Energetic Forum  
Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Delicious Digg Reddit WordPress StumbleUpon Tumblr Translate Addthis Aaron Murakami YouTube ONLY 13% OF SEATS AVAILABLE!!!*** 2017 ENERGY CONFERENCE ***


* NEW * BEDINI RPX BOOK & DVD SET: BEDINI RPX


Go Back   Energetic Forum > > >
   

Inductive Resistor Open source development of highly efficient inductive resistor circuits.

Bedini RPX Sideband Generator
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
  #1501  
Old 08-01-2009, 11:35 AM
Hoppy Hoppy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by witsend View Post
I keep trying to answer this and couldn't edit - so another attempt.

We have a test that empties the bottle and returns 16 bottles to the fridge. If it were a paltry 10% of 90% or 50% or whatever - then, indeed, we'd be arguing the point.
That's excellent Rosemary
__________________
 

Download SOLAR SECRETS by Peter Lindemann
Free - Get it now: Solar Secrets

  #1502  
Old 08-01-2009, 11:36 AM
Cloxxki Cloxxki is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 454
I was told by a fellow FE fan that this forum was the more serious one, especially compared to overunity.com
It saddens me to see that gospels rules science here. That vague "research" is demanded to be replicated including results, before the original experiment is repeated at any increased level of credibility, per the view of critics. You should be looking for nothing but ways to please the critics! They want to believe just as well, but decide to do so after reasonable proof has been offered, and won't accept gospel.
Very valuable time and energy of more skilled researchers has been wasted, while in the process they've been discredited for their methods and sharp eye for incomplete evidence they themselves would not try to get away with, just to get some good results published.

How hard is it to just repeat the original experiment, while incorperating superior measuring methods? If you are so sure, this could only confirm your case. These critics are not here to sabotage your FE device, they are here to get proof they themselves will accept, and base their furher life of research on.

Scientifically I am now bored with this thread, as I have become convinced that no over unity is here in any form. And if somehow there is, probably a totally different form that the believers will be aware of. I'm now just skimming these pages to feel a bit smarter myself when I need this (I did not enjoy the luxury of any education apart from the crude lessons of life), a bit like watching that silly reality show you know is mainly staged, and not going to bring anything new, but is entertaining in a voyeuristic kind of way.

This makes me sad. Inadequate research, where any critics are bullied off, and confusing result is allowed to bait-waste capable scientics' time, is the kind of stuff big oil and governments would pay me much better money for than my day job. If the very elite of the believers, on the most serious of FE forums are doing this for free, I'll likely be looking at paying a lot of high energy bills over the rest of my life, unless I get a permit to build a windmill on my roof.

I came to this forum to try and be a small part in the process that will one day produce over unity, to eventually feed the hungry and heal the sick. This post would also need to serve that purpose, albeit surely unappreciated by the believers whom are very much "believe with us, or go away". An outspoken atheist would expect no other treatment in a church. Some would say "you are welcome as child of the same maker, as long as you respect us for the way we choose to live". It's a mutual thing.

I have mostly a human factor to offer to the FE community , and can sometimes have an innovative idea. If one doesn't work, I move on. The Ainslie circuit believers on here better also make sure to devote significant time on totally unrelated research rather than allowing this magical, and after years yet unproven circuit to absorb all of their invaluable brain power.
Let's make FE something we can give to our children, rather what making our greatgrandchildren wonder why let it all to them to figure out . My country was fed and built by windmill power, and I've yet to see something better. I'll donate the largest amount I can afford to developing this kind of circuitry once gullable uneducated me gets convinced there really is something to this. I feel to see any progress between the thousands of lines of distorting distraction.

Disappointed,
J

__________________
 
  #1503  
Old 08-01-2009, 11:57 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Cloxxki - I don't think we are here to bolster your hopes - but it would be nice if we did. The point is that the actual replicated test is waiting some measuring instruments - one of them due shortly and - we hope a second on loan.

We are not in a position to publish results until this is to hand. And then, when we do give the numbers the hope is that they'll be argued with the security of calibrated instruments that can sustain the required critical scrutiny.

I think the truth is that Aaron is tired of the 'rebuffs'. We all are. We've had the systematic 'debunk' from TK's thread where I see/saw you on a daily basis - and had the dubious satisfaction of reading your own contributions to the scathing remarks about our poor efforts. To this day TK has not delivered a single comparative watt measurement - not a single value other than a perpetual discussion on the waveforms and God know what else. Notwithstanding which his bad science has been entirely acceptable by all. Our's, not yet put to the table, is consistently derided by members. And on this forum those members who do argue - have never called TK's debunk to account for the patent lack of impartiality that it should have elicited.

So yes. You may well be tired. Think what it's like at this end. Personally I'm aware of a readership out there that far exceeds the members of this forum. In a way the object is to keep their interest alive rather than yours. It's always the silent majority who eventually carry the day.
__________________
 

Last edited by witsend; 08-01-2009 at 12:16 PM. Reason: qualified
  #1504  
Old 08-01-2009, 12:17 PM
Hoppy Hoppy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by witsend View Post
Cloxxki - I don't think we are here to bolster your hopes - but it would be nice if we did. The point is that the actual replicated test is waiting some measuring instruments - one of them due shortly and - we hope a second on loan.

We are not in a position to publish results until this is to hand. And then, when we do give the numbers the hope is that they'll be argued with the security of calibrated instruments that can sustain the required critical scrutiny.

I think the truth is that Aaron is tired of the 'rebuffs'. We all are. We've had the systematic 'debunk' from TK's thread where I see/saw you on a daily basis - and had the dubious satisfaction of reading your own contributions to the scathing remarks about our poor efforts. To this day TK has not delivered a single watt measurement - not a single value other than a perpetual discussion on the waveforms and God know what else. Notwithstanding which his bad science has been entirely acceptable by all. Our's, not yet put to the table, is consistently derided by members. And on this forum those members who do argue - have never called TK's debunk to account for the patent lack of impartiality that it should have elicited.

So yes. You may well be tired. Think what it's like at this end. Personally I'm aware of a readership out there that far exceeds the members of this forum. In a way the object is to keep their interest alive rather than yours. It's always the silent majority who eventually carry the day.
Rosemary wrote: -

Notwithstanding which his bad science has been entirely acceptable by all. Our's, not yet put to the table, is consistently derided by members. And on this forum those members who do argue - have never called TK's debunk to account for the patent lack of impartiality that it should have elicited.

With respect Rosemary, your case has already been put to the table in the form of a technical report that others at your request have commented on both positively and negatively. How can one deride a case that has not been put to the table. If you are referring to the test case that Peter and Aaron are going to set up on your behalf, the jury has not yet sat.

Hoppy
__________________
 
  #1505  
Old 08-01-2009, 12:25 PM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoppy View Post
Rosemary wrote: -

How can one deride a case that has not been put to the table...

Hoppy
You ask? The derision has been conducted with the use of the most colourful and defamatory of language and statement spread thoughout 800 odd postings by TK and his team with a persistence, I might add - of a full insurgent confrontation. I have never known the like. Ask yourselves how this could have happened? I only know that I needed to defend myself every step of the way. I drew breath when I saw that TK's debunk had completed. But I see now that the death rattle's not quite over.
__________________
 
  #1506  
Old 08-01-2009, 12:47 PM
Altair Altair is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 107
Deception

Aaron, I had respect for you. I followed this thread almost from the start, albeit mostly silently. My busy schedule prevented me from contributing with my EE experience and knowledge.
Now I realize it would have been wasted time anyway, to try to point out blatant errors and correct faulty understandings of basic electricity.
Just your recent drawing where you put the Mosfet between source and load proves that you do not understand the very basics of electronics. Somebody had to point it out to you (probably Peter).
I won't take anymore time on this already excessively long thread, but I just wanted to tell you that it was a big mistake to ban the contributions of very knowledgeable people like Hoppy, MileHigh and Cloxxki, to name a few.
Please, don't respond to this message, your point was already well received.
Thanks,
Guy Sirois
__________________
 
  #1507  
Old 08-01-2009, 01:14 PM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Altair, I've just read through your contributions on this thread. Indeed, we'd be sorry to lose your support.

I would like to point out, in defense of Aaron - that you claim your own work constraints prevented your more active participation. Just think then what it is like when Aaron puts in his 16 hours a day and more, gratuitously. On top of that those efforts are presented without thought of anything other the advancement of the hopes in OU which have countered extraordinary resistance from every reputable quarter of application and study. He's up against mainstream and mostly alone. Then put yourself in his shoes and test your own tolerance levels. I'm afraid my sympathy goes to Aaron. I've been on this thread for two months - and I'm permanently exhausted. It challenges the intellect at a very profound level to counter the attacks. And - by close reckoning Aaron's been in the front of this battle for seven long years.

And the truth is - one could prepare a raft of detailed examples as to why it was necessary to rebuff certain allegations. But we all know the need. It has not been a reasonable investigation. It's been an attempted slaughter. It's been exhausting. And while it may have cost you some time. Think of what it has cost Aaron in sheer applied hard work to keep up with the requirements to rebuff attack. On top of which he still needs to marshall the required protocol to allow others to replicate the test without those sharp instruments. The last thing he now needs is further doubt on the subject.

Indeed if you had the heart we'd be glad if you could perhaps prepare some schedule where experimenters could simply measure advantage from battery draw down rates. And I would appeal to you to look at it from Aaron's point of view. He's been fighting his corner. And it has not been easy.
__________________
 

Last edited by witsend; 08-01-2009 at 01:51 PM. Reason: spelling
  #1508  
Old 08-01-2009, 01:36 PM
DavidE DavidE is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 555
“When you have come to the edge of all light that you know, and are about to drop off into the darkness of the unknown, Faith is knowing one of two things will happen: There will be something solid to stand on, or you will be taught to fly.”
-Patrick Overton
__________________
 
  #1509  
Old 08-01-2009, 01:42 PM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Dave - I'm printing that post and shall frame it. Have been giggling here. I sure as hell hope I'll find wings. Ground's decidedly shakey.
__________________
 

Last edited by witsend; 08-01-2009 at 01:52 PM.
  #1510  
Old 08-01-2009, 02:05 PM
Hoppy Hoppy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 241
Rosemary wrote: -

And I would appeal to you to look at it from Aaron's point of view. He's been fighting his corner. And it has not been easy.

And its been no easier for others to convince him that he's on loosing wicket if he is relying on EE principles to prove his case and convince others when he clearly demonstrates a lack of knowledge and understanding of those principles and how to apply them.

Hoppy
__________________
 

Last edited by Hoppy; 08-01-2009 at 02:22 PM.
  #1511  
Old 08-01-2009, 04:11 PM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Inductive Circuits - The Classical Approach

For those that may be interested in learning/discussing "Inductive Circuits", a new thread has been started here:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...ead.php?t=4569

Here it is OK to discuss the technical aspects of these circuits from the "classical" point of view. New-Ager's and those wanting to learn about or better understand these circuits from the classicist perspective are of course invited.

Rational debate is welcome. Philosophy and beliefs should be relegated to other appropriate threads.

.99
__________________
 
  #1512  
Old 08-01-2009, 04:30 PM
DavidE DavidE is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 555
Altair,

Quote:
basic electricity?
Are you trying to make a blond joke?
I am offended.









Note to Self: Study the bible on Basic Electricity (Buddhist Version).
__________________
 
  #1513  
Old 08-01-2009, 05:06 PM
Hoppy Hoppy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by witsend View Post
Actually Hoppy this is the kind of thing where I entirely sympathise if you're now locked out. It's just jolly unfair to pretend that you can argue classical anything on results that defy classical prediction. Please delete this post if your still there. come on Hoppy. It's fuel to the fire? Make a reasonable concession here.
Rosemary, I'll let Aaron read and digest what I'm saying and let him decide if it needs deleting.

Hoppy
__________________
 
  #1514  
Old 08-01-2009, 05:26 PM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
DaveE - I must tell you - I've had the first long laugh in a really long time. Thanks for that. Both posts. Up there.

Rosemary
__________________
 
  #1515  
Old 08-01-2009, 06:05 PM
SkyWatcher's Avatar
SkyWatcher SkyWatcher is online now
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,169
Hi folks, Hi cloxxki, you quoted "I'll likely be looking at paying a lot of high energy bills over the rest of my life, unless I get a permit to build a windmill on my roof."
Well it seems you already have part of your answer. If you you need to ask permission from another human who thinks they have authority over another human being especially in regard to basic essential things like energy, well we need look no further than our own back yard.
peace love light
__________________
 
  #1516  
Old 08-01-2009, 06:31 PM
Harvey's Avatar
Harvey Harvey is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by rave154 View Post
Aaron,

ive got hold of 3 IRF740's

they seem very comparable to the mosfet youre using, avalanche rated, diode inside etc.... will it suffice you think?

David. D
That part has a lower on resistance (good thing) but a lower Avalanche Voltage (400V instead of 1000V) So it will Avalanche with a lower spike level, but it does have a higher drain current (another good thing).

It's input capacitance is lower and it's output capacitance is higher. All the combined differences (esp. the on resistance) will cause it to act differently than Rosemary's circuit, but it (the circuit) probably can be adjusted to get the benefits sought after.

I'll be posting the section on Avalanche from the Designers Manual in a few minutes.
__________________
 

Last edited by Harvey; 08-01-2009 at 06:35 PM.
  #1517  
Old 08-01-2009, 06:41 PM
Harvey's Avatar
Harvey Harvey is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,137
Article on Avalanche

Larger Image

Larger Image

__________________
 
  #1518  
Old 08-01-2009, 06:52 PM
Harvey's Avatar
Harvey Harvey is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,137
From where I sit, it seems we want a higher amplitude ring if possible. The frequency of that ring will depend on the battery and inductor combined resonance. Perhaps Hoppy or Milehigh can offer suggestions on methods of determining the battery capacitance so we can actually engineer a resonant circuit. My time is divided greatly over the next few days, but I will help where I can.

The Avalanche circuit inside the HEXFET serves to snub the ringing, but under certain conditions can actually exacerbate it when it encourages an increased current draw at the start of the spike but on the next cycles of the ring the Avalanche diode turns off for some reason. That would result in an increased field energy that dissipates in the ringing.

Rosemary, were any voltage measurements taken across the HEXFET? Did they ever exceed 1KV?

EDIT:
How can I measure the capacitance (NOT capacity) of a battery? - Yahoo! Answers
Chapter 9: Internal Battery Resistance
__________________
 

Last edited by Harvey; 08-01-2009 at 07:39 PM. Reason: Added two links that may prove useful.
  #1519  
Old 08-01-2009, 07:02 PM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Guys - I've just watched yet another sad attempt at TK trying to apply power analysis to my circuit - two efforts on youtube, both using a LeCroy. He's using a machine which, by his own acknowledgement has the dc off set on the blink. Any analysis after this point is entirely erroneous. Please disregard any numbers at all that he references in either of the two videos. The wattage analysis function that he's employed relates to the product of the entire waveform. It is not able to determine the returning energy that is evident in voltage across the shunt and across the battery.

Also. There is clear evidence of aliasing - and he does not have enough samples to draw an analysis. He does not have a periodic waveform and is trying to draw conclusions from a ridiculously small sample range. If there were any validity in his claim he should be able to point to the dump with the numbers that determine the voltage across the shunt. He can't do this because DC coupling on the LeCroy is broken! For goodness sake.

Quite apart from which I suggest he brush up on his mental arthimetic. It's sadder than this new attempt at debunking. What qualifications does this man have? I'm an amateur and can see through this nonsense? Why .99 are you not poynting this out? And Hoppy? And MileHigh? Why do I need to do this? Where is the impartiality of our mainstream scientists?

EDIT Again, Ramset seems to have left the building. Could someone belonging to that forum please be good enough to post this across?
__________________
 

Last edited by witsend; 08-01-2009 at 07:27 PM.
  #1520  
Old 08-01-2009, 07:07 PM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harvey View Post
From where I sit, it seems we want a higher amplitude ring if possible. The frequency of that ring will depend on the battery and inductor combined resonance. Perhaps Hoppy or Milehigh can offer suggestions on methods of determining the battery capacitance so we can actually engineer a resonant circuit. My time is divided greatly over the next few days, but I will help where I can.

The Avalanche circuit inside the HEXFET serves to snub the ringing, but under certain conditions can actually exacerbate it when it encourages an increased current draw at the start of the spike but on the next cycles of the ring the Avalanche diode turns off for some reason. That would result in an increased field energy that dissipates in the ringing.

Rosemary, were any voltage measurements taken across the HEXFET? Did they ever exceed 1KV?
Hi Harvey. If you're referring to our paper experiment - there were measurements but not recorded. To the best of my knowledge I have never seen voltage anywhere on the circuit that high - except when we tested from a utility supply source.

Harvey - please may I ask you a favour. Can you schedue the test protocol required to prove the effect with battery draw down. Or I'll try and do something - would you and any other qualified to do so please then vet it?
EDIT And yet again Harvey - many many thanks for the info re the MOSFETs. Much appreciated.
__________________
 

Last edited by witsend; 08-01-2009 at 07:10 PM.
  #1521  
Old 08-01-2009, 07:15 PM
Gre Gre is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 59
Cloxxki,

I feel the same way... There's just way too much hype at this point.
__________________
 
  #1522  
Old 08-01-2009, 07:15 PM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyWatcher View Post
Hi folks, Hi cloxxki, you quoted "I'll likely be looking at paying a lot of high energy bills over the rest of my life, unless I get a permit to build a windmill on my roof."
Well it seems you already have part of your answer. If you you need to ask permission from another human who thinks they have authority over another human being especially in regard to basic essential things like energy, well we need look no further than our own back yard.
peace love light
Hi SkyWatcher. A really good point here.
__________________
 
  #1523  
Old 08-01-2009, 07:33 PM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,561
Rosemary Ainslie Schematic

Quote:
Originally Posted by rave154 View Post
is there a clear, definitive schematic for this circuit that your using so i can begin replication,
Hi everyone, here is a more clear schematic of what I'm using. It works and has great variability depending on what you want to do. Any inductive resistor you put on this can be tuned to its own resonant frequency with this timer circuit. Gate resistor tunes the ringing.

I don't know any common item with these inductive resistors. Check Ebay, Mouser, Digikey, etc... Ohmite and Clarostat brands are the two best. The Clarostat's seem to have much more inductance for the same rating.

Big and small version




__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

  #1524  
Old 08-01-2009, 07:55 PM
FuzzyTomCat's Avatar
FuzzyTomCat FuzzyTomCat is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 620
Send a message via Skype™ to FuzzyTomCat
Hi everyone,

I found another possible substitution for the MOSFET ...

International Rectifier IRFPG50

ST Microelectronics STW9N150

N-channel 1500 V - 1.8 Ω - 8 A - TO-247
very high voltage PowerMESH™ Power MOSFET
Single pulse avalanche energy - 720

@ Aaron and Rosemary ....... look at Figure 4 Typical Output Characteristics and Figure 5 Typical Transfer Characteristics everything else appears fairly close.

Best Regards,
Glen
__________________
 
  #1525  
Old 08-01-2009, 08:00 PM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Many thanks Fuzzy. Much appreciated.
__________________
 
  #1526  
Old 08-01-2009, 08:25 PM
Hoppy Hoppy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harvey View Post
From where I sit, it seems we want a higher amplitude ring if possible. The frequency of that ring will depend on the battery and inductor combined resonance. Perhaps Hoppy or Milehigh can offer suggestions on methods of determining the battery capacitance so we can actually engineer a resonant circuit. My time is divided greatly over the next few days, but I will help where I can.

The Avalanche circuit inside the HEXFET serves to snub the ringing, but under certain conditions can actually exacerbate it when it encourages an increased current draw at the start of the spike but on the next cycles of the ring the Avalanche diode turns off for some reason. That would result in an increased field energy that dissipates in the ringing.

Rosemary, were any voltage measurements taken across the HEXFET? Did they ever exceed 1KV?

EDIT:
How can I measure the capacitance (NOT capacity) of a battery? - Yahoo! Answers
Chapter 9: Internal Battery Resistance
Although I have seen the fundamental resonant frequency of an LA battery quoted to be anywhere from 8.0KHz to 3.5MHz, the only resonance I can see possibly applying to this exercise is what is termed the 'absorbtion resonance' I have found this to be around 700Hz to 800Hz for an SLA battery. The absorbtion resonant frequency is the frequency where the battery can take maximum charge with least internal resistance at the commencement of the charging process. It is not IMO viable to see this circuit working in a classic resonant mode. Furthermore, as I've pointed out in an earlier post, given that batteries are non-linear systems, I can see no useful purpose using battery drain measurements by conventional load testing as an acceptable method of proving that this circuit is working overunity, unless the test circuit does in fact work at COP17 as claimed, in which case a straight 'before and after' battery capacity meter reading (BCM), although quite innacurate, will at least confirm that the system is working OU and should be more readily accepted by academics.

Hoppy
__________________
 

Last edited by Hoppy; 08-01-2009 at 08:30 PM.
  #1527  
Old 08-01-2009, 08:52 PM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
OK this is how I would suggest the test be conducted if there are no storage scope meters available.

Set the duty cycle and check the temperature of the resistor when it's stable.

Then apply the same resistor to a variable power supply and adjust the voltage until the same temperature is found and stable over the same resistor

Then do a v^2/r analysis to determine the wattage dissipated at the start of the experiment.

Then record the start time to run the experiment until the battery is depleted to say, 11 volts from a 12volt supply or 22 volts from a 24 volt supply.

Then recharge the batteries and apply a resistor in series with them to draw down the same amperage as recorded at the start of the experimental test.

Then record the time it takes for the battery to deplete to the same level as the experiment.

Then rerun both tests.

If you've got two sets of batteries - run them concurrently until one or other hits that critical voltage level. Then recharge both and swap them, control to experiment and vice versa.

Please comment if I've left out anything critical.
__________________
 
  #1528  
Old 08-01-2009, 09:12 PM
Hoppy Hoppy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by witsend View Post
OK this is how I would suggest the test be conducted if there are no storage scope meters available.

Set the duty cycle and check the temperature of the resistor when it's stable.

Then apply the same resistor to a variable power supply and adjust the voltage until the same temperature is found and stable over the same resistor

Then do a v^2/r analysis to determine the wattage dissipated at the start of the experiment.

Then record the start time to run the experiment until the battery is depleted to say, 11 volts from a 12volt supply or 22 volts from a 24 volt supply.

Then recharge the batteries and apply a resistor in series with them to draw down the same amperage as recorded at the start of the experimental test.

Then record the time it takes for the battery to deplete to the same level as the experiment.

Then rerun both tests.

If you've got two sets of batteries - run them concurrently until one or other hits that critical voltage level. Then recharge both and swap them, control to experiment and vice versa.

Please comment if I've left out anything critical.
Yes, re-run test as many times as necessary until calculated COP stops falling and stabilises out!

Hoppy
__________________
 
  #1529  
Old 08-01-2009, 10:08 PM
jas_bir77 jas_bir77 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 13
huge back emf recovery

hi,everyone i was just going through ou.com and this thread and videos came up IST! NEO ZAP! TECK Breakthrough ....
and these videos YouTube - IST NEO ZAP! TECK , YouTube - Neo transformer effect.AVI , YouTube - IST! NEO ZAP! IN THE DARK
in these video you can see how easily and abundantly back emf is being generated with just 12v
i thought since we are utilising back emf so why not enhance to a great length and then use it sorry if i went off topic.
good luck guy's
one thing more one video is from allcanadian and he is posting in this forum also so he might be able to help us better
thanks
jasbir
__________________
 

Last edited by jas_bir77; 08-01-2009 at 10:10 PM. Reason: new information previouslly left
  #1530  
Old 08-01-2009, 10:20 PM
Harvey's Avatar
Harvey Harvey is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,137
Avalanche Proof vs. Avalanche Rated

Really these are just two ways of saying the same thing. The SK transistor has a breakdown voltage of 900V while the IR transistor is 1000V. Essentially, both will handle the breakdown without destruction. Naturally, they will both have limits as to how long they can handle that condition under the rated current.

The SK does not offer the Joule rating nor does it infer any recovery timing etc for an Avalanche condition. So without actually delving into the particulars of what they mean by "Proof" and "No secondary breakdown" it would be difficult to determine what this device would do with a 925V spike.

TK did raise an important point regarding the spike slope, and another poster here (sorry forgot the name) explained how the voltage of the spike is directly related to the time it takes to travel from peak to peak. The shorter the time period, the higher the voltage. Remember, an AMP is a time based unit. When you subdivide the time you trade amp for volt.

The Avalanche is only a factor in this circuit if Rosemary's original configuration was able to produce greater than 1000 volts across the HEXFET. In that case, for that brief period, extra current would flow due to the extended ON condition through the Avalanche thereby bolstering the magnetic field and slowing its total collapse. If however the voltage never reaches breakdown, and the spike and ringing is all below that limit, then the entire energy in the ringing is a result of how fully you charge the magnetic field before collapse - it can only store so much before it saturates.

Keep in mind too, that as I understand Rosemary's claim, it has to do with conserved energy in the load resistor being stored at the point of manufacture, and that it would leak into the field and add to it resulting in a breakdown of the load resistor. Please correct me if I am wrong here.

__________________
 
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Please consider supporting Energetic Forum with a voluntary monthly subscription.

For One-Time Donations, use admin@ this domain > energeticforum.com

Choose your voluntary subscription

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v1.4.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
2007-2015 Copyright - Energetic Forum - All Rights Reserved

Bedini RPX Sideband Generator

Tesla Chargers