Energetic Forum  
Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Delicious Digg Reddit WordPress StumbleUpon Tumblr Translate Addthis Aaron Murakami YouTube 2020 ENERGY CONFERENCE - PRE-REGISTER NOW!!!!

2020 Energy Science & Technology Conference
PRE-REGISTER NOW!!!
http://energyscienceconference.com


Go Back   Energetic Forum > >
   

Renewable Energy Discussion on various alternative energy, renewable energy, & free energy technologies. Also any discussion about the environment, global warming, and other related topics are welcome here.

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #121  
Old 08-20-2016, 02:54 PM
boguslaw's Avatar
boguslaw boguslaw is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,494
Only electrons can do that...In my opinion Tesla used electrons to tap ambient field, in fact it was not his idea originally
__________________
 
Reply With Quote

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

  #122  
Old 08-21-2016, 12:26 AM
Tom Booth Tom Booth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Fort Plain, New York, USA
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernst View Post
Puzzled?
How?
Well, the image is from a site about Lind's process for liquefying air by a thermodynamic process of compression cooling and expansion.

Are you suggesting this somehow had something to do with electron gas or electrical something?
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 08-21-2016, 12:57 AM
Ernst Ernst is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 910
Exactly.
If you've read my thread and linked documents, then you somehow missed the point.
Tesla found that whatever causes electricity behaves like a gas. Modern science has come to the same conclusion for free electrons in a conductor, but they do not take the next logical step. Tesla does.
If that which causes electricity is like a gas then gas laws should apply and so, Linde's system has an equivalent in electrical engineering using electron gas as a working medium.
You can compress it in a Tesla coil and a discharge would be a sudden expansion resulting in a cooling effect.

I thought my video would make that clear, but apparently not as clear as I thought?


Ernst.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 08-21-2016, 03:34 AM
Tom Booth Tom Booth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Fort Plain, New York, USA
Posts: 50
Thank you. That clears things up quite a bit As well as making your entire presentation a lot more interesting.

I must confess I began to tune out quite a bit at points as it seemed to me you were somehow confusing issues.

I certainly can't deny that Tesla was involved in electrical phenomenon I personally have no idea about, and it only seems logical that free electrons should behave just like any other free particles.

Still I don't think Tesla was talking in code or symbolicly in his article about the "Self Acting Engine" in Century magazine in 1900, though I certainly can't deny he might very well have spoken about the phenomenon of which you speak elsewhere.

It seems to me that at that time in the Century magazine article Tesla was talking strictly in terms of thermodynamics from start to finish as far as references to his self acting engine go anyway.

Would that be how those thermoelectric coolers work, by compressing and expanding electrons using various conductors and resistors in a manner similar to the condenser and evaporator and throttling device and such in a refrigerator?
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 08-21-2016, 03:46 AM
Jeff Pearson Jeff Pearson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Taos NM
Posts: 188
You would think anyone who has read Tesla would be familiar with him explaining electricity in fluid dynamics. If it works with a gas there is a direct analogy to electricity and vis versa. So even if Tesla's ambient heat engine is a purely mechanical device.....He is still making a direct analogy to how electricity behaves......I would not call it a code so much...I would say making analogies between how a gas behaves and how electricity behaves
__________________
 

Last edited by Jeff Pearson; 08-21-2016 at 03:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #126  
Old 08-21-2016, 04:44 AM
Tom Booth Tom Booth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Fort Plain, New York, USA
Posts: 50
Unhappy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Pearson View Post
You would think anyone who has read Tesla would be familiar with him explaining electricity in fluid dynamics. If it works with a gas there is a direct analogy to electricity and vis versa. So even if Tesla's ambient heat engine is a purely mechanical device.....He is still making a direct analogy to how electricity behaves......I would not call it a code so much...I would say making analogies between how a gas behaves and how electricity behaves
My work was with Stirling Engines years ago. In attempting to design a more efficient Stirling Engine, at one point I was trying different cooling systems. More or less randomly I started toying with air cycle refrigeration in conjunction with the Stirling engine. I came up with what I thought was a good combined Stirling air cycle solar generator and had this machine running on a parobolic dish concentrator in my imagination.

As I ran this machine in my head... I suddenly realized the sun had set and yet the engine kept running, apparently able to effect its own cooling while continuing to run on ambient heat. Though this was only my own vivid imagination, I was shocked.

I kept the thing running for days without a dish, just pulling heat from the air.

When I called the contractor who had recruited me for the project, he consulted with some experts he knew from the DOE I believe. They told him it was impossible and he didn't want to hear any more about it. BUT I KNEW in my mind it would work. But there went my partner. There went funding. I became a bit obsessed with it. This engine I wanted to build and prove could work. Then one day I happened across Tesla's article regarding his self acting engine. He was describing the engine I had running in my imagination to a tee.

Prior to reading Tesla's article about this engine I knew virtually nothing about Tesla. Needless to say I was flabberghasted.

I'm relating all this as an explaination as well as an apology, I'm not any kind of expert on Tesla. I havent read much of anything he's written or anything written about him beyond whatever else I could find regarding his Self Acting Engine.
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 08-21-2016, 05:29 AM
Ernst Ernst is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 910
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Pearson View Post
You would think anyone who has read Tesla would be familiar with him explaining electricity in fluid dynamics. If it works with a gas there is a direct analogy to electricity and vis versa. So even if Tesla's ambient heat engine is a purely mechanical device.....He is still making a direct analogy to how electricity behaves......I would not call it a code so much...I would say making analogies between how a gas behaves and how electricity behaves
I agree. I just thought it was more fun to call it a code as we have a Da Vinci Code, now we have a Tesla Code.

Yet at some points in his works it is not an analogy he uses, it is more like he tries to hide his true message a bit. But it is 95% analogy....


Ernst.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 08-21-2016, 06:21 AM
Tom Booth Tom Booth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Fort Plain, New York, USA
Posts: 50
Personally I don't see anything in Tesla's article to suggest or indicate that he meant anything other than what he said.

I think that trying to read too much into it could just end up obscuring the plain and straightforward statements of fact and personal observations made by Tesla in the article regarding his Self Acting Engine.

If he was talking ordinary thermodynamics, heat engines, air compressors, refrigeration units, real nuts and bolts objects that anyone can see and understand and observe, then considering it to be analogy with some parralel deeper "TRUE" meaning may just lead us further away from rather than closer to the truth.
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 08-21-2016, 06:46 AM
Ernst Ernst is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 910
That is your opninion.
We will see which opinion will lead to results.


Ernst.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 08-21-2016, 10:43 AM
boguslaw's Avatar
boguslaw boguslaw is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,494
The process is known and called Faraday Induction law
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #131  
Old 08-21-2016, 04:44 PM
Tom Booth Tom Booth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Fort Plain, New York, USA
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernst View Post
That is your opninion.
We will see which opinion will lead to results.


Ernst.
I'm not saying your view is wrong. Tesla often spoke in broad generalities or universal principles.

If he says "much energy" and "little energy" I tend to read that as Heat and Cold , but obviously he could have said that. He may very well have worded it that way so as not to rule out, or to include other possibilities like higher and lower electrical potentials. I certainly don't discount that possibility and I don't necessarily think it has to be strictly one or the other.

It could be both or neither depending on, is the underlying principle sound?
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 08-21-2016, 07:30 PM
Tom Booth Tom Booth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Fort Plain, New York, USA
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Lindemann View Post
...

All of the principles to build an engine like this have been discussed earlier in this thread. The only thing missing is the specific design, which of course is a critical omission.

Tom, I am interested to see what you can do with your ideas. If you ever want a little help, just PM me. Thank you for keeping this thread alive!!

Peter
One thing that keeps me interested in this is the information collected on this site regarding the energy in compressed air:

COMPRESSED AIR IS SOLAR ENERGY

I have also come across additional references to the effect that ALL the electrical energy used to compress air by means of an air compressor is converted into heat.

I see this as similar to compressing a spring. Air is elastic. when compressed, all the energy put into compressing the air is converted into heat, but there is still additional latent heat in the air that remains even after the air is compressed and all the heat/energy added to it is lost.

When the compressed air is used to operate an air tool it "springs back" and expands. In doing so it uses heat energy. If expanded against a turbine the expanding air can turn the turbine even though all the energy of compression has already been lost. In the process the air uses up some of it's own latent internal energy and this causes a sharp drop in temperature. If the turbine is very thoroughly insulated so it can not absorb heat from the surroundings as it expands, the air can even drop to cryogenic temperatures, far far below ambient.

Given all this, if we can reclaim 100% of the heat of compression, and still use the compressed air to do additional work drawing on the air's "internal energy" It seems to me we have already done more than break even.

Yet NOW, after all this, we are left with a potentially near cryogenic cold sink into which more ambient heat can flow into and use this to extract more energy... NO?

It is not true that we are missing a specific design
. I have several designs for machines that could utilize these principles. I've already spent several thousand dollars on machining equipment to build them.

It shouldn't be long now before I'm able to get some of these machines built or put together, but I can say it IS challenging. Machining any kind of engine with precision parts such as piston and crankshaft is a major challenge.

I should say, I do not have a 100% exact design for a working machine. I have several rough designs that may or may not work. There are of course specific details to work out like the exact length of "condenser" tubing needed to achieve maximum performance, the exact bore of the cylinder, the length of the stroke of the piston etc. but such considerations don't change the basic design but will no doubt require some trial and error to get everything just right.

There are other things to work out like what to do about ice build up, but IMO if the thing runs and ice build up becomes a problem, that would constitute a working "proof of concept" engine. There wouldn't be any problem with ice formation if the thing wasn't running. These kind of problems are relatively minor and incidental. The main goal in my mind is to simply see if it works.

This claim about compressed air giving up 100% of the energy of compression as heat is not some outdated or obsolete information from old textbooks.

That you can compress air, reclaim ALL the heat and still use the compressed air, in effect utilizing your energy twice, is still a phenomenon that is recognized by companies that are in the business of heat energy reclamation:

Use your energy twice - Atlas Copco Use Your Energy Twice
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 08-22-2016, 06:46 PM
lota lota is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 23
Hallo,
i think, you must look for this: Organic Rankine Cycle
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_Rankine_Cycle
Heat energy recovery technology | Scoop.it
In Germany, has a man that combines with a car. The consumption went from 6l / 100km to 3 l/100. He has also a patent. I must look for it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0oN3teVv8g
http://www.neue-erfindungen.de/germa..._Uwe_Motor.pdf
Patent WO2005106233A1 - Verfahren zur erh√∂hung des wirkungsgrades eines vier-takt-¬*verbrennungsmotors ... - Google Patente
My english is bad.
Sorry


lota
__________________
 

Last edited by lota; 08-22-2016 at 07:10 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 08-28-2016, 06:30 AM
Tom Booth Tom Booth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Fort Plain, New York, USA
Posts: 50
I've said this before on various forums, possibly earlier in this one, but I think maybe it could use re-emphasis at this point.

I think that we already have a working example or "proof of concept" model of Tesla's "Self Acting Engine" embodied in that toy "drinking bird".

Sometimes I think that maybe Tesla, or someone in a situation where they could not get the idea of a "free energy" self powered engine across to a scientific community blinded by the idea that "it's impossible" put that little harmless toy out there to be carried forward through history to some future more enlightened age.

This simple little toy meets all the requirements Tesla described for his ambient heat engine.

First, it IS a heat engine, Second it produces work as heat passes through it. It converts heat into other forms of energy in its passage. It maintains its own "cold hole" or "sink" and once started continues running, converting ambient heat into motive force "with no further effort" on our part, indefinitely. It is a refrigeration system as well as a kind of air compressor creating a temperature difference as well as an internal pressure difference.

If someone were to say that it only runs by evaporative cooling, I would argue that without the mechanical motion which certainly augments and accelerates the cooling as the wet bulb of a head swings back and forth it likely would not run, or at least not run so well of so fast or with as much force.

In other-words the birds cooling system is not JUST natural evaporative cooling. To some degree its simple refrigeration system depends upon and is driven by the mechanical aspect of the apparatus.

So what's my point exactly? My point is, demonstrating the truth of Tesla's idea is quite simple really. Just take a heat engine and give it some cold for a sink instead of heat so that it uses ambient heat as it"s actual hest source, then use the energy output to repeatedly and continuously replenish the "cold" as necessary.

There is not really any need to worry about where the energy is coming from. The real problem is WAY TOO MUCH ENERGY ALL AROUND ALREADY.

The real problem is how do you get rid of
all that excess energy that you don't need.

Luckily it is easier to get rid of excess energy than it is to make energy. The sun pumps PLENTY of energy into earth's atmosphere. Way way more than we could possibly ever utilize. In fact we can't utilize it at all until we start throwing a whole lot of it away.

Finding "free energy" isn't the problem. The problem is getting rid of the energy excess .

Last edited by Tom Booth; 08-28-2016 at 04:47 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 08-28-2016, 07:38 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,192
Absolutely Correct!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Booth View Post
I've said this before on various forums, possibly earlier in this one, but I think maybe it could use re-emphasis at this point.

I think that we already have a working example or "proof of concept" model of Tesla's "Self Acting Engine" embodied in that toy "drinking bird".

Sometimes I think that maybe Tesla, or someone in a situation where they could not get the idea of a "free energy" self powered engine across to a scientific community blinded by the idea that "it's impossible" put that little harmless toy out there to be carried forward through history to some future more enlightened age.

This simple little toy meets all the requirements Tesla described for his ambient heat engine.

First, it IS a heat engine, Second it produces work as heat passes through it. It converts heat into other forms of energy in its passage. It maintains its own "cold hole" or "sink" and once started continues running, converting ambient heat into motive force "with no further effort" on our part, indefinitely. It is a refrigeration system as well as a kind of air compressor creating a temperature difference as well as an internal pressure difference.

If someone were to say that it only runs by evaporative cooling, I would argue that without the mechanical motion which certainly augments and accelerates the cooling as the wet bulb of a head swings back and forth it likely would not run, or at least not run so well of so fast or with as much force.

In other-words the birds cooling system is not JUST natural evaporative cooling. To some degree its simple refrigeration system depends upon and is driven by the mechanical aspect of the apparatus.

So what's my point exactly? My point is, demonstrating the truth of Tesla's idea is quite simple really. Just take a heat engine and give it some cold for a sink instead of heat so that it uses ambient heat as it"s actual hest source, then use the energy output to repeatedly and continuously replenish the "cold" as necessary.

There is not really any need to worry about where the energy is coming from. The real problem is WAY TOO MUCH ENERGY ALL AROUND ALREADY.

The real problem is how do you get rid of
all that excess energy that you don't need.

Luckily it is easier to get rid of excess energy than it is to make energy. The sun pumps PLENTY of energy into earth's atmosphere. Way way more than we could possibly ever utilize. In fact we can't utilize it at all until we start throwing a whole lot of it away.

Finding "free energy" isn't the problem. The problem is getting rid of the energy excess .
Tom,

YES, I first suggested that the Drinking Bird was an embodiment of Tesla's "Self-acting Engine" in a lecture I gave in 2012. The Drinking Bird was invented in China sometime before 1922, when Albert Einstein reported being amused by one in a shop in Shanghai. Whether the inventor knew of Tesla's idea of an atmospheric heat engine is not known. What is known is that he solved Tesla's criteria for creating an artificial "cold spot" that could constantly replenish itself using a natural process, thereby allowing the device to draw in heat from the ambient air and channel it through the device and produce mechanical energy in the process. So, evaporation of water creates the cold spot, and the confined dichloromethane expanding and contracting changes the balance point of the Bird so that it alternately becomes either "top heavy" or "bottom heavy," creating its "drinking motions" on its stand.

The other important lesson of the Drinking Bird is that it shows that even small temperature differentials can be sufficient to demonstrate the complete cycle in a well engineered device. I own a couple of Drinking Birds and have played with them quite a bit. Interestingly, they work better with warm water than with cold water. They work best on a warm day with low relative humidity. On days of moderate humidity, once the Bird's head is wet, it will bob up and down for up to 30 minutes without needing anymore water. Under most other conditions, the Bird works better when drinking from a cup of isopropol alcohol, since it evaporates more easily and accentuates the cooling process. Continuous use of isopropol alcohol is not recommended however, because it is not good to breathe and may degrade the glue holding the red felt to the Bird's glass head.

The point is, Tesla was right and it IS possible to build an engine on these principles. The question is: when is humanity going to perfect this machine at an industrial scale and provide itself with unlimited energy from the Sun, 24/7?

Peter

Last edited by Peter Lindemann; 08-28-2016 at 08:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 08-28-2016, 08:30 PM
Tom Booth Tom Booth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Fort Plain, New York, USA
Posts: 50
Well this is interesting I suppose.

Someone had posted a thermal image video of a lamina flow type Stirling engine to YouTube quite a while back.

There were some comments on this video to the effect that it was quite surprising that it appeared that very little if any heat at all was migrating to the cold "sink" end of the engine.

The "heat flow" actually appeared entirely static. Basically it appeared that the heat was in effect being "destroyed" or converted into mechanical energy before it went anywhere in the engine. The cold "sink" end of the engine did not get hot and then dissipate the heat. It just stayed cold, apparently at ambient.

I posted this video several times in the past in various forums in an effort to show that heat in a Stirling Engine did not actually make it to the "sink", and that therefore Tesla's ideas were actually quite practical and "do-able"

That is, an ambient heat engine running "on ice" or a "cold hole" could potentially run forever as the ambient heat would not be going THROUGH the engine but would rather be entirely converted into mechanical energy.

The "Laws" of thermodynamics dictate that SOME heat absolutely MUST flow through the engine, but personally I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT!!!!

It is important when considering these issues to understand how "thermal efficiency" is actually reckoned.

A Stirling Engine could be entirely "SELF ACTING" it could run "on ice" indefinitely or even chill the ice colder than freezing indefinitely and perhaps even produce a bit of power to light a light bulb or something and "THEY" (the staunch proponents of the 2nd law of thermodynamics) would still say that such an engine was "inefficient". maybe it would only be 2% efficient if it could light a LED and run "forever". It could actually run forever with no external energy output. Just keep itself running and it would be 0% efficient, but this would still be a "Self Acting Engine".

Thermal efficiency is therefore not really an issue that prevents a heat engine from being "Self Acting".

I went to find this video to post here, but unfortunately it no longer exists.

This is the link where it had been previously located.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PflY-AFp15c



Here is a more recent video I found of a different type of Stirling Engine. The Temperature difference is not so prominent in this video as it appeared in the other video of the lamina flow type engine but I suppose it is still interesting.



I think these "Toy" LTD Stirlings are "less efficient" than the Lamina Flow engine type. Heat rises. Hot air rises. Therefore I think this newer video of the LTD engine would show the effect I'm talking about more clearly if it were running on ice rather than a hot cup of coffee.

Ice underneath the engine that is with ambient heat on top. rather than the heat on the bottom.

Last edited by Tom Booth; 08-28-2016 at 08:43 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 08-28-2016, 08:41 PM
Tom Booth Tom Booth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Fort Plain, New York, USA
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Lindemann View Post
Tom,

YES, I first suggested that the Drinking Bird was an embodiment of Tesla's "Self-acting Engine" in a lecture I gave in 2012. The Drinking Bird was invented in China sometime before 1922, when Albert Einstein reported being amused by one in a shop in Shanghai. Whether the inventor knew of Tesla's idea of an atmospheric heat engine is not known. What is known is that he solved Tesla's criteria for creating an artificial "cold spot" that could constantly replenish itself using a natural process, thereby allowing the device to draw in heat from the ambient air and channel it through the device and produce mechanical energy in the process. So, evaporation of water creates the cold spot, and the confined dichloromethane expanding and contracting changes the balance point of the Bird so that it alternately becomes either "top heavy" or "bottom heavy," creating its "drinking motions" on its stand.

The other important lesson of the Drinking Bird is that it shows that even small temperature differentials can be sufficient to demonstrate the complete cycle in a well engineered device. I own a couple of Drinking Birds and have played with them quite a bit. Interestingly, they work better with warm water than with cold water. They work best on a warm day with low relative humidity. On days of moderate humidity, once the Bird's head is wet, it will bob up and down for up to 30 minutes without needing anymore water. Under most other conditions, the Bird works better when drinking from a cup of isopropol alcohol, since it evaporates more easily and accentuates the cooling process. Continuous use of isopropol alcohol is not recommended however, because it is not good to breathe and may degrade the glue holding the red felt to the Bird's glass head.

The point is, Tesla was right and it IS possible to build an engine on these principles. The question is: when is humanity going to perfect this machine at an industrial scale and provide itself with unlimited energy from the Sun, 24/7?

Peter
I don't personally have the resources to do any large scale manufacturing, but what I can do, and am currently in the process of doing is to perfect a small working model engine.

I would like to produce and distribute as many of these small model engines as possible.

I believe that if a principle is sound, it can be done on any scale.

What I imagine would be something like a small "self acting engine" that could sit on someones end table and run a night light or a table lamp, or possibly serve as a cell phone recharging station.

Anyone who sees such a thing would immediately see the possibility of scaling it up to power a home.

Something not very different from or any bigger than the little "toy" Stirling Engines already available on the market.

Just put an ice cube in the bottom to get it started.

Something similar to this:



Stirling Charger V 2.0 - Charge your phone with a candle!| Interesting Engineering

But not needing a candle.


Just by way of a warning. There is some similar project on Kickstarter alleging to be making or planning to produce a Stirling Engine cell phone charger.

As far as I can see this is a total scam IMO. the thing looks nothing like any conceivable working Stirling Engine. I don't believe that it could possibly work as advertised and would not put any money into it, though thousands of people obviously already have. View the updates/comments. backers of this project are pissed off and want their money back.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...ck/description
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Charger-V.-2.0.jpg (23.0 KB, 126 views)

Last edited by Tom Booth; 08-28-2016 at 09:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 08-29-2016, 05:56 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,192
How About This?

Hey Tom,

I love the way you think. So, this is sort of what I think you are talking about, right?

A Stirling Engine made with a rotary displacer made of Styrofoam running a "piston" made from a balloon (or plastic bag) held in a small "bellows" type of structure. If the hinge on the bellows structure was hanging downward, it could rock back and forth across a balance point and act like a pendulum while driving the crank shaft. In this way, 98% of the momentum in the moving parts could be conserved. This "proof of concept" design would need very little critical machine work and could be scaled easily from the size of your hand up to the size of your kitchen with very few modifications.

The top of the rotary displacer is the hot side, which can be painted black to absorb more frequencies of light and convert them into infrared, and under the bottom of the displacer is a small, highly insulated box (at least R-200) to hold your initiating ice cube. The insulated box should be painted white of covered with aluminum foil to act as a "radiant barrier" to heat absorption. Larger models would have the displacer half buried underground.

If you are right about the ice cube never melting, and I agree that by tweaking the phase relationship between the power piston and the displacer you should be able to produce some cooling at the end of the stroke, then this could be the beginning of a practical design!!

LOL. Here is a post I made to another thread on Stirling Engines in 2014. Scaled up solar Stirling Its almost the same idea, except it is designed to run on solar heated water.

Awesome!

Peter

Last edited by Peter Lindemann; 08-29-2016 at 08:43 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 08-30-2016, 03:31 AM
Tom Booth Tom Booth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Fort Plain, New York, USA
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Lindemann View Post
Hey Tom,

I love the way you think. So, this is sort of what I think you are talking about, right?

A Stirling Engine made with a rotary displacer made of Styrofoam running a "piston" made from a balloon (or plastic bag) held in a small "bellows" type of structure. If the hinge on the bellows structure was hanging downward, it could rock back and forth across a balance point and act like a pendulum while driving the crank shaft. In this way, 98% of the momentum in the moving parts could be conserved. This "proof of concept" design would need very little critical machine work and could be scaled easily from the size of your hand up to the size of your kitchen with very few modifications.

The top of the rotary displacer is the hot side, which can be painted black to absorb more frequencies of light and convert them into infrared, and under the bottom of the displacer is a small, highly insulated box (at least R-200) to hold your initiating ice cube. The insulated box should be painted white of covered with aluminum foil to act as a "radiant barrier" to heat absorption. Larger models would have the displacer half buried underground.

If you are right about the ice cube never melting, and I agree that by tweaking the phase relationship between the power piston and the displacer you should be able to produce some cooling at the end of the stroke, then this could be the beginning of a practical design!!

LOL. Here is a post I made to another thread on Stirling Engines in 2014. Scaled up solar Stirling Its almost the same idea, except it is designed to run on solar heated water.

Awesome!

Peter
I really like your idea for a heat engine using the two 55 gallon drums!



Quite an ingenious design! Much more creative than anything I've come up with, So I guess I'd have to say no, that is quite different from what I had in mind, but I LIKE IT!

My idea was more along the lines of what someone said later in that thread, about a more conventional Stirling running a heat pump. The heat pump maintaining the temperature differential.

The KEY to making that work, according to Tesla, is NOT to worry about using the heat pump for heating the hot end of the Stirling. That is an uphill battle. RATHER let AMBIENT HEAT take care of providing heat.There is already an abundance of heat in the ambient. Rather, concentrate on using the heat pump to keep the cold hole cold.

Convert the ambient heat into mechanical energy with the Stirling "on the downwatd flow". In this way the cold hole stays relatively cold, but some heat will get in no mater how well it is insulated.

Remember, if you unplug a deep freezer or the power goes out, the food in the freezer will stay frozen for three days. Probably more if it was better insulated.

So, if you run a Stirling on ambient heat only, with a heat pump providing cold, The heat pump may only need to run intermitantly, possibly only a few hours every other day or so. The rest of the time the Stirling can be running free on ambient heat until the "freezer" begins to thaw out a bit. Then the heat pump can kick in for a while again. THE HEAT extracted from the "cold hole" (your freezer) can be put right onto the hot ambient side so while the heat pump is running, the stirling gets a boost of extra heat.

This is what Tesla meant when he said that whatever heat makes it into the cold hole could simply be pumped out "using it's own energy".

But to try to use the heat pump to provide above ambient heat all the time would be a mistake. You would be running the heat pump too long trying to get heat out where there isn't any. Once the heat pump re-establishes a good cold freez in the ice box or cold hole its done as much work as it can do. Continuing to run the heat pump any longer than absolutely necessary to keep the cold hole cold would be a complete waste of energy.

Now, what I'm describing above would be for a conventional closed system heat pump.

My intention is to use an open air-cycle refrigetation systrm which is a slightly different animal and would probably run continually at a temperature much colder than ice. But there too, the focus is on generating COLD with the heat pump. In the case of the air-cycle, To get really cold temperatures it will be necessary to discard a great deal of heat. I'm afraid that won't make sense but it is easier to use a heat pump to throw away heat at a lower temperature than to try to use it to maintain a very high above ambient temperature. Ambient is plenty hot enough in reality.

The idea is to use the mechanical energy generated by the Stitling to maintain the cold sink AT ALL COST, even if you just have to dump the majority of that heat back to ambient.

Trying to use the hest pump to create heat for the engine much above ambient for any great length of time looses the advantage of extracting energy, or rather, converting it on its DOWNWARD below ambient flow.

Last edited by Tom Booth; 08-30-2016 at 12:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 08-30-2016, 04:19 AM
Tom Booth Tom Booth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Fort Plain, New York, USA
Posts: 50
BTW, the thing about tweaking the displacer action or phase shift to in effect turn a running Stirling engine into its own "cryocooler" at a certain part of the cycle is a different idea altogether, which, if it could work, that would do away with the need for any additional or outside heat pump.

A stirling engine runs on heat, but if driven, it becomes a heat pump.

I've actually been giving this a lot of thought the past few days. It seems to me it might just work but it would require a different mechanism to dtive the displacer than what you have in a conventional Stirling. Something like a cam that would delay the movement of the displacer until the critical moment and then kick it to the other end suddenly, then kick it back again suddenly at the next critical moment after another delay.

The idea being for 1/2 cycle the heat engine is a heat engine that stores energy in the flywheel. For the other 1/2 cycle the heat engine is a cryocooler driven by the energy stored in the flywheel during the first 1/2 cycle.

A displacer that simply follows the rotation of the crankshaft at a 45 degree phase shift would not do at all I don't think.

There would have to be a sharp and sudden demarcation between the two functions, but really, a Stirling engine already does this to a degree but in a sloppy way so that the power phase and cooling phase overlap and in effect cancel each other out or fight against each other.

That's how it looks to me anyway. I think that really is how it is.

A relatively minor modification to a standard Stirling actually.

If only the displacer could just appear at one end and then suddenly teleport and appear at the other end... that is almost what you want.
Reply With Quote
  #141  
Old 08-30-2016, 06:20 AM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,192
Sort of like this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Booth View Post
BTW, the thing about tweaking the displacer action or phase shift to in effect turn a running Stirling engine into its own "cryocooler" at a certain part of the cycle is a different idea altogether, which, if it could work, that would do away with the need for any additional or outside heat pump.

A stirling engine runs on heat, but if driven, it becomes a heat pump.

I've actually been giving this a lot of thought the past few days. It seems to me it might just work but it would require a different mechanism to dtive the displacer than what you have in a conventional Stirling. Something like a cam that would delay the movement of the displacer until the critical moment and then kick it to the other end suddenly, then kick it back again suddenly at the next critical moment after another delay.

The idea being for 1/2 cycle the heat engine is a heat engine that stores energy in the flywheel. For the other 1/2 cycle the heat engine is a cryocooler driven by the energy stored in the flywheel during the first 1/2 cycle.

A displacer that simply follows the rotation of the crankshaft at a 45 degree phase shift would not do at all I don't think.

There would have to be a sharp and sudden demarcation between the two functions, but really, a Stirling engine already does this to a degree but in a sloppy way so that the power phase and cooling phase overlap and in effect cancel each other out or fight against each other.

That's how it looks to me anyway. I think that really is how it is.

A relatively minor modification to a standard Stirling actually.

If only the displacer could just appear at one end and then suddenly teleport and appear at the other end... that is almost what you want.
Tom,

I showed a machine design like this in my lecture on Open System Thermodynamics in 2013, a year before that other thread started.



It is a combination of a regenerative heat pump and a Stirling Style heat engine in the center. Each of the Rotary Vane devices is meant to operate on a common shaft. They are shown sideways to convey their functions. All heat and mechanical energy are recycled and conserved in the system. The outer loop circulates dry nitrogen so freezing temperatures are not a problem. The inner areas of the expansion engine in the center are filled with Carbon Dioxide gas which has explosive expansion characteristics in the 0 to 100F temperature range. The dry nitrogen does not enter the rotating vane structure of the central engine. Only its heat is conveyed through heat exchangers in and out of the Carbon Dioxide. The image illustrates this as a surface contact between the two sections.

The important idea here is that the "source of the heat" for the expansion engine is also the "sink for the heat" on the contraction side after the Nitrogen is re-expanded. This was Tesla's great discovery; that the heat used to produce the mechanical energy in the engine could be recovered and recycled to do it again and again! This is WHY he did NOT believe in the Second Law of Thermodynamics!!!

In actual application, I'd use two "scroll compressors" to provide the compression and expansion functions in the outer two sections. The multiple Rotary Vane design is meant to convey the ideas, not a practical embodiment. But this machine is difficult and expensive to build using Nitrogen and Carbon Dioxide as working fluids.

The point is, with two, back-to-back scroll compressors (available commercially), a temperature swing of 200F can be created continuously while recovering 65% of the mechanical energy needed to drive the compressor. This small mechanical requirement is all the Stirling Engine has to overcome to establish "self-running" operation. Using a rotary displacer and a weight-balanced piston drive, the power section can conserve 90% of its motional momentum, as well. Even using air as the sole working fluid in the system, a machine that produces 0.5kw may not have to be any larger than 3' x 3' x 8' long (72 cubic feet). By keeping the diameter down, it may be able to reach some reasonable speeds, as well.

I think we are closer to understanding how to do this than we give ourselves credit for.

Peter
Attached Images
File Type: jpg SAE slide2.jpg (79.5 KB, 116 views)

Last edited by Peter Lindemann; 08-30-2016 at 05:38 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 08-31-2016, 12:10 AM
Tom Booth Tom Booth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Fort Plain, New York, USA
Posts: 50
I think the dual displacer machine could certainly operate as any stirling engine would on a temperature difference, possibly quite well. I've been pondering some different designs based on your drawing. The exact linkages and such.

It has stimulated my imagination quite a bit and seems perfectly do-able in vatious ways. I might, if you wouldn't mind, try putting together a small model or two, using empty tin cans rather thsn 55 gallon drums to start with. I'm not very hopeful it could be made "self acting" though as rotary displacers tend to be less efficient generally due to the fact that when 1/2 way around the hot and cold gas or air will mix and rob some power. Also there is no way I can think of to incorporate any kind of regenerator.

This other machine with the Stirling between the compressor and expander I can only get some general idea of, but should confess, don't quite understand.

The "Stirling like heat engine" in the middle doesn't look like a Stirling. I'm not really familiar with the workings of a "regenerative heat pump" and can not find any real information about the same so with that one I'm afraid I'm kind of lost, Though it does bear some resemblance to some of my own designs in a way, but only very vaguely. The Stirling driving an air-cycle heat pump in particular, which incorporates an expander and compressor in a "bootstrap" configuration with the Stirling between the hot and cold heat exchangers.

I think I may have an old drawing up somewhere on another forum.I'll see if I can find something.
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 08-31-2016, 12:36 AM
Tom Booth Tom Booth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Fort Plain, New York, USA
Posts: 50
This is also a very rough "concept drawing" that conveys little or nothing as far as the workings of the Stirling, which is shown more or less as a "black box" without any linkage.

The turbo-expander is also shown as NOT in a bootstrap here. That is, not on the same shaft as the compressor.

At any rate it seems we're thinking along the same or at least similar lines conceptually, even if the drawings are not up to any kind of real enginering standards. LOL.

Attached Images
File Type: jpg Concept.jpg (55.0 KB, 96 views)

Last edited by Tom Booth; 08-31-2016 at 01:07 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 08-31-2016, 05:28 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,192
Something Like This...

Hey Tom,

I didn't mean to make things difficult to understand. Apparently, a lot of people have been working on ideas like this. Here is a diagram of a twin, rotary displacer Stirling Engine with a twin piston drive by Michael Rosola.



In addition to this, all I am suggesting, as you are, is to produce the hot and cold sides using a heat pump cycle of compressing and expanding a working fluid .... preferably air. When the compressor and the expander are placed on the same drive shaft, a large percentage of the mechanical work needed to compress the air is recovered during expansion, thereby reducing the NET work needed to produce the temperature gradient.

Michael Rosola also suggests that by using the twin acting piston system, both sides of the machine can be sealed and the air in the displacer/drive piston area can also be raised to a higher pressure than ambient, increasing the pressure differentials on either side of the drive pistons and increasing mechanical energy production for the same amount of heat moving through the engine. Also, by using graphite as the piston material, a good, low friction, self-lubricating seal can be maintained.

The web page that discusses Michael Rosola's ideas is here: https://rosola.wordpress.com/home/pr...ling-engine-2/

Hope this helps.

Peter

Last edited by Peter Lindemann; 08-31-2016 at 05:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 09-01-2016, 05:22 AM
Tom Booth Tom Booth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Fort Plain, New York, USA
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Lindemann View Post
Hey Tom,

I didn't mean to make things difficult to understand.
I'm not sure "difficult to understand" is the right way to put it.

I'll readily admit that if I were to hand one of my concept drawings to an engineer he or she would probaly throw me or laugh me out of his or her office.

If we are going to try and bridge the gap it may take subjecting these concepts and ideas to some critical analysis.

One of my favorite activities is to post this kind of stuff to some physics or engineering forum and ask "why wont this work" or "could this work".

Too often I find that my explainations are misunderstood, my drawings miss-interpreted, my theory of operation roundly of flipantly dismissed, or at best, perhaps patiently tollerated, usually tesulting in some impass where someone sites some quote about enthropy or the 2nd law or god forbid I end up stepping on some moderator's ego by trying to explain some point of fact that I have studied in depth, sometimes with my jaw dropping, but checked and doubble checked the facts from dozens of textbooks and professional sources...

Just for example, I got into a quite lengthy debate on one physics forum over the function and operation of a turbo-expander.

The guy just couldn't get it through my head that a Turbo-Expander is, or must be driven by a motor. He insisted that an expansion turbine is not driven by the expanding gas but rather the turbine, itself driven by a motor, expands the gas. You can't get energy from an expansion turbine he insisted, the expansion turbine takes energy.

As you can probably imagine he failed miserably in his efforts to enlighten me due to my stuborn "refusal to learn".

I think it is quite amazing that by getting a compressed gas to do work turning a turbine you get energy out of the gas and end up with "free refrigeration" as a byproduct. It does seem "too good to be true" and maybe "there is no free lunch". And of course, on a physics or engineering forum with dozens of trained professionals participating, you would think someone would chime in and say something. Like which one of us had the right idea???

Is an expansion turbine driven by expanding gas or does driving an expansion turbine with a motor force the gas passing through the turbine to expand?

But, nobody else ever chimed in on that one. No other physicists or engineer steped in to settle the argument. The topic is somewhat obscure so authoratative references are kind of hard to find and drawings and diagrams are open to interpretation...

I concluded, for the most part that what I was trying to explain about the expansion turbine was some kind of fairly well guarded "trade secret" of the petrol industry of which even the trained professionals in the field are kept mostly ignorant about, or had I completely lost my mind?

An expansion turbine IS damn well driven by the expanding gas. You can so damn well recoup some of the energy used to compress the gas in the process and this does damn straight result in a refrigerating effect, and this does seem rather bizzar and unbelievable when you think about it. BUT A FACT IS A FACT.

Unfortunately, I've come to the conclussion that there is no way to get the idea across without building the machine myself and demonstrating that it works, once and for all. But would that really be the end of it?

Do you know that the fact that compressed air creates heat was once construed some kind of "witchcraft" when it was demonstrated with some primitive device made out of sticks, probably setting back science and engineering some 200 years? Well is there any hope that a running Self-Acting engine as Tesla described wont cause people to cross themselves and pick up a sledge hammer to smash it or kill the wicked diablo making it turn without any observable physical means?

It srems to me you and I may be quite alone in this quest my good friend. We may have a hard road ahead if the intention is to actually build a functional engine. I don't know how much help we can count on.



https://youtu.be/Mvlm-BiCU2k

Quote:
Apparently, a lot of people have been working on ideas like this. Here is a diagram of a twin, rotary displacer Stirling Engine with a twin piston drive by Michael Rosola.



In addition to this, all I am suggesting, as you are, is to produce the hot and cold sides using a heat pump cycle of compressing and expanding a working fluid .... preferably air. When the compressor and the expander are placed on the same drive shaft, a large percentage of the mechanical work needed to compress the air is recovered during expansion, thereby reducing the NET work needed to produce the temperature gradient.

Michael Rosola also suggests that by using the twin acting piston system, both sides of the machine can be sealed and the air in the displacer/drive piston area can also be raised to a higher pressure than ambient, increasing the pressure differentials on either side of the drive pistons and increasing mechanical energy production for the same amount of heat moving through the engine. Also, by using graphite as the piston material, a good, low friction, self-lubricating seal can be maintained.

The web page that discusses Michael Rosola's ideas is here: https://rosola.wordpress.com/home/pr...ling-engine-2/

Hope this helps.

Peter

Last edited by Tom Booth; 09-01-2016 at 06:00 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 09-01-2016, 10:47 AM
citfta's Avatar
citfta citfta is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,323
Tom,

Have you considered a Tesla Turbine? It has been proven to be one of the most efficient designs. It is also much simpler to build. Anyone with reasonable machining skills and a lathe and milling machine can build one.

It can be used as an expansion turbine or a compressor/pump. With some fairly simple modifications it can even be used as a fuel driven turbine.

Carroll
__________________
Just because someone disagrees with you does NOT make them your enemy. We can disagree without attacking someone. This means YOU especially BroMikey.
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 09-01-2016, 02:56 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,192
Do Not Dispare, my friend...

Tom,

I am not concerned about whether other people believe this will work or not. Working models of new devices have never needed ignorant people to believe in them to work! I also have no expectation that there will be an immediate commercial market for these machines. That is also irrelevant! I am reminded of the fact that Archimedes invented the rotary screw pump in 600 BC to easily pump water out of the bottom of leaking boats. It took another 2,300 years before anybody else figured out that a thin slice of that very same screw could be used to actually PUSH a boat through the water! DUH! Today, we call it a propeller. To say that we belong to a group of people who really aren't that smart is an understatement!!!

Now, back to real science. There is no such thing as the "heat of compression." This idea was the brain child of James Joule and was part of his "proof" that mechanical energy could be converted into heat. He studied and published on at least 4 different methods to illustrate this process. They included: 1) running electricity through a resistor and measuring the temperature rise, 2) turning a paddle wheel in a tub of water and measuring the temperature rise, 3) pushing water through a conical sieve and measuring the temperature rise, and finally, 4) compressing a gas and measuring the temperature rise. The first three examples dissipate the initiating source energy to produce the temperature rise, but the fourth example does not!

Tesla did not believe in the "Laws of Thermodynamics".... end of story!! He openly published on the idea that electricity behaved more like a "gas under pressure" than anything else, and that electricity followed fluid dynamic laws much more closely than thermodynamic laws. Before the Kinetic Theory of heat became prominent, heat was considered similarly. Carnot, who believed in Caloric Theory, developed all of the math to build heat engines based on the idea that heat was a subtle fluid. This is also, absolutely, what I believe.

A volume of air is actually a volume of two fluids. One is the air and the other is its content of heat. Boyle's Gas Laws say that if I confine that volume of gas and mechanically force it into a volume half its size, both the pressure and the temperature will rise. This does not mean there is more HEAT in the system. It simply recognizes that both fluids were densified.

The external, mechanical pressure applied to the gas is expressed as a rise in the pressure of the gas itself. This does NOT represent an "energy conversion." Pressure was added to the gas and it exhibits more pressure within itself. The heat content of the gas is now also forced to express itself within half its original volume. This is the temperature rise! But this represents the densification of the heat that was already in the gas, NOT the production of "new heat" by the action of pressurizing the gas. Arguments like this were originally raised against Joule's thesis, but were eventually ignored as the proponents of Kinetic Theory pushed Joule's work forward as "proof" that Caloric Theory was bogus. But as you can see, it did not make this reality go away!

This is why you can compress a gas, remove some of its heat, decompress the gas and recover some (most) of its stored mechanical energy, and end up with refrigeration effects "seemingly" for free. People who fail to understand this are never going to comprehend WHY these machines can do what they do!! Everybody who has looked at this closely agrees that the "magic window" for highest benefits is moving back and forth between about 1 Bar and 2 Bars of pressure. The temperature swing is well over 250F and the pressure drop on the high side, after significant heat is removed, is still only about 0.5 psi. These are facts that can be harnessed to drive these machines!

Citfta,

The Tesla Turbine is an amazing machine. There is little doubt of that. But they are only efficient at very high speeds, usually above 10k rpm. In contrast to that, scroll compressors are a "positive displacement" compressor with a very high efficiency at almost any speed. For the kind of machine we are contemplating, I believe that the scroll compressor should be investigated first. Small scroll compressors with low compression ratios are available "off-the-shelf" and run well in reverse as expanders. Here is one example. https://airsquared.com/products/scro...2h020a-bldc-c/

Best regards,
Peter

Last edited by Peter Lindemann; 09-01-2016 at 11:59 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 09-01-2016, 10:10 PM
rosehillworks's Avatar
rosehillworks rosehillworks is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 175
Peter
Do you mean one or two bars variation at any PSI or is that one or two bars variation above atmospheric pressure?
Is there a specific pressure at which to Bar variation is the most effective?
Thanks.
__________________
William Reed
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 09-01-2016, 10:32 PM
rosehillworks's Avatar
rosehillworks rosehillworks is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 175
Peter
I hope I am not off track hare but wouldn't a double ended solenoid compressor Work well in this scenario?
__________________
William Reed
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 09-01-2016, 11:16 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,192
Reversability is the Key...

Quote:
Originally Posted by rosehillworks View Post
Peter
I hope I am not off track hare but wouldn't a double ended solenoid compressor Work well in this scenario?
William,

In general, the best window is between 1 Bar and 2 Bars, meaning between One Atmosphere (14.5 psi) and Two Atmospheres (29 psi).

The Key to this working is the ability to recover the mechanical energy needed to compress the gas. Tesla says in the article about the Self-acting Engine that he believed that his Mechanical Oscillator would work. The Mechanical Oscillator is essentially an AIR SPRING connected to a piston operated by compressed air. Tesla knew that his "air spring" was also a "thermal spring". The idea of an air compressor on the same shaft as an air expander with heat exchangers in-between is nothing more than an "air spring" with a delay in the two phases and a few higher losses from friction. Both ideas create similar effects, being a temperature gradient and the conservation of mechanical energy.

Thinking this all through again makes me believe that if we could convey the temperature swings generated in the air spring away quickly enough to an external air chamber, we might be able to operate a double sided expansion piston from the pressure changes. In this case, a Stirling type of engine could be produced where an "air spring" would replace both the displacer AND the hot and cold sources that power a double acting piston that moves back and forth from the pressure changes.

Maybe Tesla actually solved it and didn't tell anyone!!

Food for thought!!!

Peter

Last edited by Peter Lindemann; 09-01-2016 at 11:40 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

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.

Choose your voluntary subscription

For one-time donations, please use the below button.


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v1.4.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
2007-2015 Copyright - Energetic Forum - All Rights Reserved

Bedini RPX Sideband Generator

Tesla Chargers