The bistander thread

[bistander]

I never said my generator can’t get up to speed. ...

What does this mean then?

... , jut like the motor can't turn "at speed" when the rotor on the generator is in the presence of all those iron cores, so what it COULD do if it COULD get up to speed has nothing to do with reality. ...

Can you clear that up? I thought you were saying that the motor is unable to reach normal operating speed when your generator is attached and fully populated with cores.

bi

[Turion]

I never said my generator can’t get up to speed. Greyland has it humming right along at 3200 rpm outputting over 220 volts per coil. Not sure of the amp measurement yet. He is running it on 110 power and he hasn’t given me an amp draw of the motor yet, but the motor is rated at five amps and you can turn the rotor with one finger, so I doubt it’s pulling max amps. He and his son are supposed to shoot some video today with voltage in and voltage out to a load. Each coil will have the exact same load and is wound the exact same way, so people will have to trust that all coils are putting out the same amount at one time. They are going to attempt to loop the system today if everything works out. They were getting funky readings from one coil pair, so they were going to try and get that fixed first.

What are you going to do when we prove this works? Because it does. It doesn’t matter what you SAY. All that matters is what the machine actually does. I’ve seen it. I know what is possible.

[bistander]

...
And bi the way BS, you entirely MISSED the point of my example. You can't run with a car on your back in the FIRST place, jut like the motor can't turn "at speed" when the rotor on the generator is in the presence of all those iron cores, so what it COULD do if it COULD get up to speed has nothing to do with reality.
Remember this??? "Neither improve generator performance at speed and at load". Data, data, data ol' buddy. What's the use in providing it if you are just going to ignore it?

Wait a minute. You have claimed your generator put out 2000 watts of real power while using less than 300 watts input. Now you say it can't get up to speed? Is this admission your claim has been false all along?

And think about what you're saying. The motor that you use is a permanent magnet motor, right? It has magnets and core(s). It can also operate as a generator. And it has no problem working at and accelerating to those speeds. That's reality.

Regards,
bi

[bistander]

I knew that is EXACTLY what you would do. You can’t argue against the data I posted so you pick the fight you think you can win and ignore the data that proves you do not know what you are talking about. How about sticking to the point instead of focusing on garbage? How about admitting you you were wrong and don’t know what you are talking about? But you can’t admit you were wrong can you? How about that data BS. Data, Data, Data. You’ve been demanding it and when I provide it you ignore it. Truth hurts doesn't it? This was your FOURTH chance to address the data but again, you chose to ignore it.

Sorry, I had an appointment. I've waited years for you to back up your claim but you're upset I took a few hours to respond.

And what specific data is it that you want me to address?

Is it this?

"This is part of what I posted
"On another note, I did a video where I showed my big generator running with 0 coils in it and the motor running on 7 amps at 36 volts, and I don't remember the RPM, but I remember it was over 3,000. That was the baseline. Then I put four coils in the machine and it drew over 12 amps and the RPM was reduced by 500 RPM. " "

O.K. Kind of sloppy. Not much in the way of experimental conditions. But I see nothing unusual about those numbers, assuming your coils had cores, the cores were responsible for much, most or even all the loading of the prime mover motor. Conventional coils (w/o cores) would make no difference if open circuit. Bifilar coils have been shown to load the system even when open circuit. Your data doesn't specify coil load. Your data also doesn't specify if it is in a equilibrium state, is it?

In your post, you included:

!!!

"But like I've said numerous times, it, along with your other scheme, doesn't affect output at load" (referring to magnetic neutralization and "neutral" coils)

AND A COUPLE POSTS LATER

"Neither improve generator performance at speed and at load" (referring to magnetic neutralization and "neutral" coils)

!!!

The quotes refer back to my statements from previous posts. And they appear in tact. Thank you for that. You've added parentheses to show some context. Thank you.

What is it you don't understand? I realize that you disagree with me. I state conventional wisdom (truth or fact as the rest of the scientific community sees it) and you believe in your own theories. That's why you need to prove what you claim. How does 5 amps more and about 500 RPM less disprove what I said in those two quotes?

I guess that you have changed what you call your bifilar coil scheme from "speed up under load" to "neutral" coils. Is that correct?

I have not stated or claimed anything wrong, false or incorrect regarding my analysis of your generator. You certainly have not provided any proof to show me wrong.

What is the point of all this? Free energy, right? Energy available to mankind without burning natural resources or using solar power, wind, hydro or renewables. So it is reasonable that a claim of a device (generator) which puts out 2 kilowatts of real power while requiring less than 300 watts input is providing 1700 watts of free power. Correct? And it is also reasonable to infer this claim, in regards to free energy, to be non transient. In other words, 1700 watts for minutes continuously, or hours, or years. Modern machinery can easily run for years with continuous output without interruption. So why wouldn't your 1700 watt free energy generator be used to power a household, or other load like pumping clean water for years without interruption? This is what I mean by "at speed and at load". Doing what a generator is designed to do. Of course it needs to initially start and accelerate. But that condition is rare. Why dwell on it? Something which happens for a few seconds a year. Forget about it. Use a starter motor if you have to. Deal with the steady state equilibrium performance first. 2 kilowatts output real power using 300 watts input, on a continuous basis. Prove that first.

Regards,
bi

[Turion]

I knew that is EXACTLY what you would do. You can’t argue against the data I posted so you pick the fight you think you can win and ignore the data that proves you do not know what you are talking about. How about sticking to the point instead of focusing on garbage? How about admitting you you were wrong and don’t know what you are talking about? But you can’t admit you were wrong can you? How about that data BS. Data, Data, Data. You’ve been demanding it and when I provide it you ignore it. Truth hurts doesn't it? This was your FOURTH chance to address the data but again, you chose to ignore it.


And bi the way BS, you entirely MISSED the point of my example. You can't run with a car on your back in the FIRST place, jut like the motor can't turn "at speed" when the rotor on the generator is in the presence of all those iron cores, so what it COULD do if it COULD get up to speed has nothing to do with reality.
Remember this??? "Neither improve generator performance at speed and at load". Data, data, data ol' buddy. What's the use in providing it if you are just going to ignore it?

[bistander]

...

But about DATA......I posted data PROVING that magnetic neutralization affects the RPM and the amp draw of the motor. This in turn affects the OUTPUT of the generator, which means the overall performance of the generator is SIGNIFICANTLY impacted by magnetic neutralization. It decreases watts in. Meaning HIGHER efficiency of the two pieces (motor and generator) working together, and It increases watts out from the generator.

This is part of what I posted
"On another note, I did a video where I showed my big generator running with 0 coils in it and the motor running on 7 amps at 36 volts, and I don't remember the RPM, but I remember it was over 3,000. That was the baseline. Then I put four coils in the machine and it drew over 12 amps and the RPM was reduced by 500 RPM. "

ADDING COILS INCREASED THE AMP DRAW OF THE MOTOR. THE MORE COILS ADDED, THE GREATER THE AMP DRAW OF THE MOTOR. ALSO THE MORE COILS ADDED THE MORE THE RPM OF THE MOTOR WAS REDUCED. EACH COIL ADDED HAD A GREATER EFFECT THAN THE PREVIOUS COIL, SO THE MORE YOU ADD THE WORSE EACH INDIVIDUAL ADDITION AFFECTS THE PERFORMANCE OF THE MOTOR. IN THE WORLD I LIVE IN THE REDUCED PERFORMANCE OF THE MOTOR AFFECTS THE OUTPUT OF THE GENERATOR.

bistander choose to ignore the data and a few posts later said this:

"But like I've said numerous times, it, along with your other scheme, doesn't affect output at load" (referring to magnetic neutralization and "neutral" coils)

AND A COUPLE POSTS LATER

"Neither improve generator performance at speed and at load" (referring to magnetic neutralization and "neutral" coils)

Now, I don't know about YOU guys, but in MY mind, if I can keep the amp draw of there motor from going up, that is a positive thing, and worth investigating. In meh world, when the RPM of the motor DROPS, so does the output of the generator it is turning, which, if I am not mistaken, affects the output of the generator. So to say that magnetic neutralization is of no benefit is just STUPID. Oh, but he didn't SAY that did he? He inferred it, which is a TOTALLY different thing.

The king of semantics is very careful with his word choice. bI says "Neither improve generator performance at speed and at load". He is assuming you REACH "speed" despite the fact that speed will be reduced because of the effect additional coils have on the performance of the motor and therefore the generator.

That's like saying "If I can run sixty miles an hour with a car on my back, the car is not an issue." You would be absolutely right! An idiot, but SEMANTICALLY correct.

I think from now on I will just refer to BiStander as BS. let's keep it simple

Turion,

It's not the semantics, it's the concept which you fail to comprehend and accept. Both I and Newton stipulate "no outside forces acting on the mass". So yes, "If I can run sixty miles an hour with a car on my back, the car is not an issue.", that is exactly what Newton and I claim. At a constant 60 mph, in the absence of gravity and aero drag, the car on your back is no different than a semi truck on your back, or a skateboard on your back. If fact, you need not even run, the 60 mph velocity would continue at 60 mph, until acted on by an external force.

And that's no BS.
bi
I'll address more of the above quote, again, later. Gotta run. Sit in a car actually and let it run against the external forces.

[bistander]

Assuming a 1" diameter 0.5 thick N50 Neo magnet with a 0.125 gap between them the attractive force would be just slightly over 100 lbs. Of course I'm making assumptions on the "gap" between them that was machined into the rotor. Anyway just a thought... It's worked well on some misgivings of projects in the past.

Looks like I was too quick on my assumption. Maybe it would've worked. Worth a closer look and possible try next time if needed. I looked at attractive force calculator on KJ Magnetics web site. Notice that attractive force is same to steel plate as to another magnet.

Thanks,
bi

[dragon]

Assuming a 1" diameter 0.5 thick N50 Neo magnet with a 0.125 gap between them the attractive force would be just slightly over 100 lbs. Of course I'm making assumptions on the "gap" between them that was machined into the rotor. Anyway just a thought... It's worked well on some misgivings of projects in the past.

[bistander]

Drill a small hole on the outer rim center of the magnets you want to remove, use air pressure to blow it out...

Hi dragon,

Good idea, but say at 150, or 200psi and maybe 1 sq.in., I imagine magnetic attractive force is greater than that 200 pounds provided by the compressed air. However such a small hole as a vent may have made assembly much smoother.

Regards,
bi

[dragon]

Not too messy. Good job.
bi
image_23628.jpg

Drill a small hole on the outer rim center of the magnets you want to remove, use air pressure to blow it out...

[bistander]

... All I want to do is prove that what I have been saying is true.
...

Me too.

Thanks,
bi

[bistander]

Not too messy. Good job.
bi
image_23628.jpg

[bistander]

The simple fact is, you are wrong.
But let's take a look at what you said, because you are all about semantics

"Magnetic Neutralization reduces cogging."
Wrong. High speed reduces the EFFECT of cogging. Cogging is The PHYSICAL reaction of the magnets to the iron cores. It NEVER goes COMPLETELY away. Not even at high speed. You just can't see it because the intervals between incidents are so much shorter. Almost a CONSTANT. But the attraction is still there. It is a magnetic DRAG that NEVER goes away. Unless of course you use magnetic neutralization, in which case the amp draw of the motor goes DOWN, reducing input to the system. The rpm of the motor goes UP, resulting in the speed of the generator going UP also, which means the output is greater. I posted three videos showing this beyond a doubt. I presented the data from those videos a few posts ago. But as usual, you IGNORE that which proves you wrong. You might enjoy reading the original patent and the university research that was done to VERIFY said patent. Bertil WERJEFELT Magnetic Battery. This is OLD tech that I read about and applied to my generator.

"Bifilar Coils increase open circuit power input."

When used as GENERATOR coils at the WRONG FREQUENCY, YES, the do. But only a moron would run them at the incorrect frequency. Since all YOUR experience with them seems to have had negative results, I must assume that you are running them at the incorrect frequency, where they cause the motor to speed up when they are put under load. That does not speak well of you. At the correct frequency they do exactly what we want them to do. They output MORE than the standard coil because they have greater capacitance. They do NOT affect the operation of the prime mover in the way that a standard coil does, so the OUTPUT of the generator is higher and the INPUT to the prime mover is less. It is not slowed when the coil is put under load. These are the facts. That you are unable to accept them is YOUR problem, not mine.




That larger mass has more WEIGHT too. (Those with half a brain understand that) There is a cost over time to get that additional weight up to speed. If you can't see that, I'm sorry for you.

Newton and I've have always stipulated at a constant speed, which this time was inferred by you saying "turning" instead of accelerating.

bi

[BroMikey]

The old folks heart throb of century motors. Freshening it up for another 100. Bye motor talk centers
around these. Good luck with that.

[BroMikey]

This is why Bye can't understand, he has this motor. Stolen from his vac.