Author Topic: Newman machine with a closed loop selfrunning without batteries or solar panels (Read 67677 times)

acp · « **Reply #45 on:** September 12, 2007, 09:25:28 PM »

The Joule is the International Standard unit of energy defined as one watt-second. One watt-second of mechanical work is the work done by a force of one Newton (or 0.2247 pound) pushing through a one-meter distance. 3600 Joules are contained in one watt-hour, since an hour contains 3600 seconds,. Batteries are often rated in milliampere-hours instead of watt-hours. This battery rating can be converted to energy if the average voltage of the battery during discharge is known. For instance, a 3.6-volt Lithium-ion battery rated at 850 mAh will maintain a voltage of 3.6 volts with little variation during discharge. Multiply the voltage of 3.6 volts times 850 mAh to yield 3060 mA-volt-hours, or 3060 milliwatt-hours. 3.06 watt-hours equal 11016 watt-seconds or Joules.

This was taken directly from http://www.allaboutbatteries.com/Battery-Energy.html

So you see, to convert the battery RATING into battery ENERGY, you must know the voltage.

I agree Mikestocks2006 that 10 batteries at 1Ah in parralell give the same as 1 battery at 10Ah, if the batteries have the same voltage rating.

Joh70 · « **Reply #46 on:** September 12, 2007, 09:28:54 PM »

Hum and last poster are right! Ah is not energy! I would say: watt is energy and watt/hour is work. The value Ah makes batteries of the same type comparable. in this case 9V blocks.

Answer to mikestocks case-example: each setup, parallel or serial takes 1 hour to discharge. But in the first case parallel, it flows a current of 10A in the serial case it flows only 1A but at 10times the voltage.

Humbugger · « **Reply #47 on:** September 12, 2007, 09:33:03 PM »

Quote from: mikestocks2006 on September 12, 2007, 09:19:28 PM

Quote from: acp on September 12, 2007, 09:00:40 PM
Sorry to chip in in this private conversation but,

If Ah are electrical energy as stated by the website above, Then a 9volt battery with 1Ah rating has the same electrical energy as a 1.5 volt battery with 1Ah rating. I think one can see that this clearly is not the case. As Humbugger has been trying to say electrical energy needs the Amps, Volts and time duration taken into consideration. Commonly Watt/hours are used to express electrical energy.

Yes they are exactly the same in terms of energy capacity available. In terms of energy capacity only

The confusion may lie in the terminology as it is used in batteries...

Okay Mike. If they call pies "cakes" on your block then so be it. It's not really up for vote but you can join the abusers of correct terminology and insist you are right. I am going to survive while you go off thinking that a 6V 1Ah battery holds the same energy as a 24V 1Ah battery. It's incorrect and I've tried hard to help you understand why, as has ACP, but it's okay if you don't agree. We can still be friends. I'll just have to remember that if I get invited to your house and I want some pie, I should ask for cake!

You might take a web cruise to a battery maker and notice that 24V batteries are just about exactly four times larger in volume and weight than 6V batteries of the exact same Ah capacity. That's because, if they are the same technology and similar constuction and have the same ENERGY DENSITY rating, the one that holds four times the energy is four times larger.

Humbugger

Humbugger · « **Reply #48 on:** September 12, 2007, 09:36:42 PM »

Quote from: Joh70 on September 12, 2007, 09:28:54 PM

Hum and last poster are right! Ah is not energy! I would say: watt is energy and watt/hour is work. The value Ah makes batteries of the same type comparable. in this case 9V blocks.

Thanks for helping out here

but watt is not energy. watt is power. watthour (no slash-it implies divide) is energy. power x time = energy

everything else you say seems 100% correct

Hum

mikestocks2006 · « **Reply #49 on:** September 12, 2007, 09:40:12 PM »

Quote from: EMdevices on September 12, 2007, 09:21:37 PM

Guys both of you are correct in a sense but Humbugger is more correct and here's why:

My small 12 volt battery is rated at 5 AH. (20 hr)

What does that mean?

It means they've tested the batteri and drawn an EQUIVALENT current of 5 Amps for one hour (based on equivalence of charge that has left the battery).

Why Equivalent??

Because in actuality they drew less current for 20 HOURS, (a standard practice since the internal resistance of the battery is lower at lower current levels, less heating etc..)

So the tested current was actualy 5A/20 = 0.25A for 20 hours. But when specs are listed we speak of Amp Hours, in other words how much current can I draw from this battery in ONE HOUR and discharge it AT THE END OF THE HOUR. (Dont' try this at home, the battery might explode if you try to discharge it that quick, that's the whole point of these specs, they're just a spec, not an actual test they've done)

Ok, that's all fine and dandy, but AmpHours is not energy, it needs the volts specified, and what are the volts?

It's obvious , we are talking about a 12 Volt Battery, or in your case a 9 Volt one,   and although the voltage fluctuates as the battery is discharged, we can assume it stays at the rated level and any energy calculations would be fairly accurate. (an exact calculation would integrate the voltage times the current waveform in time)

Now, I see you've been discussing SERIES vs PARALLEL (let's take my example with 2 12 volt batteries)

1) In series we have   24 volts putting out how much? That's right   5 Ah (or the equivalent 0.25 for 20 hours)

Energy is   24 Volts x 5 Amps x 3600 sec = 432 000   Joules

2) In parallel we have 12 volts putting out how much?   That's right , twice the current so 10 Ah

Energy is 12 Volts x 10 Amps x 3600 sec = 432 000 Joules

So we get the same result.

So, strictly speaking, AmpHour units are not units of energy (but we know we are talking about a certain voltage) so we can do our calculations.

Exactly!
The energies are the same and thus my first post here of the total system energy being 16x625mAh=10000mAh=10Ah, Those 16 in series are equivalent to one of 10Ah total energy capacity

Series or parallel is irrelevant as far as total initial available system energy is concerned.

But also as I?ve noted above, some confusion may lie on the battery usage terminology to describe energy capacity in terms of Ah etc.

Humbugger · « **Reply #50 on:** September 12, 2007, 11:06:33 PM »

Ampere-hour
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
? Learn more about using Wikipedia for research ?Jump to: navigation, search
An ampere-hour (abbreviated as Ah or A-h) is a unit of electric charge. One ampere-hour is equal to 3600 coulombs (ampere-seconds), and is the amount of electric charge transferred by a steady current of one ampere for one hour.

The ampere-hour is a unit frequently used in measurements associated with electrochemical proceses such as electroplating and electrical batteries. Although it is not a direct measure of the energy in a battery (like the joule (J) or watt-hour (Wh)), it is a common rating of how long a battery will last (or in the case of a rechargeable battery, how long it will last when fully charged).

The commonly seen milliampere-hour (mAh) is equal to 3.6 coulombs.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A 48V battery rated 10Ah holds four times the energy of a 12V battery rated 10Ah. Each battery can deliver* 10A for an hour but the 48V battery, in doing so, is delivering 480W for that hour and the 12V battery is delivering only 120W for it's hour. Energy is power x time. The 48V battery holds 4x the energy of the 12V battery.

*In practice, the Ah ratings are specified to perform at a chosen, usually lower, discharge current. A 10Ah battery, for instance, might be rated to discharge for 5 hours at a 2 Ampere current. 5h*2A=10Ah

argona369 · « **Reply #51 on:** September 13, 2007, 01:11:40 AM »

This is a very interesting discussion on AMPS, not quite the same as ampere hours
But amps do interest me, and quite frankly I?m not sure what amps and volts are.

http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia_term/0,2542,t=amp&i=37731,00.asp
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/ampere

Amps is a measure of electrons ( a charge carrier) moving past a point. But as we know
electrons don?t move in a wire they transfer from one to the other,
moving electrons is electron drift.

So lets assume that what there really talking about is the ?bumping?
Of electrons as the measure of amps.
But we know that voltage is part of the measure of power.

Lets use just one electron. One electron bumps the end of a wire.
And the transfer down the wire is at light speed.
Is bumping it lightly 1 volt? or smack it hard one million volts? Is this the real measure of voltage?

One amp is so many collisions (transfers) at any point in the wire. But wait there?s voltage.
Do the collisions contain different amounts of energy? But the transfer is at light speed already?
I read somewhere (I looked but could not find it) that its more like an electromagnetic ?packet?

So what is voltage then?

EMdevices · « **Reply #52 on:** September 13, 2007, 02:46:32 AM »

Great, you're all very smart and sharp and know where to look up infoÃ‚Â (the web)Ã‚Â LOL Ã‚Â

Lets talk about the video

But first let me say that I've heard of Joseph Newman's machine, here and there for quite a few years, but just in passing.

I never actualy saw the guy or any of his videos and all I knew about him was that he used a BIG coil to make a motor but it wasn't over unity.

So is that him in the video?

What a clown !!Ã‚Â I expected somebody else I guess, I don't know, somebody more profesional, educated etc..

He talks nonsence in the video, keeps harping about 9 volt batteries for TOYs puting out so much power and points to that freaking paper, very irritating!Ã‚Â

I'm thinking where is the power?

This guy doesn't know what power is.Ã‚Â Ã‚Â A spinning wheel that's not loaded consumes so LITTLE POWER.Ã‚Â Only enough to overcome FRICTION.

I can keep a disk like his going with 0.05 amps from a 9 volt battery or even less, just make sure the bearings are realy good.

The only significant event in the video (and I didn't watch more then 10 minutes due to the unbearable stupidity I was seeing) was the ramp up in speed.Ã‚Â Ã‚Â Some of you pointed that out already.

Is he telling us his disk is weighingÃ‚Â thousands of pounds?Ã‚Â Ã‚Â Yeah sure, that's a bunch of crap.Ã‚Â That disc is probably carboard.Ã‚Â But even if it would be aluminum or something heavier,Ã‚Â there is enough POWER available in those batteries to accelerate the thing.

So I hope he shows us a CLOSED SYSTEM someday.

EM

hartiberlin · « **Reply #53 on:** September 13, 2007, 07:44:36 AM »

Hi Emdevices and Humbugger,
you are right with your amphour examples.

So the energy stored in Newman?s 16 x 9 Volts battery pack was about
144 Volts x 0.625 mA x 1 Hour= 90 Watthours.

That means, it can deliver 90 Watts one hour long or
30 Watts 3 hours long or 10 Watts 9 hours long
or 1 Watt 90 hours long, etc...

I guess this motor draws about 100 milliamps in this demonstration at
144 Volts.
YOu can calculate that from his earlier test with his solar panels
at 400 Volts using about 0.27 amps of input current.
As the input is linear at 144 Volts it would be 97.2 mA.

Okay, so lets say it is about 100 mA of input current.
then the batteries would be able to power this motor
for 6.25 hours.
We just saw one hour.
But as the backspike recharges the batteries quite nicely these
batteries would even last much longer.
At least in intervals.

Regards, Stefan.

hartiberlin · « **Reply #54 on:** September 13, 2007, 08:02:48 AM »

P.S: Looking finally forward to see the selfrunning motor
of Joe.

Thaelin · « **Reply #55 on:** September 13, 2007, 02:00:48 PM »

This brings to mind just what he "is" doing with the bemf. The flywheel has a contact at the bottom and I think one at the top. Sure this monster has two coils in it. Makes me wonder if not more. Like an avalanche setup. Power the first, bemf to a cap. That fires another coil with bemf to a cap and so on. Hmmmmmm? That size of coils would fill a cap bank darn quick. Something to ponder.
I encountered a glitch just before the last speed reading, did any one else? Just curious.

thaelin

mikestocks2006 · « **Reply #56 on:** September 13, 2007, 06:18:53 PM »

Quote from: hartiberlin on September 13, 2007, 07:44:36 AM

Hi Emdevices and Humbugger,
you are right with your amphour examples.

So the energy stored in Newman?s 16 x 9 Volts battery pack was about
144 Volts x 0.625 mA x 1 Hour= 90 Watthours.
....

Heh, that?s what I?ve been saying since post 1 in this thread.
A stcack 16 bateries at 625 mAh each is the same as one at 10000 mAh or 10Ah

Equivalent of one 9v with 10Ah energy charge capacity rating

Ok to get some closure here and not divert the thread away from the original focus:
.Battery manufacturer adopted terminology of Ah to describe battery stored energy can be confusing
.Amp hour in the Strict sense (SI) is not a Unit of Energy Measurement, even though it is used by Battery manufacturers to describe energy charge capacity.
.A pack of Multiple batteries in series or in parallel has the same total available energy to deliver = energy per battery x number of batteries. etc

Back to the Newman video.
It doesn?t appear to self sustain as it is clear the flywheel seems to be slowing down. From about 35 rpm at start of video to about 30 at the end.

Again it appears to take about 58 seconds to come to a stop from 30 rpm, fter the batteries are removed.
If we can find out the materials used and geometries of the rotating parts from Mr Newman, we can easily derive the total system rotational energy at eg 35 rpm and since it takes 58 seconds to come to a stop from 30rpm, we can determine the energy loss per cycle due to frictions, add circuit losses and so on
From that we can also calculate how much draw per cycle is needed by the battery stack to keep it running etc.

Can the stack of 16 x 9v in series batteries (144v total) start and sustain the movement?

Even though the initial acceleration is remarkable, it is possible for a stack of 144 9v cells to give it a good initial jolt.
Cold cranking amps of even a AA cell can be in the multiple amps range. Easily tested at home.
The wheel appears to reach 0-35 rpm in less than 2 secs
Ok lets say a 9v shorted for 1-2 secs and allow 1.5 amp flow.
The batteries will squat down some. So lets say 100 volts x 1.5 amps = 150watt about 1/5 hp feasible to accelerate it to 35 rpm? Yes but we need the actual specs as noted above for a better dynamic analysis.

Sustain movement? Most definitely yes, with low enough friction it can sustain movement on a great mass!

It would be also helpful to have the battery stack readout at the end of the demo.

Bottom line is, for this video, that machine is not self sustaining.
As fellow posters also noted above, it needs to close the loop and self sustain, for claim of OU.
Maybe one of these days he?ll get it to OU

Good thread, civil, interesting tech discussions.
Thanks

RunningBare · « **Reply #57 on:** September 14, 2007, 05:10:31 AM »

errr guys, in all your debate about batteries in parallel and in series you neglected the batteries internal resistance which sets the current.

So a 9 volt battery at 625ma has an internal resistance of 14.4 ohms, each individual battery will have this.

Now, 16 of these batteries in series will give an internal resistance of 16x14.4 = 230 ohms

The total voltage will be 16x9 = 144 volts

144 devided by 230 = 0.626 ma (0.625)

So in short in series you will have 144 volts at 0.625 ma. : 144x0.625 = 90 watts.

Parallel is simply 16x0.625 = 10 amps at 9 volts.: 9x10 = 90 watts.

TEguy · « **Reply #58 on:** September 15, 2007, 02:12:25 AM »

40 scientists signed in agreement and not one is prepared to come forward and verify these claims. Even now when they should all be real old and retired and dont have much to fear??? Not one of them is prepared to support him??? I don't buy that. So many crazy claims by this guy I don't know where to begin. He's had this invention for most of his life and the best example is this primitive looking thing. I am also confused with the efficiency claims, I guess it is because I watched both videos, but if his invention is over 100% efficient why does it need batteries to run it?? I also would like to know is his house powered by this device?? What better way to convince the world that it works than showing us all that he is not paying any energy bills to those big evil companies. If I were him that would be the first thing I do, instead of making videos. I have other concerns too. In the video that has a link in the very first post he goes on about saying that he unravelled the mistery of the universe that has been puzzling Einstein and Tesla, etc. Yet listening to his explanations I can see that he doesn't understand some pretty basic stuff. I strongly disagree with the idea that electric current is a GYROSCOPIC PARTICLE. Electrons are particles and they do not travel with the speed of light in an electric conductor. It seems to me that his gyroscopic particle is nothing more than an electron. It has a mass, a charge and it spins around. He hasn't discovered anything new, definately nothing that has puzzled Tesla. The most convincing evidence that his invention is nothing special is couse he's not dead yet.

TEguy · « **Reply #59 on:** September 15, 2007, 02:15:56 AM »

Sorry Stefan,you seem so enthusiastic every time you find one of these inventors and post their machines, I just don't think they are being honest. I really hope this guy is honest but I know better. If I were him and really had something that could change the world, I'd be a lot more convincing in my explanations and a lot less repetitive.

News:

User Menu