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

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Muller Dynamo  (Read 4322011 times)

chalamadad

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #5415 on: December 27, 2011, 08:58:03 PM »
If the AC voltage of my oscillating coil is 30% higher than the rectified DC, how would I get closer to the AC voltage? Is it just a switching/frequency limitation and will schottky diodes perform better?

skaarj

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 16
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #5416 on: December 27, 2011, 10:25:55 PM »
switching diodes work better than traditional diodes. I don't know about Shotky diodes, I never had the chance to work with them - I usualy prefer vacuum tubes in this situations - but rectifying diodes from switching power supplies will do their job and never get hot. In the power supply modules from PC computers, there are some diodes with three connectors (common anode I think) which have the maximum of around 50 volts and around 20 amps - at least this is what their datasheet say. They look like a big transistor. Those are the diodes you should try. If you use high-frequency switching diodes, they will never get hot as the traditional rectifying bridges - or the 1N4007. Romero did a great thing by connecting many diodes in parallel (or rectifying bridge with diodes in parallel) but there was a lot of loss due to the incorrect diode type. The problem with heat is the switching frequency - inapropriate for traditional diodes.

konehead

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 462
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #5417 on: December 28, 2011, 03:19:10 AM »
hi all
Shottky diodes work really well with backemf/recoil since it is really really fast reaction of the votlage spikes....however they dont make that high of voltage ones....for genrator coils, they dont make much difference.
 

chalamadad

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #5418 on: December 28, 2011, 12:53:54 PM »
I have lots of them, a big box full of S30D45CS ; SBL1640CT; STPS3045CW; STPR1620CT,SB3045ST; S20C10CC,....
I have tested those and performance was lower than existing ones 1n4001. Maybe they do work good but at higher frequency BUT not in my current setup.
Maybe someone can explain and help me decide what to use in the next setup.

Romero has tried those rectifiers from the power supplies. (S20C... are in fact Schottky rectifiers: http://html.alldatasheet.com/html-pdf/141510/MOSPEC/S20C40CE/217/1/S20C40CE.html) But they did not perform better in HIS setup. I am using 1N4007 in parallel to FWBR. But in fact he was using 1N4001.

I found out that it is possible to get every coil into self oscillation mode even without the rotor attached using his driver circuit. The hall sensor has to be placed somewhere near the coil, sometimes beneath, sometimes on top, depending on the inductance and the distance of the biasing magnets. It is important to have the right amount of magnets at the right distance under the coil and to match the direction of current flow through the coil. So if the connections are reversed it won't work. This works with a steel core as well. When driving with 15V I have the AC voltage between 40V and 60V. Unifilar connection seems to give higher voltage compared to bifilar.

So I still wonder if these high frequency oscillations are key. His statement from above indicates that this was not necessarily the case. I wish he had shown a scope shot of one of the driving coils too.


Khwartz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 601
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #5419 on: January 06, 2012, 09:58:39 PM »
Hello here!

I see you all very busy about Bill's Dynamo :)

May I ask you if someone has achieved too, like RemeroUK, a COP 2.0, or at least > 1.0? I've read elsewhere that it was fake but I've seen the vids and I seen nothing wrong with his experiment :/ but any way, if someone else have done too, so that it was good, at least on the basics ;)

So, could let me know about your own achievements here?

Cheers.

chalamadad

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #5420 on: January 07, 2012, 07:53:41 PM »
I've got an interesting scopeshot today. The waveform seems to go back in time and there is a loop there.

Khwartz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 601
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #5421 on: January 07, 2012, 10:27:47 PM »
hi! about replication of Muller's dynamo, how succeed in it, and if someone have done same than RomeoUK or even more?

konehead

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 462
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #5422 on: January 08, 2012, 06:29:44 AM »
Hi all
 
I made a mistake in my drawing I put up mabye month ago of way to recover backemf/recoil from a NPNmosfet motor/drive coil pulsed DC circuit. and so have re-drawn the circuit wtih steering diode in proper place, plus added the two stage output circuit to it too:
 
 

mariuscivic

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 203
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #5423 on: January 08, 2012, 10:31:58 AM »
Hi konehead!

I went ''back'' at shorting the coil at the peak of the sine.I got  a solid state relay but was very disappointed couse it does not work as i though it would( also paid a lot of money).It works good only in AC
With my stone age components i did short the coil at peak . i used extra energy for this but for now this is not impotant . I got huge spikes when shorting even at 100rpm.  The spikes lights 100 leds at 100rpm. I still get lenz couse i cant control the time that the coil is being shorted.( in my case that is 2mS and is too much).
We need some electronic module that shorts the coil at peak but also with variable time short. I belive that the less time the coil is shorted, the bigger the spike an of course less lenz


chalamadad

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #5424 on: January 08, 2012, 01:31:28 PM »
hey marius, you should try connecting the negative out to the negative in and compare the output...

killed my arduino yesterday, trying to dump many small output caps in parallel back to the battery with a transformer. that didn't happen with just one bigger cap.

mariuscivic

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 203
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #5425 on: January 08, 2012, 01:47:59 PM »
I'll try that; meanwhile i just burned another hall sensor  >:(

chalamadad

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #5426 on: January 08, 2012, 02:05:57 PM »
I'll try that

It doubles my output voltage

Thaelin

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1093
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #5427 on: January 08, 2012, 02:18:00 PM »
   For the hall users. There was a non-hall circuit floating around that used
just the main coil to trigger it and then pulsed the coil with the fet. This will
bypass that finicky little devil. Something you should look into doing. That
is where I went and I see a lot of room to use what ever you have in the box
under the bench for parts. N-channel fet and pnp trigger transistor. Worth
the look see.

thay
 

tysb3

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 206
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #5428 on: January 08, 2012, 07:03:39 PM »
                        @Khwartz
Quote
@trace_ru
 I am also working on my version of Kapanadze replica but it is nothing in common with Dynatron.
 It happends all the time, while I am working on something I get new ideas and I must try and see if is worth investigating more.
 I have many projects in progress and I jump from one to another while I get stuck on one I will continue working on another...
 
 Regarding Muller generator: I stopped that experiment and not willing to continue, I know what is the best way to have it working and in my variant we don't need more than 2 pair of coils to drive it.Of course we can have more than that as driver coils but to get it selfrun two pair of coils are enough.All coils are becoming driver coils while in operation but without external power applied to them.... this subject is closed.
 
 I continue investigating all other experiments inclusive the RG1, the one with magnets on two rotors but for now Kapanadze replica and the newest one where I am trying to utilise particles in the air are my priority.
 
 The schematic I posted recently works fine in selfloop but for now with no significant load. That was confirmed by few other forum members too.The problem there is that the batteries will be destroyed after a period of time and I am working to eliminate them.
 
 Best regards,
 Romero
for more information you need to go to Romero's site:
http://underservice.org/index.php?topic=3.210
http://underservice.org/index.php?board=2.0

Khwartz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 601
@tysb3 - Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #5429 on: January 08, 2012, 09:44:17 PM »
Hi tysb3! Very thanks for these materials  :D

But if I understand well, we are still far form having any self-running generator able to provide enough power to feed any significant load?  :-\