Author Topic: Floodrod's Etheric Generator Research / Build (Read 19328 times)

captainpecan · « **Reply #180 on:** May 12, 2022, 07:46:04 PM »

Yes, that is what I have been working on for many years. There is much info about that online. Both good and bad. It's the same concept as sending energy from 2 batteries in series, into 2 batteries in parallel. It is the same concept of catching the energy in capacitors on the other side. That of course has its own 50% or so loss unrelated to the motor, but the concept is there. I have had great success in increasing run times using this recycling method. In fact it is a huge part of my current experiments. I just haven't shown a lot of it yet. You do NOT capture all the energy into the battery. But it DOES appear to capture a portion you can then reuse. And that motor is not consuming it. You are passing it through it. I did a little dumb video many years ago showing a motor is not consuming it as we have been told. Yes there are losses, but we are actually sending it to ground and neutralizing all of our potential instead doing it the normal way. This way, we do recycle a portion of it.
https://youtu.be/vwp7podu06s

floodrod · « **Reply #181 on:** May 12, 2022, 07:58:16 PM »

Quote from: onepower on May 12, 2022, 05:12:33 AM

How does what is presented relate to generating or extracting more energy/motion?.

Regards
AC

The less the flux interferes with the rotor- the more motion there will be. I needed to learn how lenz affects me. I know the sayings and what the Laws say- but I had to see it all in action for myself to understand why it works like it does.. There is a degree of truth in beating a portion of the lenz resistance by adjusting the core position in certain coil arrangements. How this affects power generation, I am not sure.

Next I want to experiment with what I just posted. Creating my flux to drive the motor between 2 positive leads- for a fraction of the cost

floodrod · « **Reply #182 on:** May 12, 2022, 08:24:03 PM »

Quote from: captainpecan on May 12, 2022, 07:46:04 PM

Yes, that is what I have been working on for many years. There is much info about that online. Both good and bad. It's the same concept as sending energy from 2 batteries in series, into 2 batteries in parallel. It is the same concept of catching the energy in capacitors on the other side. That of course has its own 50% or so loss unrelated to the motor, but the concept is there. I have had great success in increasing run times using this recycling method. In fact it is a huge part of my current experiments. I just haven't shown a lot of it yet. You do NOT capture all the energy into the battery. But it DOES appear to capture a portion you can then reuse. And that motor is not consuming it. You are passing it through it. I did a little dumb video many years ago showing a motor is not consuming it as we have been told. Yes there are losses, but we are actually sending it to ground and neutralizing all of our potential instead doing it the normal way. This way, we do recycle a portion of it.
https://youtu.be/vwp7podu06s

Cool! Correct me if I am wrong.. Not counting inefficiencies of battery charging, etc.. The amount we capture / lose from power supply through a coil to a battery should be calculatable by ohms of the coil?? Does the math work from power supply to battery?

Example- PS pushing 12V 1 amp straight to a battery. So the resistance of the battery is 12 ohms in this example.

Add a 1 ohm coil between, now we have 13 ohms. at 12V, current is now 0.92308 amps to the battery. We are using under 1/10th of the 12 watt input power to create the flux. the other 90+% is going to the battery.

If we connect the 1 ohm coil to the PS directly with 12V, we use the full 12 watts. But by collecting the output, we use under 1.2 watts to create the same amount of flux?

If we are losing more than this, what's the cause?

Another example- I am charging a car battery with 100' cables. Does it take more power to charge the car battery if the 100' charging cable is coiled up rather than straight?

Thanks for any info you can share!

captainpecan · « **Reply #183 on:** May 12, 2022, 08:52:59 PM »

Yes... and no... this one is hard to explain because it seems it shows something different to me on the bench than you would expect. But exact measuring using batteries is a skill I am lacking in. I just get so many different variances in charges being held over time and stuff. It is so much easier to measure it using capacitors because you can get very accurate measurements that are repeatable. But then you also have normal losses simply from using capacitors. It's frustrating. But here is what I have learned from my bench tests...

A quick answer to your question is that yes, you can get pretty close to figuring your losses in the manner. It should not be true, but i have seen similar on the bench. How you cam test it yourself is just like the simple test I did in that old video. When I do them, adding just a resistor between them, still does not lose extra energy. Even using a high resistance. What I see is simply a slower transfer of the energy. Now, there is an argument that if you release the energy way slower, you did lose that work you could have gotten done by pushing all the current faster. But when measuring the amount of energy that actually transfers and gets caught in the other caps, there is very minimal loss. If I had to explain it, using this method to run a motor, the higher the resistance the slower the energy transfers, the less torque the motor gives. That is my assumption. You basically trade torque for longer run time. Which isn't really a waste of energy, it's simply changing how it's used. I also see differences in how much energy is able to transfer due to higher inductance in the circuit, and to counter emf. In my experents, back emf seems to do the same thing as added resistance. It just slows down the energy transfer but it still transfers. I have a lot of theories and tests I've done. It is essential to my motor builds I just haven't gotten a motor efficient enough to move to begin testing woth this powering design. I believe my new motor I am building right now is a perfect candidate and I will be posting a lot about it. New threads coming. Just been waiting on parts.

BTW... You have been following Russ's videos. He 100% understands all this concept because I have been seeing his videos he had made discussing it. Look into his videos posted to grasp the concept better if you need. He has great way of explaining things. His video 4 and 5 will get you looking at things the correct way... here is his part 4. It's a little long, but you already know what your in for when watching his videos... lol
https://youtu.be/6YTRzTniKc8

I will start a thread for this stuff. I don't want to highjack your thread with it to much.

floodrod · « **Reply #184 on:** May 12, 2022, 09:21:42 PM »

Quote from: captainpecan on May 12, 2022, 08:52:59 PM

Yes... and no... this one is hard to explain because it seems it shows something different to me on the bench than you would expect. But exact measuring using batteries is a skill I am lacking in. I just get so many different variances in charges being held over time and stuff. It is so much easier to measure it using capacitors because you can get very accurate measurements that are repeatable. But then you also have normal losses simply from using capacitors. It's frustrating. But here is what I have learned from my bench tests...

A quick answer to your question is that yes, you can get pretty close to figuring your losses in the manner. It should not be true, but i have seen similar on the bench. How you cam test it yourself is just like the simple test I did in that old video. When I do them, adding just a resistor between them, still does not lose extra energy. Even using a high resistance. What I see is simply a slower transfer of the energy. Now, there is an argument that if you release the energy way slower, you did lose that work you could have gotten done by pushing all the current faster. But when measuring the amount of energy that actually transfers and gets caught in the other caps, there is very minimal loss. If I had to explain it, using this method to run a motor, the higher the resistance the slower the energy transfers, the less torque the motor gives. That is my assumption. You basically trade torque for longer run time. Which isn't really a waste of energy, it's simply changing how it's used. I also see differences in how much energy is able to transfer due to higher inductance in the circuit, and to counter emf. In my experents, back emf seems to do the same thing as added resistance. It just slows down the energy transfer but it still transfers. I have a lot of theories and tests I've done. It is essential to my motor builds I just haven't gotten a motor efficient enough to move to begin testing woth this powering design. I believe my new motor I am building right now is a perfect candidate and I will be posting a lot about it. New threads coming. Just been waiting on parts.

BTW... You have been following Russ's videos. He 100% understands all this concept because I have been seeing his videos he had made discussing it. Look into his videos posted to grasp the concept better if you need. He has great way of explaining things. His video 4 and 5 will get you looking at things the correct way... here is his part 4. It's a little long, but you already know what your in for when watching his videos... lol
https://youtu.be/6YTRzTniKc8

Will do... I am testing already. It becomes quickly obvious I want my coil resistance to match the battery resistance to maximize flux and get most efficiency.

Example- if my coil reaches 5 amps at 2 volts (which it does) but I have to put out 13 volts 2 amps to charge my battery, my coil is only getting 2 amps through it and only needs under 1 volt to make it pull 2 amps. So I am sending 11 unneeded volts, which hurts my wattage for no additional flux. Not really wasting because my battery is charging- but defeating the purpose.

But if my coil and battery had the same ohm value- I'd be maximizing my flux to watt ratio. It appears in best case scenario, you can almost double your flux for the same input price..

Yes I know there are losses I am not including and it may not work out like I am insinuating. Just thinking out loud how this should work so when I setup my next motor I have a plan

captainpecan · « **Reply #185 on:** May 12, 2022, 09:49:12 PM »

You are doing exactly as needed. This is one you really do need to learn on the bench. It is also one of the reasons I am experimenting with higher resistance coils of thinner wire to get more turns In a smaller space. Stronger field, less current, but higher voltage. It has seemed to me that the batteries capture more efficiently at lower current charge. At least that's what seems to be happening for me and I am testing. So I am trying to match a motor with coils that both use low current AND get strong magnetic flux. It's a work in progress anyway.

floodrod · « **Reply #186 on:** May 13, 2022, 12:29:14 AM »

I have about 10 coils like the ones shown. To start, I plan to run alternating polarities through 5 of them- then dump into a battery.
Take 5 more of the coils and clamp them to the 5 that are being pulsed with alternating polarities.
Rectify and store the output. Then take measurements.

I will run the voltage just above the battery nominal voltage, so the battery will take a charge. And tinker with pulse rates via an ardiuno.

I have yet to check out solid-state stuff. This will be good learning for me.

captainpecan · « **Reply #187 on:** May 13, 2022, 03:09:36 AM »

Consider this though. If the battery is 12v, and you run 14v from the power supply, the load only sees the difference. So it would only see 2v. Keep that in mind. Your experent is a good start. I have found some success pulsing through a transformer and using the secondary to run full size led bulbs. I currently use that to light a couple rooms in my house and I keep switching battery packs. The packs run down but I feel they last way longer and these are 8 watt bulbs I run off of about 1 watt at full brightness. There are batter ways, like joule thief, but I have been playing with this just for fun. What I did find though, if I run it through a motor, I get better efficiency. It seems that if I use the generated magnetic field for work, i lose less energy. If I collapse the field to charge something or use it on the opposite side of a transformer, it isn't as efficient. Just my experience anyway. Also, running loads of other than wire in line loses more energy as well. For instance an incandescent bulb does burn some of the energy into heat and light. But it does still charge the battery, so I'm assuming its still better than sending it to ground.

Edit... BTW I did go ahead and make a thread you can post anything you want in with these concepts without having to run to far off topic here.
https://overunity.com/19112/work-done-while-recycling-the-energy/msg566889/#new

floodrod · « **Reply #188 on:** May 15, 2022, 03:30:07 AM »

I got a kinda newish plan that relates to my original idea of this thread.

I noticed this several times and been trying to harness it with rotation, but it's difficult because the small window needs precise timing. And within the window, there is a "hot zone" which it would be best to focus all the energy and motion within. Short stroke reciprocation is my best bet here.

I can get generated current to flow the direction of input. And I am like 99% sure of this. Lenz is reversed in this 1 small spot.

I can easily feel it when powering the coil also. In the exact spot where the current goes the right way- the flux helps the motion of the magnet in that exact window. It actually goes that way the remainder of the coil, but the power drop-off is not worth passing those parts of the coil.

I need to setup a reciprocator and hit only this small section.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gC65NQoo-Xg

I am uploading another video to show it in action

captainpecan · « **Reply #189 on:** May 15, 2022, 04:11:48 AM »

Edited... I just understood what you were doing. My comments weren't relevant.

floodrod · « **Reply #190 on:** May 15, 2022, 04:24:42 AM »

I want to use half core and only focus in the cherry spot..

I just tested Powering the coil and passing the magnet.

Input goes UP when passing the first side of the coil..

When I hit my cherry-spot INPUT GOES DOWN when passing that half.

Exactly the confirmation I needed!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cu1sH8400dw

NOTE- But sure- I'd like to see the videos you mention. More info the better!

captainpecan · « **Reply #191 on:** May 15, 2022, 04:32:38 AM »

Seeing your new video. When you remove the core on the left, does the left side still draw more current when you pass the magnet, or does it go down as well without the core. I only ask because I'm trying to understand core effect a bit better. You have a higher inductance on the left side with half core. Just trying to visualize what's going on. Also, same exact setup, does current still drop if you go right to left on right hand side. The coreless side, moving magnet towards the center. Current still drop?

captainpecan · « **Reply #192 on:** May 15, 2022, 04:47:02 AM »

I'm trying to think this through. I may be thinking backwards, but it seems that if successful at Lenz induced current running in same direction as supplied current, wouldn't the current supplied go up, not down? Are you maybe working on the wrong side of the equation? I understand everything is backwards and confusing and I am probably wrong here, but it's bugging me.
The reason I say this, is with a motor, the current actually increases under load because the motor is turning slower and the back emf of Lenz actually decreases. As the motor turns faster, the induced magnetic field of Lenz increases restricting the current flow. The Lenz law is actually causing the motor to draw less current. That is why when you load a lenzless motor the current would not change.

Am I backwards here? It's actually pretty important to understand to find the desired results. Maybe someone can add some thoughts to this part?

Edit.... This could still all be correct. Maybe if Lenz current runs in the same direction, it may do both things, increase the ability of current to flow that TYPICALLY draws more from source, but at the same time, fills that void with its own current??? Maybe? So possibly I am thinking correct on how it works, but forgetting that the input current increase is now replaced by the induced Lenz current??

floodrod · « **Reply #193 on:** May 15, 2022, 04:50:56 AM »

Glad you recommended testing that.

OK I did 2 tests..

I can not get a reading with no core- as it's hard to build inductance that way..

Test 1- I positioned a coil the traditional way and powered it. I had the coil sucking me in when I try to escape.. (the way I think Lenz works).. And when I escape- the input goes UP.

Test 2- I positioned the long coil on the side like the videos. Core going all the way through. Going the way it doesn't want to go makes the input go UP. Going the way it DOES want to go makes the input current go down.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HNIwjZAErM

captainpecan · « **Reply #194 on:** May 15, 2022, 04:55:25 AM »

Thanks for trying some different stuff. One step over to understanding it all.

Cookie	Origin	Persistency	Information and Usage
ecl_auth	overunity.com	Expires after 30 days	This cookie contains the text "EU Cookie Law - LiPF cookies authorised". Without this cookie, the Forums' software is prevented from setting other cookies.
SMFCookie648	overunity.com	Expires according to user-chosen session duration	If you log-in as a member of this site, this cookie contains your user name, an encrypted hash of your password and the time you logged-in. It is used by the site software to ensure that features such as indicating new Forum and Private messages are indicated to you. This cookie is essential for the site software to work correctly.
PHPSESSID	overunity.com	Current session only	This cookie contains a unique Session Identification value. It is set for both members and non-members (guests) and it is essential for the site software to work correctly. This cookie is not persistent and should be automatically removed when you close the browser window.
pmx_upshr{NAME}	overunity.com	Current session only	These cookies are set to records your display preferences for the site's Portal page if a panel or individual block is collapsed or expanded
pmx_pgidx_blk{ID}	overunity.com	Current session only	These cookies are set to records the page number for the site's Portal page if the page for a individual block is changed.
pmx_cbtstat{ID}	overunity.com	Current session only	These cookies are set to records the expand/collapse state for a CBT Navigator block content.
pmx_poll{ID}	overunity.com	Current session only	These cookies are set to records the id for the current poll in a multiple Poll block.
pmx_{fadername}	overunity.com	Current session only	These cookies are set to records the state for a Opac-Fader block.
pmx_LSBsub{ID}	overunity.com	Current session only	These cookies are set to records the current category and the state for a static Category block.
pmx_shout{ID}	overunity.com	Current session only	These cookies are set to records the current state of a Shout box block.
pmx_php_ckeck	overunity.com	Page load time	This cookie will probably never see you. It is set, if a Syntax check on a PHP block is initiated and will be deleted if the function executed.
pmx_YOfs	overunity.com	Page load time	This cookie will probably never see you. It is set on portal actions like click on a page number. The cookie is evaluated on load the desired page and then deleted. It is used to restore the vertical screen position as before the click.

1	We are aware that Google uses additional cookies it stores on your PC and when you browse our site and all other sites. These are used to target advertising and Google currently does this without seeking your permission. Four of these cookies we know about are named "rememberme", "NID", "PREF" and "PP_TOS_ACK" and are stored in Google's cache on your computer.
2	If you are accessing this site using someone else's computer, please ask the owner's permission before accepting cookies.
3	Your browser provides you with the ability to inspect all cookies stored on your PC. In addition your browser is responsible for removing "current session only" cookies and those that have expired; if your browser is not doing this, you should report the matter to your browser's authors.
4	We regret and apologies for any inconvenience this causes to members and guests who are accessing our web site from outside the European Union. It is not currently possible for us to interrogate your browser and obtain geographic location information in order to decide whether or not to prompt you to accept cookies.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Floodrod's Etheric Generator Research / Build (Read 19328 times)

captainpecan

Re: Floodrod's Etheric Generator Research / Build

floodrod

Re: Floodrod's Etheric Generator Research / Build

floodrod

Re: Floodrod's Etheric Generator Research / Build

captainpecan

Re: Floodrod's Etheric Generator Research / Build

floodrod

Re: Floodrod's Etheric Generator Research / Build

captainpecan

Re: Floodrod's Etheric Generator Research / Build

floodrod

Re: Floodrod's Etheric Generator Research / Build

captainpecan

Re: Floodrod's Etheric Generator Research / Build

floodrod

Re: Floodrod's Etheric Generator Research / Build

captainpecan

Re: Floodrod's Etheric Generator Research / Build

floodrod

Re: Floodrod's Etheric Generator Research / Build

captainpecan

Re: Floodrod's Etheric Generator Research / Build

captainpecan

Re: Floodrod's Etheric Generator Research / Build

floodrod

Re: Floodrod's Etheric Generator Research / Build

captainpecan

Re: Floodrod's Etheric Generator Research / Build