Motor Generators

[OrionLightShip]

I've been mostly gone for years and still the argument rages. Without even reading anything but the last couple of posts here; I can say that Turion is mostly or completely correct. "They" say that electrons are transformed into heat or magnetic fields. Total BS!!!
No electrons are harmed or lost.....ever....period!!!!! The only thing lost is potential (Voltage Drop, hello!) which can be recovered and exceeded with great efficiency using an active clamp convertor. If using another lower potential battery to capture the electrons you have to deal with the battery charging limitations.

Because the methods we were taught and that most believe; systems are made to simply throw away those electrons instead of re-use methods that are possible.

Prove me wrong.

Orion

[wantomake]

Just to prove I am not a complete ass, here are the issues I see. And remember, we found this stuff out by accident. Things worked and we didn't know WHY. It is hard to teach how to do something correctly when you don't know WHY it is working. We just had "working" setups. Anyway, to get to the three schematics you have just shown.

Pulse charging methods has been developed as one of the fast charging methods for Lithium ion battery. This technique applies the continuous constant current and pulse with certain pulse width until the battery fully charged.

Post 3484

Runs the inverter between the positives NO DEVICE PULSING THE BATTERY. CONSTANT CURRENT ONLY

Runs Boost between the positives NO DEVICE PULSING THE BATTERY. CONSTANT CURRENT ONLY


Post 3487

Output of the boost (which is run between the positives) is run DIRECTLY to the battery without going through a load. WASTE
The motor is run directly between the positives with NO VOLTAGE CONTROL TO ADJUST THE PULSE.


POST 3488

Load run between the positives NO DEVICE PULSING THE BATTERY. CONSTANT CURRENT ONLY

Turion,
Where are these three post at?
In the 3BGS thread? Sorry I'm exhausted, been helping the Lady of this Manor move lots of furniture!!!! Not 50 anymore!!

[Turion]

Three schematics bro posted above.

orion,
look at post 3448. My theory on batteries. Also look at my recent post where I state that a boost module, run between the positives, is a free energy device because you recover some of the input energy in the lower potential side plus you ge the “generated” energy of the module output. The same goes for a buck module. The same goes for a transformer wired to used pulsed DC to mimic AC. Run EVERYTHING on potentials.

[OrionLightShip]

Three schematics bro posted above.

orion,
look at post 3448. My theory on batteries. Also look at my recent post where I state that a boost module, run between the positives, is a free energy device because you recover some of the input energy in the lower potential side plus you ge the “generated” energy of the module output. The same goes for a buck module. The same goes for a transformer wired to used pulsed DC to mimic AC. Run EVERYTHING on potentials.

YUP, it's all about potential, and like you said with batteries. Also, those ions move a lot slower than electrons so a problem exists there unless you place a capacitor in parallel with the battery to hold that higher voltage charge so the battery can have time to absorb it.

Orion

[Turion]

Right, otherwise you hit it with a pulse and MOST of it is wasted. Even when you understand the concepts it is the little things that make the difference between success and failure.

[OrionLightShip]

Right, otherwise you hit it with a pulse and MOST of it is wasted. Even when you understand the concepts it is the little things that make the difference between success and failure.

Then, the question appears; what happens when all the electrons are not absorbed by the battery.

I only have one theory. There is no such thing as an electron. It is an energy perturbation in the aether that we call an electron. Perhaps if it has no potential behind it and nowhere to go; it simply is absorbed back into the aether.

Orion

[Turion]

A former friend used to say, find an effect and figure out how to take advantage of it. Let SOMEONE ELSE figure out how it works and WHY it works.

[BroMikey]

YUP, it's all about potential, and like you said with batteries. Also, those ions move a lot slower than electrons so a problem exists there unless you place a capacitor in parallel with the battery to hold that higher voltage charge so the battery can have time to absorb it.

Orion

POST 3448

I have theorized this many times in writing and I will put it forth again. What if when we charge a battery we are forcing the charged ions all to one side, so when we put a meter on it, we are measuring the difference between one side and the other.

When you let a battery just sit, those charges make their way back to the other side and the two sides “equalize”, so our meter registers 0 volts eventually.

when you put a load on the battery you give those charges a path of least resistance to follow but with the SAME result. You measure less in the battery because the two sides have equalized. The “load” didn’t “use up” the energy, it ran because the energy moved through it. Yes, there are losses in the load so you end with less than you started with.

To charge a battery we use a tremendous amount of energy to force those charges back to one side. Consider this possibility when you look at what you saw happen.

....................

[OrionLightShip]

A former friend used to say, find an effect and figure out how to take advantage of it. Let SOMEONE ELSE figure out how it works and WHY it works.

HaHaHa Genius, I really don't care what happens to energy I have no way to control.

However, I favor Tesla's method of building it in my head until I understand it completely, then bringing it to the physical. I'm just a whole lot slower on the go and life happens so it's taken me years and years to figure out what I now know. Now I just need to get motivated and fire up my 3d printer and start building it.

Orion

[OrionLightShip]

....................

66% efficient....not good....better results available with an active clamped boost convertor. I know this to be true but I've never had a need to shop for one so I have no idea where to find something like that

Could be some inaccuracy with your meters as well......swap places and see if you get a better or worse result.

Orion

[BroMikey]

66% efficient....not good....better results available with an active clamped boost convertor. I know this to be true but I've never had a need to shop for one so I have no idea where to find something like that

Could be some inaccuracy with your meters as well......swap places and see if you get a better or worse result.

Orion

It is in the 95% range afte you see what I see. 1.85watt and then 1.4watts at the end. Each meter .15 x 2 and the boost takes .15watt also just idling. it ain't to bad

Here are the circuit Dave let me post 4 years ago and he must have said don't forget to add caps if you want.
I hear him say add diodes too but I am unsure.

http://flyer.thenetteam.net/3battery...ryDiagram1.jpg

http://flyer.thenetteam.net/3battery...ryDiagram2.jpg

http://flyer.thenetteam.net/3battery...ryDiagram3.jpg

http://flyer.thenetteam.net/3battery...agramTest4.jpg






...............

[BroMikey]

Here are the rest of the details. Meter bouncing between 1.8 and 1.9watt on first watt meter say 1.85 and same at the end watt meter bouncing between 1.2-1.4 watt so 1.3watt is average. See video of idling draw.

11.34 X 25ma meter bouncing as you watch 20ma -30ma multiple 11.34 X .025 = .2835 for both the watt meter and booster idle. No load condition only 1 watt meter.

[BroMikey]

3 hrs into my first baseline run battery pack 3 blew out a brand new battery running 2 watts. Can you imagine? Can't trust any of these packs now, without running them down. I used over 5wh and bang.

Test was restarted at 12:30am battery 3 voltage 11.60v @170ma right at 2.0 watts. Burning the midnight oil.

Load voltage 18.3v @80ma right on 1.4 watts

I am looking to have good batteries THEN the fun begins thanks for all of your support.

[Turion]

Save yourself hours of time. Use a power supply with your meter between it and the boost module input. Then take the output of the boost module straight through another meter to a load. You can measure watts in and watts out and calculate efficiency and have a CONSTANT source of supply rather than a declining one as batteries discharge.

Alternately, take a Variac with a bridge rectifier attached set to low AC voltage. Run the kilowatt meter off the DC side of the bridge with the boost module attached. Again, take the output of the boost through a meter to a load. Watts in vs watts out. Efficiency.

Test Circuit. jpg.jpg

Once you know the efficiency of the boost module you can set up the attached schematic. I forgot to show the kilowatt meter hooked directly to the battery and the two wires I show "connected to the battery" should be connected to the kilowatt meter output. This will test whether a boost module, in and of itself, is a free energy device. It allows you to compare watts into the boost module to watts into the load. If your boost module is 87% efficient and MORE than 87% of the watts you input to the boost module arrive at the load, where did they come from? Especially when you consider LOSSES in the TWO meters, the boost module and the two diodes. Silicon diodes have a forward voltage loss of approximately 0.7 volts, and there are two of them in the circuit. so that's 1.5 volts. What % of your input is that, and how should that ALONE affect the output. Does it?

This is the simplest process and simplest test setups I could come up with to prove the point. Lots of folks have most of this stuff on hand.

[BroMikey]

Okay test coming. I have this one? https://www.fridayparts.com/linear-d...30v-0-3a-5v-3a