am not an expert on battery science, my take on your example is that in case of mainly lead acid types the regular and conventional charging process builds up sulphate layer on the surface of the plates and with such 'treatment' you saw from the guy the unwanted layers could be blasted off and such batteries could be revived and used for a longer time when this occasional pulse charge is applied. 
But the process is not straightforward: damage may occur on the plates when the voltage difference is as high as 230V versus the 12V and may render a battery fully dead.  Perhaps with much less than 230V 'zapping', the process is safer from battery survival point of view.  And the Farad value of the capacitor that is charged up for such treatment surely counts too (the amount of the stored energy).

The kinda charging with "radiant energy" the Bedini fans follow is also said to be doubtful: on the long run it may kill batteries,  I do not know the truth, there have been people replicating charger circuits that are said to be charging with "radiant energy" and after a certain time the batteries became useless.  Then there are others who say that if the pulse amplitude is only 18-20V with respect to the 12V battery, then that treatment is not harmful on the long run either or not so harmful. 
My take on this is that it is the energy of the collapsing magnetic field  (when current is switched off in a coil) which is collected in a capacitor and then this cap is discharged onto a battery, does the charging... sorry from those believers.  8)   

Gyula

Offline SkyWatcher123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 730
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #59 on: May 08, 2018, 07:25:36 PM »
Hi gyulasun, nevermind the 6.7 volt comment, wasn't thinking, was tired.
Yes, 18 mw is correct for the 220 ohm resistor.
I already started the new test with the 100 ohm on the emitter line.
Voltage across that is .6 volts, so 3.6 mw.
Input is much lower starting out with this 100 ohm in place, though charging good it seems.
I notice the frequency is lower, though based on previous testing, the frequency will climb when the charge battery climbs in voltage.
We shall see how the load test numbers pan out.

Hi belfior, I've tried that circuit, though not sure how healthy it is for batteries in the long term.
This rene/aum circuit, gives a normal pulse charge and then a flyback pulse, the normal pulse should prevent any problems of turning the battery into a capacitor or fluff charge syndrome.
I have been using my rejuvenated lawn tractor in the tractor, that was pulsed by the rene/meissner circuit and it seems ok so far.
peace love light

 

OneLink