3 Battery Generating System

[axxelxavier]

Not sure what kind of inverter you have, most of the ones I have used over the years can handle up 15-16 volts then automatically shuts off around 10-10.5 volts. Most of the boost modules allow you to adjust the voltage, so you could adjust it so ithe initial differential doesn't exceed your inverter's upper limit.

About booster, I thought there must be a voltage difference between in and out, in order to work properly. Today I've learned I was wrong, so a new test began.
About my inverter, is is 300 watt inverter, nothing special, except it's working between 9,6 - 15 volts, so I hooked up to my setup the booster set to 14,7 volt on output.
I have the data from previous test, so the differences should be visible from the very first run.
Best regards,
Teodor

[Iamnuts]

In for a shock!

Well,a shock is just what I got when I embarked on my first 24/7 project.
How those little losses add up to ruin the results.
When you think about it, that little remote with a coin cell locks your car
for years. My greedy Arduino Leonardo was responsible for a lot of the
grief, that would have to go. It’s possible to do away with the development
board and just use the chip.Nick Gammon on the Arduino forum has a
detailed post on how to minimise current draw, he knows every trick in the
book.
When it comes to lead acid batteries there’s a point most people don’t seem
to take in to account, that is the RTE,or round trip efficiency, a common
figure quoted is somewhere between 90 and 95 per cent,this means that
every time you charge you lose at least 5 per cent.
To get a decent life out of lead acid it’s good to go at least 50per cent more
capacity than you need.Sulphation rears it’s ugly head when you get below
about 12.3v.
Switching has to be watched too, if you have half a dozen relays at 99.5%
and say the average consumption is 200 Watts that adds up to a fair
chunk over the 8000 odd hours a year.
I don’t care if you think I’m an idiot, but as far as I’m concerned making
the most of your hard earned energy can’t be bad.

[Iamnuts]

Youtube.

https://youtu.be/npc3uzEVvc0

[Aaron]

topping charge

When it comes to lead acid batteries there’s a point most people don’t seem
to take in to account, that is the RTE,or round trip efficiency, a common
figure quoted is somewhere between 90 and 95 per cent,this means that
every time you charge you lose at least 5 per cent.
To get a decent life out of lead acid it’s good to go at least 50per cent more
capacity than you need.Sulphation rears it’s ugly head when you get below
about 12.3v.

If you actually knew how batteries work, you can get an INCREASE in capacity with each charge cycle up to 10% above the manufacturers rated capacity and keep it there virtually indefinitely. And you can do this while discharging deep cycles down to 10.5 volts every single time as the chemistry is 100% reversible to like-new condition. You don't seem to understand how to deliver a true topping charge to a lead acid battery and what to look for in order to know when it is actually ready.

[Sawt2]

About booster, I thought there must be a voltage difference between in and out, in order to work properly. Today I've learned I was wrong, so a new test began.
About my inverter, is is 300 watt inverter, nothing special, except it's working between 9,6 - 15 volts, so I hooked up to my setup the booster set to 14,7 volt on output.
I have the data from previous test, so the differences should be visible from the very first run.
Best regards,
Teodor

Great, I hope your experiments go well for you.

[Turion]

info

Here is the main reason you don't want to patent your invention

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invention_Secrecy_Act

They basically kill the patent, put a gag order on you so you can't even talk about your idea, and you are given NO compensation. Better to sell it to the highest bidder for whatever you can get than to try and patent it and end up with nothing. I WOULD say the best idea is to disclose it on a forum like THIS, but nobody will believe you, so that's a waste. Better to sell it for what you can get.

[bistander]

Easy solution

Here is the main reason you don't want to patent your invention

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invention_Secrecy_Act

They basically kill the patent, put a gag order on you so you can't even talk about your idea, and you are given NO compensation. Better to sell it to the highest bidder for whatever you can get than to try and patent it and end up with nothing. I WOULD say the best idea is to disclose it on a forum like THIS, but nobody will believe you, so that's a waste. Better to sell it for what you can get.

All you have to do is provide proof or, at least, provide supporting evidence of your claims. People don't believe you when you refuse to support your claims with the proof you say that you have.

Regards,

bi

[bistander]

Battery charging

Running an inverter between the positives you are hitting battery 3 with 12 volts to begin with, which is your potential difference, but as the primary batteries go down and battery 3 charges, your potential difference drops below the standing voltage of battery 3. That's an incredibly costly way to try and charge battery 3, and your results will reflect that. The purpose of the boost module is to maintain the input voltage hitting battery 3 at 14.5 volts or HIGHER so that it is ALWAYS getting hit with a higher voltage than its standing voltage. Your results will reflect THAT as well.

Hi Turion,

So what is inferred by your statement is that you do not subscribe to the universally accepted charge algorithm which starts with the bulk phase of constant current, often noted as CC/CV, constant current followed by constant voltage.

You also have said on numerous occasions to keep current at or below C/20. So it would appear that axxelxavier has properly controlled his experiment. Can you show us test data where you, or someone, has boosted voltage like you say and been able to maintain the C/20 current level?

Thanks,

bi

[Turion]

Researchers

hi,
The kind of people I am interested in working with are those that are curious enough and dedicated enough to see something of interest and research it for themselves. Not those who demand to be spoon fed everything. Matt and I know what we know because we investigated and researched. NOT because we stood around with our hands in our pockets waiting for ANYONE to prove ANYTHING to us.

You can’t even imagine the number if things I built that DIDN’T work before I found something that did. If you don’t want to build and test this stuff, DON’T. But why do you continue to hang around here if you’re not going to build???
It only makes sense if you are a disinformation agent trying to keep people from exploring this avenue.

[bistander]

Spoon fed

hi,
The kind of people I am interested in working with are those that are curious enough and dedicated enough to see something of interest and research it for themselves. Not those who demand to be spoon fed everything. Matt and I know what we know because we investigated and researched. NOT because we stood around with our hands in our pockets waiting for ANYONE to prove ANYTHING to us.

You can’t even imagine the number if things I built that DIDN’T work before I found something that did. If you don’t want to build and test this stuff, DON’T. But why do you continue to hang around here if you’re not going to build???
It only makes sense if you are a disinformation agent trying to keep people from exploring this avenue.

I still do not understand how requesting proof of your claim equates to "spoon fed".

But enough.

bi

[Iamnuts]

Empirical.

If you actually knew how batteries work, you can get an INCREASE in capacity with each charge cycle up to 10% above the manufacturers rated capacity and keep it there virtually indefinitely. And you can do this while discharging deep cycles down to 10.5 volts every single time as the chemistry is 100% reversible to like-new condition. You don't seem to understand how to deliver a true topping charge to a lead acid battery and what to look for in order to know when it is actually ready.

Just point me to the empirical and I’ll believe you.
Bedini sparked my interest and I wasted a shed load of time on that.
Nobody I know ever had success with Bedini motors.
I’ve ruined a good few batteries in my time.
It’s all to easy to make a claim but far more difficult to prove it!

[Turion]

Spoon Fed

If you want proof, build an accurate replication. Then you will have it. I will not provide it. Because what YOU know or don't know is up to YOU and YOUR research. It is not up to me or mine. If you don't want to do that, why hang around here? You cannot seem to answer THAT question.

[axxelxavier]

Just a quick update.
As I told you, my test now it's using a booster, set on 14,7 volts on the output.
Total time running, so far, is 6 hours, 43 min, and battery 3 seems to be charged faster, BUT, C20 rate are exceeded, because current draw on the input of the booster (which was in the beginning at 2 amps) now is on 2,62 Amp, and it's increasing (differential voltage on the input = 11,47 volts). On the output of the DC booster (going to the inverter), current draw is 1,74 amp.
Not sure what to do, though. I think I am going to let the system to work for 2 more hours, and I am going to measure the current draw before stop it. If it will exceed 4 Amp, I think I am going to shut down my test. I cannot afford to kill a good battery...
Now I am using a 150 watt, like the first image in the attachment, with no current limit.
I have also a bigger one (1200 watt - second image in the attachment) which have an option to limit current... this should be better?
Best regards,
Teodor

[bistander]

I'll tell you why

If you want proof, build an accurate replication. Then you will have it. I will not provide it. Because what YOU know or don't know is up to YOU and YOUR research. It is not up to me or mine. If you don't want to do that, why hang around here? You cannot seem to answer THAT question.

Looking for proof of claims of free energy and/or over unity made people like you. And in the process to expose falsehoods whether they be honest mistakes or deliberate fraud. I have learned a great deal not only about science but also about human nature. This is an open forum and as long as I don't rub Aaron too much, I am entitled to post reasonable questions and pertinent statements. The method to make me stop is to post truth, facts, evidence and proof.

Simple, right?

bi

[Aaron]

RTA irrelevant

Just point me to the empirical and I’ll believe you.
Bedini sparked my interest and I wasted a shed load of time on that.
Nobody I know ever had success with Bedini motors.
I’ve ruined a good few batteries in my time.
It’s all to easy to make a claim but far more difficult to prove it!

Nearly $2 million in R & D went into proving just that showing the charging chart in the "battery bible" is correct. I don't need to prove anything to you. Thousands of customers around the world have benefited over the years with the EnergenX chargers that accomplish this topping charge.

I know people that have not gotten results and most have not paid attention to what has been said - sounds like you fit this category. Has been proven time and time again. There are countless charge and discharge graphs that have been posted for years showing an increase in capacity with each successive charge. This is indisputable. That is with old batteries that have been brought back. With new batteries, you can keep the full capacity almost indefinitely if topped properly.

The topping charge chart from the battery bible is in this free book and has been there for years Free Solar Secrets or you can download the battery bible. Anyone can put a CBA-IV or similar on a battery while charging it up for the charge graph, charge it until you see the voltage dip at the top around 15.1-15.3, then it is done.

Taking the S2A12 and putting it on a brand new battery such as a 100Ah lead acid will instantly push the capacity to about 110Ah on the very first charge. I've done that countless times and so many many others.

Losing 5% on each charge? That's beyond ridiculous - why don't you show a chart of losing 5% on each cycle and show all of us here when a deep cycle drops below 10.5 volts? You can do that in Excel - start with full capacity then reduce by 5%, then from that total reduce by 5% and so on. You will prove one thing - you are spreading nonsense that has no basis in reality because everyone's experience will show that their deep cycles last many more charge cycles than what you are claiming.

What you claim can only apply to those who do not charge their batteries properly by using conventional charges that only go to 13.8 to 14.8 if you're lucky. Too many are conditioned to believe you can charge a battery to those low voltages, then the voltage settles at 12.6 or above and they think that is evidence the battery is charged when it is not. So obviously with those low voltages, there will be sulfation left over, but this forum is full of members who know better who have followed the methods that provide better results for a long time.

With a 35Ah deep cycle, your bogus claim means after the 10th charge cycle, the battery's capacity is only 22Ah. Do you actually expect anyone to believe that? After 10 charge cycles a battery has lost 1/3 of it's capacity? Even with a conventional charger that chronically under charges a battery, you will have way more than 2/3 of the capacity left after 10 charges.

There are 225Ah deep cycle flooded cell lead acids that used to be at EnergenX that are 10-15 years old, which have had hundreds if not thousands of charge/discharge cycles and they are still almost like new. All the plug in and solar charge controllers were tested on the bench before getting shipped. The "load box" would drain the battery(s), then the charger would charge them back up. This was done countless times showing that obviously when giving the true topping charge, it throws out your belief system on the matter, which is irrelevant to those charging their batteries properly. And the forklift? Those batteries were dead and abused when they got that forklift many years ago. We still have that forklift and the batteries are still in excellent shape.

I would challenge you or anyone else who thinks like you to a simple test. Get a CBA-IV or anything that can graph the charging cycle on a laptop. Get a constant voltage constant current adjustable power supply and set it at 15.3 volts, short the output leads and adjust the current to about 2 amps - use a 35Ah deep cycle for example and un-short the leads. Turn power off and wait until the battery is drained. Make sure it is full charged as in like new charge. Drain with 20 hour load until it drops to 10.5 volts. Remove load and hook up the power supply. When you see the voltage get to about 15.1-15.3 volts, you will see a point when the voltage dips. That dip means the impedance of the battery dropped because the final layers of sulfation dissolved back to solution making it more conductive, therefore, there is less back pressure to the voltage so it drops. That is the even you need to look for, which means you reversed the chemistry 100% to like new condition. Repeat that 10 times and tell me if you have lost 5% on each cycle. According to you, on the 10th charge cycle, the battery will only have 22Ah remaining with a 5% loss of the remaining total on each cycle. You will become bored with this test because you will see you get the same capacity out of it every single time. The RTA concept is only necessary to explain the phenomena of losing capacity with crappy charging with crappy chargers but who wants crappy charging methods when batteries cost so much? Not me!