Bedini Earth Light

[jehdds]

Guys,
Just did a vacuum test. Negative 25"
Hg dropped current from 3 to 1.5
mA. Rapid
Decompression allowed current to
Return. Positive pressure test
Will follow.
Very best regards,
Jim

[jehdds]

Guys,
Just did a vacuum test. Negative 25"
Hg dropped current from 3 to 1.5
mA. Rapid
NOTE CORRECTION HERE REcompression or Pressure increase for equalization allowed current to
Return. Positive pressure test
Will follow.
Very best regards,
Jim

Guys,
Hyperbaric increases current for sure. Test taken to 50 psi. Depressurization does not spike voltage as does occur to the extent as with opening ambient into vacuum chamber which is a sudden RISE in pressure.
Video will follow.
Very Best Regards,
Jim

[NextGen1967]

Problem: You'll be going from "short" to "small load" to "short", how do you expect to see recovery like that?

Your last paragraph made me facepalm... 1 Volt divided by 1 M ohm = 1 micro amp * 1 Volt= 1 micro watt. 0.52 Volt / 100k ohm = 5.2 micro amp * 0.52 Volt = 2.704 micro watt. 1.2 mV (measurable on standard DMM) / 100k ohm = 0.1 micro amps * 1.2 mV = 1.08 nano watts. This is the most basic relationship in electricity, and it's accuracy never changes because the resistor is a multiplication factor (aka how the analog current meter works). In fact, you can obtain MORE accuracy by using resistors here because the cell has a high input impedance. When you match that impedance: you will get the maximum amount of power transfer possible (aka: the cell under optimal load). To test recovery, you need to INCREASE resistance from that.

I think I do not understand you, or you not understand me?

Recovery can be seen when the meters are REMOVED from the load... Let it 'rest' for a while, and on reconnecting an meter, one can see the 'bounce back' that has happened while the meter was disconnected (Witch is not a re-charge of the cell, and *that* was my point).

Hmmm, my point was just to show IB that by removing a load (the analog meter), the cell would 'recover' , and NOT 'recharge', and thus also NOT to 'test' for any accuracy of recovery, but rather show the effect.

About the accuracy of measuring over resistor on this type of cell... I'm not going to argue about this, other then saying that you will not get accurate measurements with the average standard DMM and resistors (unless one is easy satisfied and believes that what he measures is accurate... Also 1.2mV on a standard DMM can as well be about 1.15mV to 1.25mV, same for uA's -resulting v*a error-, add the resistor accuracy, leads of the meter and environment signals going into cell and wires and there you go...) There is a difference in *theory* and practice results.

1.2 mV (measurable on standard DMM) / 100k ohm = 0.1 micro amps * 1.2 mV = 1.08 nano watts.

Say again ???

Your view and my view about accuracy might differ, and that is ok with me tough :-) But I just want to be clear that my whole point was to show an effect -only-, and not to complicate things with measurements and include accuracy. It has been dragged out of context I think. Sigh, such an simple point I wanted to bring over and got messy like this haha. Maybe I was not clear in the first place of making my point?

--
Ron.

[LetsReplicate]

I think I do not understand you, or you not understand me?

Recovery can be seen when the meters are REMOVED from the load... Let it 'rest' for a while, and on reconnecting an meter, one can see the 'bounce back' that has happened while the meter was disconnected (Witch is not a re-charge of the cell, and *that* was my point).

Hmmm, my point was just to show IB that by removing a load (the analog meter), the cell would 'recover' , and NOT 'recharge', and thus also NOT to 'test' for any accuracy of recovery, but rather show the effect.

About the accuracy of measuring over resistor on this type of cell... I'm not going to argue about this, other then saying that you will not get accurate measurements with the average standard DMM and resistors (unless one is easy satisfied and believes that what he measures is accurate... Also 1.2mV on a standard DMM can as well be about 1.15mV to 1.25mV, same for uA's -resulting v*a error-, add the resistor accuracy, leads of the meter and environment signals going into cell and wires and there you go...) There is a difference in *theory* and practice results.



Say again ???

Your view and my view about accuracy might differ, and that is ok with me tough :-) But I just want to be clear that my whole point was to show an effect -only-, and not to complicate things with measurements and include accuracy. It has been dragged out of context I think. Sigh, such an simple point I wanted to bring over and got messy like this haha. Maybe I was not clear in the first place of making my point?

--
Ron.

It has been clearly defined that these cells, when in their dry state, have a charge and discharge curve similar to a capacitor. That means the the word "charge" was not really incorrect even though the majority of what would be happening was recovery. These cells can charge to above the galvanic voltage, when you reconnected the meter you first see the pulse current from the capacitance, then the steady galvanic voltage. That means in order to test just recovery: you'd need to measure the recovery without the capacitance recharging. That can only be done by leaving it on a load resistor. Was that clear enough?

The multiplication factor of the resistor allows for increased accuracy when you take into account that you can also measure the resistance of the resistor and the DMM is a 10Mohm load in parallel with that. Using a large resistor also increases the apparent voltage which causes less inductive pickup errors in the leads of the meter even if you don't measure the resistor and accept the error as +/- 5%. If you don't believe me that's fine, but I have taken instrumentation courses on DMMs and I know how to calculate the correct value from the reading shown on the screen (which is a nightmare for any AC voltage that is not a perfect sin wave, and in reality none are). In reality, you gain NO accuracy not using a resistor and in specific situations you can gain accuracy by using them.

Yeah, I messed up on that one calculation, my favorite calculators (I had 2) are broken so I have to do math in non-user-friendly OpenOffice spreadsheets.

Guys,
Hyperbaric increases current for sure. Test taken to 50 psi. Depressurization does not spike voltage as does occur to the extent as with opening ambient into vacuum chamber which is a sudden RISE in pressure.
Video will follow.
Very Best Regards,
Jim

Jim,

Can you give us a multi-point PSI to "stable output current" graph? (Well, a graph is not needed, but the data for it is) That way we can determine if the effect is linear or not.

Thank you,
^.^

[NextGen1967]

It has been clearly defined that these cells, when in their dry state, have a charge and discharge curve similar to a capacitor. That means the the word "charge" was not really incorrect even though the majority of what would be happening was recovery. These cells can charge to above the galvanic voltage, when you reconnected the meter you first see the pulse current from the capacitance, then the steady galvanic voltage.

Ahh, THAT is where we have different views, thanks I understand your point of view now. In *my* opinion, the word 'charge' was incorrectly used, because I see the effect as (majority) recovery... Granted, there *is* capacitor effects, but these are also in effect in normal batteries, and is rather small compared to the 'recovery'. As a note, the cell is far from 'dry state'.

If you have time, build a cell, and place it in a controlled humidity and temperature (to stabilize output a bit).... put an appropriate load on it, and then release the load... Have a scope (high impedance) on the cell and watch its -slow- curve. A Faraday cage (where I test my cell in), might help accuracy a bit. You know that EMF in motion does not want to 'come to a stop' instantly - right ? [showing 'overshoot'/'undershoot' (ring) effect].

Agreed on the pulse current, which is mostly driving the 'penny' type oscillators.

That means in order to test just recovery: you'd need to measure the recovery without the capacitance recharging. That can only be done by leaving it on a load resistor. Was that clear enough?

Again, my point was not to MEASURE, but merely SHOW the effect of the recovery. Just a *simple* observable observation *only*. (e,g. One can throw a stone in the air and see it fall back down to earth (simple observation)... OR one *could* measure it's acceleration, calculate its maximum velocity, and how long it takes to hit earth again, but that was not my point). That should be clear enough ?

The multiplication factor of the resistor allows for increased accuracy when you take into account that you can also measure the resistance of the resistor and the DMM is a 10Mohm load in parallel with that. Using a large resistor also increases the apparent voltage which causes less inductive pickup errors in the leads of the meter even if you don't measure the resistor and accept the error as +/- 5%. If you don't believe me that's fine, but I have taken instrumentation courses on DMMs and I know how to calculate the correct value from the reading shown on the screen (which is a nightmare for any AC voltage that is not a perfect sin wave, and in reality none are). In reality, you gain NO accuracy not using a resistor and in specific situations you can gain accuracy by using them.

No worries, I believe your above, tough it is 'textbook' knowledge,... I have done the actual measurements (up to fA on other projects, which is nearly impossible to measure with any accuracy in normal 'house' conditions), and can say that practice results are often FAR from theory, and the +/- 5% is often off by far far more. The v*a resolution of an average DMM can lead already to a 10% error value I believe? (Example 1.15mv*1.15uA to 1.25mV*1.25ua could on an average DMM be shown as 1.2mv*1.2uA)

"1.2 mV (measurable on standard DMM) / 100k ohm = 0.1 micro amps * 1.2 mV = 1.08 nano watts. " (added for clarity)

Yeah, I messed up on that one calculation, my favorite calculators (I had 2) are broken so I have to do math in non-user-friendly OpenOffice spreadsheets.

Hehe, I often use the old fashion brain calculator still, and it's general that errors in calculations creep in at times... I find myself messing up at times also on those.

But as a small point, you notice *how small really* -if seen the correct value of calculation- the watts produced were in the above calculation... HOW much energy (watt) can one measure with just two pieces of wire of say 20 cm length in free air in the general house room? did you check that? Not to mention the energy the cell could receive from the free air... In nW and pW measurements, environment is a MAJOR influence... in fA measurements a car passing some 100 meters away can influence the measurement. Not to mention the need to ridiculously need to insulate the wire leads from leakage. (yes, I have done those measurements).

I value your thoughts and insight and knowledge and think its good to have you here on the board, and doing the website. Don't get me wrong :-)

Later in time (I am really busy at the moment), I can send you some video's of measurements and show how horribly wrong a measurement can go when one overlook environment influence while making uV/uA/uW -or smaller value- measurements. Do the penny kind of oscillator (non toroid wound coils) *really* only use the energy of the cell, or do they 'secretly' pick up -depending on environment situations- energy from outside the cell. What you think ?

Small note: I did Fourier analyses on a cell inside and outside a Faraday cage, showing a *huge* difference between them in the 0 to about 7.5Khz range. By changing the physical volume and dimension of the cell, they can be made into a ONE component radio receiver and amplifier, an old fashion 'crystal radio earplug' -hardly can find those nowadays- would probably be able to make enough audible pressure for the ear to sense.

Ok, back to cell research now?

--
Ron.

[jehdds]

Guys,
Here is the pressure test video
Hyperbaric increases,
vacuum decreases current.
Pressure Tests Positive Negative - YouTube
Very Best Regards,
Jim

[LetsReplicate]

Ahh, THAT is where we have different views, thanks I understand your point of view now. In *my* opinion, the word 'charge' was incorrectly used, because I see the effect as (majority) recovery... Granted, there *is* capacitor effects, but these are also in effect in normal batteries, and is rather small compared to the 'recovery'. As a note, the cell is far from 'dry state'.

Agreed on the level of dryness. Diodes also have capacitance, so do inductors... In fact, EVERYTHING has all 3 (inductance, capacitance, and resistance) at all times in varying amounts based on frequency. Argument for capacitance forthcoming:

If you have time, build a cell, and place it in a controlled humidity and temperature (to stabilize output a bit).... put an appropriate load on it, and then release the load... Have a scope (high impedance) on the cell and watch its -slow- curve. A Faraday cage (where I test my cell in), might help accuracy a bit. You know that EMF in motion does not want to 'come to a stop' instantly - right ? [showing 'overshoot'/'undershoot' (ring) effect]

"EMF in motion" is a redundant, just like "current flow"

Curve as a term implies capacitance, slow curve implies large capacitance. Galvanic recovery *should* be a straight line.

Yes, I know inductance (the property acting as "mass" which produces electrical inertia) well I also know about resonance and radio:

Small note: I did Fourier analyses on a cell inside and outside a Faraday cage, showing a *huge* difference between them in the 0 to about 7.5Khz range. By changing the physical volume and dimension of the cell, they can be made into a ONE component radio receiver and amplifier, an old fashion 'crystal radio earplug' -hardly can find those nowadays- would probably be able to make enough audible pressure for the ear to sense.

7.5Khz is a AWFULLY low frequency to be receiving at: your cell should not have had enough inductance to reach that low of value. So unless the cell you tested was a fairly impressive sized coil, then capacitance must be the culprit for making the frequency that low.

Doing the math on that results in hilarity btw: at least several uF.

A tank circuit with rectifier is exactly how I did the equivalent model of these cells.

Agreed on the pulse current, which is mostly driving the 'penny' type oscillators.

Later in time (I am really busy at the moment), I can send you some video's of measurements and show how horribly wrong a measurement can go when one overlook environment influence while making uV/uA/uW -or smaller value- measurements. Do the penny kind of oscillator (non toroid wound coils) *really* only use the energy of the cell, or do they 'secretly' pick up -depending on environment situations- energy from outside the cell. What you think ?

No they don't just use the cell, the coils being "cross-wound" with a gap between them results in a virtual capacitor who's plates are electrically biased by the EMF being complimentary. The net result is an oscillator that will accelerate itself into resonance as long as the energy entropy is overcome (where the cell comes in). Any energy that it can use to overcome the entropy will work: which is why the oscillator can be run on an antenna.

Again, my point was not to MEASURE, but merely SHOW the effect of the recovery. Just a *simple* observable observation *only*. (e,g. One can throw a stone in the air and see it fall back down to earth (simple observation)... OR one *could* measure it's acceleration, calculate its maximum velocity, and how long it takes to hit earth again, but that was not my point). That should be clear enough ?

I used "measure" incorrectly there, I wasn't referring to accuracy, only that watching the voltage recover across a large resistor value (like 1 M ohm or more) would dampen out the the overshoot, ringing and any capacitive recharging. That would give a much better demonstration of the effect you were looking for.

No worries, I believe your above, tough it is 'textbook' knowledge,... I have done the actual measurements (up to fA on other projects, which is nearly impossible to measure with any accuracy in normal 'house' conditions), and can say that practice results are often FAR from theory, and the +/- 5% is often off by far far more. The v*a resolution of an average DMM can lead already to a 10% error value I believe? (Example 1.15mv*1.15uA to 1.25mV*1.25ua could on an average DMM be shown as 1.2mv*1.2uA)

+/- 5% is 10%: the example you show is LSD (least significant digit) which in this case is less than +/- 5% error. Practical measurements always have "acceptable error" but taking multiple data points in "steady state" (long term stable) will average out noise errors.

I have no reason to bother measuring anything below 100nA, nor do most people because the charge is so small it can't accomplish anything detectably useful at that level.

I value your thoughts and insight and knowledge and think its good to have you here on the board, and doing the website. Don't get me wrong :-)

I enjoy discussing these things with people that can hold their own in an argument.

Ok, back to cell research now?

Okay, this way an argument over semantics anyway.

[NextGen1967]

...<shorten for brevity>

Okay, this way an argument over semantics anyway.

Pfew... Good idea :-) With a minor note that you had a few errors in your above reasoning (I can see you did NOT do the *actual* Fourier analysis. Actually, seeing the crystalline structure, it isn't so weird -textbook vs reality). Must note the cell I tested was slightly different, but no coil or anything.

Will keep it to a rest tough, and come back at an (much) later time with figures and data (which might explain things better to you).

Tough I like your style of reasoning (only not here as it distracts from what we try to do).

Great insight on the penny type energy harvesting.

The fA measurements was a loosely joint project between TI, an German company, and me... Normally I don't work in *these* small ranges also, tough nano and pico is what I often mingle with

On another note: I send you an PM about your website.

--
Ron.

[NickZ]

@ All:
You guys are bringing up some interesting points. The idea that the oscillator circuits like the Penny oscillator, can AlSO be picking up other, unknown stray, or outside of the cell type of EM influences is important. As these oscillator circuits can also be shorting out, with relation to that same unknown energy, or not compatible with it, and so missing out on it, instead of utilizing it, and working with it. Meters, scopes, signal analyzers, and frequency generators may not really be seeing it, either, or be able to duplicate it. this "other energy" as some of this can still be hidden from their site. But some useful natural Earth or ambient type frequencies are already known, and being exploited.

I've been utilizing outside ground connections for other circuits that I'm working on, and I see a strong influence of the Ac line leached inductance or Ac hum or noise, affecting sensitive devices, Av plugs and possibly even these cells. I see everything as an antenna, or ground sink now, as I try to tune into that illusive just potential energy, and grab it by the tail...

I've been thinking of driving devices similar to the PSEC type of passive coil devices in combination with my Carbon/quartz cells, or other types of non galvanic "dry cells", as the driving source of voltage for that type of device. Since being able to utilize the natural non-man made Earth Frequencies to power devices, is easier said than done. Like trying to tune into a radio station without using a radio. Unless you own all of the needed equipment necessary. Mucho bucks...

So, the output of these cells can be used to power or "polarize" other useful low draw circuits. Such as the PSEC type coil device, and others, which can also draw some juice from the ambient, to further help to raise their combined output.
But all this, is as tricky as it gets...
NickZ

[jehdds]

Hi Guys,
Update on cell fabrication. I made three 1"x3" Graphite-Magnesium plate cells.
Two were fabricated and were polarized at ambient pressure. One cell was polarized then inserted into the pressure cell and taken to 90psi. ( I was tempted to polarize under pressure but NOTE DO NOT DO THIS DUE TO HYDROGEN LIBERATION AND POTENTIAL FOR SPARK..... Thank Goodness for the little voice in the back of your brain that says Remember the words adiabatic compression.....) So each cell at this point is making 36mA and 1.5 Volts. After resting overnight, vice tests on all as well as pressure testing the two bench cured ones as well as vacuum test on the pressure cured one.
Any Guesses to outcome?
Very Best Regards,
Jim
PS I placed two 1" o-rings flat on the plate before pouring the molten salts on the Mg. This way there is a physical resilient stop to prevent bottoming out and shorting the plates as well as allowing for a passive rebound force that may move the plates opposite one another after pressure from vice etc is relieved.

[redrichie]

Well. I guess the current increases like before. But what is the official voltage / current?

[jehdds]

Guys,
Overnight update.
Bench dried two cells :13mA, 1.6V

Cell sealed and cured under pressure: 24mA, 1.5V

Note: I believe this difference is due to less evaporative losses for the intrinsic water in the salts. No water was added for fabrication of these cells.
Curing under positive pressure seems to work and maintaining under positive pressure will obviate evaporation, and I would guess that is why John Hutchinson made his housings. This material does not imbibe water with the ease of the carbonate cells.
Very Best Regards,
Jim

[jehdds]

Update #3. Came home from work and one bench cell registered 13mA 1.35V and the other 23mA 1.35V.
Cell sealed in chamber :1.56V and 20mA.
Odd. Again, The functionality of the cells I believe is intrinsically linked to the residual moisture content of the electrolyte. Two cells in series lights a white LED no worries. Time perhaps to move on to another form of cell involving Kiln ovens.....

[jehdds]

Just did one more quick test using two cells in series sealed and under pressure.
In the hyperbaric chamber, upon pressurization, VOLTAGE DECREASES SLIGHTLY THEN EQUILIBRATES VERY SLOWLY but does not rise to ambient voltage. CURRENT INCREASES QUICKLY and exceeds ambient readings.
Very Best Regards,
Jim

[ibpointless2]

I removed the pressure from the cell and let it rest to see if the cell normal power is affected. It seems the normal power the cell gives off is not affected by the squeezing of the cell, this shows that no physical damage is being done to the cell when i crush it.