Motor Generators

[straggl3r]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J18E2KTugOY

stellar!!!!!!!!!!!!

[straggl3r]

.....off topic

[straggl3r]

....off topic

[Rakarskiy]

Recently I had an argument with an adherent of the inviolability of orthodox physics, its branch of electrodynamics. For this reason, I put together in a logical chain my various publications and the idea to prove the absurdity of statements about the impossibility of creating a power plant where the drive will be a low-power electric motor. This work has distracted me from other tasks that I consider more important. What I stated in the publication is not news to me for a long time. This may be news to you.
I warn you, this is my understanding of electrodynamics (and is far from complete). I have no desire to convince anyone or start fights and discussions.

In the material I presented everything very clearly with examples. I tried to present this as simply as possible. If you claim the method of presentation according to the method: "tell me everything in a simpler way so that I understand, because I have no time to think," then do not bother familiarizing yourself with my works. I wish you all a pleasant and informative reading.

You can download it for free from the link (appended to the post):

ELECTRODYNAMICS OVER UNITY * DC MOTOR AND GENERATOR
eBook, 2024, PDF, 46 pages, English language, Free

[straggl3r]

.....off topic

[Rakarskiy]

https://www.patreon.com/posts/99391719?utm_campaign=postshare_creator

Regarding the first part of this patent at the end of the publication my experiment of a flyback converter (identical to the first block 220 of the patent) the second block 230 has to be checked because there it is not possible to try on a transformer model. Thanks for the link I will have a look

[straggl3r]

.....off topic

[Rakarskiy]

PROOF of OVERUNITY * DC MOTORS AND GENERATORS
1.jpg?token-time=1710547200&token-hash=uj7gyGKYgi8iger2T-OqvUcjddc6CD8Y36IlHVBcPps%3D.jpg

[straggl3r]

....off topic

[straggl3r]

....off topic

[Rakarskiy]

DE2733719A1 - Electric generator without external mechanical energy source - uses conventional generator and electric unit carrying field magnets and armature - Google Patents

In the Google Patent publication there are no figures mentioned in the patent. I have added them in the pdf version.

[Turion]

Can't argue with anything you said. It is all true. But that amp meter SEEMS TO BE set up for 60 htz, and does NOT give an accurate measurement no matter what. There HAVE been videos that I have received that show the input to the drive motor. This video just didn't happen to include that information. He doesn't have a scope, and he lives far from me. Like all the way across the country.

If the machine was in my shop, I could do those tests, if I hadn't loaned out my oscilloscope. But it is not, so I can't. The guys are back at it on my machine and when they have it working the way we want, I will travel to Sacramento and shoot some video that includes inputs and outputs. My board, which they have, has a volt meter and amp meter to measure the voltage and amperage produced by each coil PAIR, so that I could see the differences between coil pairs in case one of them had a problem, which turned out to be one of the problems with my friends machine, which we were able to solve by isolating coil pairs. When I have a video to post, I'll be back, otherwise I have other projects to work on.

[bistander]

Latest update from my friend. Still between 300/400 watts input and around 900 watts output.

I realize this is only half of what I claimed, 1800-2000 watts, which is what I had with my ORIGINAL machine, but here are the SIGNIFICANT differences between the two machines.

1. Core material in the ORIGINAL machine was iron. It got hot in 15-20 minutes and melted the coils. But the coil OUTPUT was DRAMATICALLY higher.

2. He is running at 2300 rpm. I was running at 2800-3000 rpm and the RPM just flat INCREASES THE OUTPUT. BY A LOT

I have explained that the current machine will NEVER output what my original machine did with the same number and size of coils because of the change in core material, but that doesn’t mean it DID NOT WORK, because it DID. No matter WHAT anyone here says. Just as this one works. Only this one does not work as WELL, simply because of the changes we have made to eliminate the overheating problem. The RPM can be adjusted upwards to INCREASE the output, but other changes have to be made to balance the system and keep it working correctly. If you understand what those changes need to be, it is just a TIME CONSUMING TASK to implement them through trial and error, but it can be done. If it was EASY, someone else would have already done it.

https://youtu.be/Kdlyt9pjAl0

I have shared all I am going to share on this machine. No one believes me anyway. And that's fine with me. I know what I know. It works. I know there are changes that can be made that will increase the output while improving efficiency. I have SEEN the effect of those changes. They are in the works on a new version of the machine, but thats for a different place and a different time. I would love to show up to the conference some year (definitely not THIS year) with a working version of this to demonstrate, but my machine is still in the shop!! And I know how many HOURS, DAYS AND WEEKS it took my friend to work out all the kinks in his setup. Even if I got it out of the shop tomorrow, there is no guarantee it would be ready in time for the conference. Once you have everything working correctly, you CAN replicate, but what two hand wound coils are the same? Differences MATTER. It is understanding what you have to do when you HAVE those differences.

And did I mention you can run between the positives and recover 85% of the input power? None of you believe in THAT either.

Here is an interesting example. I happen to know of a setup where 32 six volt batteries were gathered over a period of time from a place that has a lot of 6 volt golf cart batteries you can get for paying the "core charge". Some were no good, but some could be restored! EIghteen were put in series and 18 were put in parallel. A 48 volt inverter was put in between them running around 100 watts of load. It was run one direction for a while and then the parallel batteries were put in series and the series batteries put in parallel. Back and forth, over and over. It wasn't DONE this way to run a load, it was DONE to restore the batteries. The capacity of the batteries improves over time to greater than the listed capacity, and the charge that the batteries "reach" increases over time to over 14V, and rather than losing power, the total available power in the system has gone up. Those are facts. You can deny it is possible all you want, but what happens on the bench is what matters

Thanks for sharing Turion.

A couple of things:

You do not show input power (DC volts and DC amperes into motor would suffice). You state it is 300 to 400 watts. It does not seem to much to ask to take 5 seconds and film the meters simultaneously as you're running.

You have, as is shown in the video, and you say it, the current output wire looped around the clamp ammeter. This causes the meter reading to be twice (2 times) the actual current in the wire.

You do not measure power factor.

So there is no display during the video test giving input power or real output power, hence nothing to define power.

Another issue will be the output frequency/waveform which will likely be departure from 50/60 Hz sinusoidal. I thought you had a good scope. Why not use it along with the meters?

There are other ways to verify power, or energy. Easy to do, and convenient if you intend to loop it, is to rectify and filter the output, measure DC values. Load resistors would also give method to heat water and calculate caloric energy. Light bulb ratings are essentially useless.

bi

[Turion]

Latest update from my friend. Still between 300/400 watts input and around 900 watts output.

I realize this is only half of what I claimed, 1800-2000 watts, which is what I had with my ORIGINAL machine, but here are the SIGNIFICANT differences between the two machines.

1. Core material in the ORIGINAL machine was iron. It got hot in 15-20 minutes and melted the coils. But the coil OUTPUT was DRAMATICALLY higher.

2. He is running at 2300 rpm. I was running at 2800-3000 rpm and the RPM just flat INCREASES THE OUTPUT. BY A LOT

I have explained that the current machine will NEVER output what my original machine did with the same number and size of coils because of the change in core material, but that doesn’t mean it DID NOT WORK, because it DID. No matter WHAT anyone here says. Just as this one works. Only this one does not work as WELL, simply because of the changes we have made to eliminate the overheating problem. The RPM can be adjusted upwards to INCREASE the output, but other changes have to be made to balance the system and keep it working correctly. If you understand what those changes need to be, it is just a TIME CONSUMING TASK to implement them through trial and error, but it can be done. If it was EASY, someone else would have already done it.

https://youtu.be/Kdlyt9pjAl0

I have shared all I am going to share on this machine. No one believes me anyway. And that's fine with me. I know what I know. It works. I know there are changes that can be made that will increase the output while improving efficiency. I have SEEN the effect of those changes. They are in the works on a new version of the machine, but thats for a different place and a different time. I would love to show up to the conference some year (definitely not THIS year) with a working version of this to demonstrate, but my machine is still in the shop!! And I know how many HOURS, DAYS AND WEEKS it took my friend to work out all the kinks in his setup. Even if I got it out of the shop tomorrow, there is no guarantee it would be ready in time for the conference. Once you have everything working correctly, you CAN replicate, but what two hand wound coils are the same? Differences MATTER. It is understanding what you have to do when you HAVE those differences.

And did I mention you can run between the positives and recover 85% of the input power? None of you believe in THAT either.

Here is an interesting example. I happen to know of a setup where 32 six volt batteries were gathered over a period of time from a place that has a lot of 6 volt golf cart batteries you can get for paying the "core charge". Some were no good, but some could be restored! EIghteen were put in series and 18 were put in parallel. A 48 volt inverter was put in between them running around 100 watts of load. It was run one direction for a while and then the parallel batteries were put in series and the series batteries put in parallel. Back and forth, over and over. It wasn't DONE this way to run a load, it was DONE to restore the batteries. The capacity of the batteries improves over time to greater than the listed capacity, and the charge that the batteries "reach" increases over time to over 14V, and rather than losing power, the total available power in the system has gone up. Those are facts. You can deny it is possible all you want, but what happens on the bench is what matters

[Turion]

Latest update from my friend. Still between 300/400 watts input and around 900 watts output.

I realize this is only half of what I claimed, 1800-2000 watts, which is what I had with my ORIGINAL machine, but here are the significant differences.

1. Core material in that machine was iron. It got hot in 15-20 minutes and melted the coils. But the coil OUTPUT was dramatically higher.

2. He is running at 2300 rpm. I was running at 2800-3000 rpm and the RPM just flat increases the output. Again, by a LOT.

I have explained that the current machine will NEVER output what my original machine did with the same number and size of coils because of the change in core material, but that doesn’t mean it DOES NOT WORK, because it does. No matter WHAT anyone here says.

I will be posting his video here soon