Basic Free Energy Device

[Dbowling]

MarkE
[size=78%]Do you REALLY think that most people who work on this stuff in their garage are going to have the kinds of meters you are talking about? We want folks to replicate this and see for themselves, and MOST people aren't going to spend the money.[/size]



[size=78%]I have five digital meters and four analogue meters. I have two scopes and several other meters. I got a brand new RMS meter yesterday. There is a digital output of volts and amps on the front of the power supply I was using to power the thing. So I have measured the inputs and outputs with quality meters and with my scope. What the Harbor Freight meter showed is close enough. I also have a bunch of those panel meters with different ranges, and for rough calculations they are just fine. [/size]


I have several of the couplings you mentioned. I don't recall seeing ones that joined different sized shafts, and I know the center piece of different sized ones is also a different size. But I will look again.


As for input vs output and this thing only being 35% efficient. (I THINK that's what you said, and can't look back while in "response') I know you don't believe the circuit I posted works, but I still say we can recover better than 80% of the power used to run the motor. IF that is true, does it matter that more amps are pulled through the motor to run loads (from one source) and deposited in a storage device (battery) on the other side? Nope. Because then you switch those two out and do it all over again. But even if that were NOT true. I can run this unit on 5 amps (with no load) at 12 volts or 60 watts (and I say I can recover 80% of THAT..), and produce 300 watts that can be dumped into caps or batteries and THEN used to power loads from there. That has ALWAYS been my intention. I never intended to use this as a direct generator to run lights or loads. Collect all the voltage and run it through a step down transformer to increase the amps to a point where batteries will charge and I believe it is worth the time to explore what is here. If that will not work, I guess this is a bust.


Dave

[MarkE]

MarkE
[size=78%]Do you REALLY think that most people who work on this stuff in their garage are going to have the kinds of meters you are talking about? We want folks to replicate this and see for themselves, and MOST people aren't going to spend the money.[/size]



[size=78%]I have five digital meters and four analogue meters. I have two scopes and several other meters. I got a brand new RMS meter yesterday. There is a digital output of volts and amps on the front of the power supply I was using to power the thing. So I have measured the inputs and outputs with quality meters and with my scope. What the Harbor Freight meter showed is close enough. I also have a bunch of those panel meters with different ranges, and for rough calculations they are just fine. [/size]


I have several of the couplings you mentioned. I don't recall seeing ones that joined different sized shafts, and I know the center piece of different sized ones is also a different size. But I will look again.


As for input vs output and this thing only being 35% efficient. (I THINK that's what you said, and can't look back while in "response') I know you don't believe the circuit I posted works, but I still say we can recover better than 80% of the power used to run the motor.

I relied on your figures of:  13V 8A on the input after the initial 20A plus transient and 35V 0.7A output.  For that to be valid both the input and output need to be steady state or resistive.  Otherwise, we cannot multiply the average voltage and average current and obtain an accurate answer.

IF that is true, does it matter that more amps are pulled through the motor to run loads (from one source) and deposited in a storage device (battery) on the other side? Nope. Because then you switch those two out and do it all over again. But even if that were NOT true. I can run this unit on 5 amps (with no load) at 12 volts or 60 watts (and I say I can recover 80% of THAT..), and produce 300 watts that can be dumped into caps or batteries and THEN used to power loads from there. That has ALWAYS been my intention. I never intended to use this as a direct generator to run lights or loads. Collect all the voltage and run it through a step down transformer to increase the amps to a point where batteries will charge and I believe it is worth the time to explore what is here. If that will not work, I guess this is a bust.

It is like anything else:  You need to measure the input and output power faithfully.  Then you will know what you have.  If neither is pulsating, or if both are resistive, then measuring average voltage and average current with meters and multiplying to get power is fine.  If that is not the case, then you need to perform AC power analysis by multiplying the instantaneous current by the instantaneous voltage which will give you a signed result and then you average that result to find average power.  You would need to do that on both the input and the output.

Dave

[Dbowling]

The input to the motor with no load attached to the generator is 5 amps at 13 volts. In the video it showed about 8 amps input, but that was because of the light that was attached as a load on the generator when I started it up. I did that for a demo only. The load on the motor will be a constant because I do not HAVE to put a load on the generator. I did it because people insist on seeing the amp draw under load. But I will NEVER put a load on this generator in real life. I will simply take the power it generates when all the coils are connected, which I have done MANY TIMES since I first fired up the first version of this thing almost two years ago now, and dump it into batteries or caps and run my loads off of them. Thats about 65 watts input of which I can recover, (Whether anyone believes it or not) better than 80%.  So in reality, this machine will run on about 13 Watts of "consumed" power.


The generator, when you look at the output of the coils to a storage device, will output 25 watts per coil as I demonstrated. That's 300 watts to be collected. That is a constant output as long as you do NOT run a load, which will of course affect the motor. There are ways to increase production from the coils without  compromising the low amp draw, and I am working on those, but will probably not be posting that here. You can also run it with a pulse motor and decrease the input required because a pulse motor can be run as a generator during the off cycle. There are many, many ways to improve this. My earlier version would speed up under load, but changing the coil cores changed some things, and now I need to change the coils. Lots of rewinding to do if I still want it to speed up under load. I need to invest in a coil winder!!


I am far from done with this, and I learn more every day about what will and won't work.


Dave

[MarkE]

The input to the motor with no load attached to the generator is 5 amps at 13 volts. In the video it showed about 8 amps input, but that was because of the light that was attached as a load on the generator when I started it up. I did that for a demo only. The load on the motor will be a constant because I do not HAVE to put a load on the generator. I did it because people insist on seeing the amp draw under load. But I will NEVER put a load on this generator in real life. I will simply take the power it generates when all the coils are connected, which I have done MANY TIMES since I first fired up the first version of this thing almost two years ago now, and dump it into batteries or caps and run my loads off of them. Thats about 65 watts input of which I can recover, (Whether anyone believes it or not) better than 80%.  So in reality, this machine will run on about 13 Watts of "consumed" power.

Why do you talk about "dump it (power) into batteries and caps" as though driving power into charging either is different than driving power into a resistor or light bulb?

The generator, when you look at the output of the coils to a storage device, will output 25 watts per coil as I demonstrated. That's 300 watts to be collected. That is a constant output as long as you do NOT run a load, which will of course affect the motor.

This is where you need to be careful that your measurements are valid.  If for instance you can draw 300W continuous from something where you supply say 100W continuous in, and you are not consuming matter/energy in the device (fuel) then you would have a free energy device.  That is something previously unknown. 

From a measurement standpoint the first thing you want to do is understand what your voltage and current look like with respect to time at both the input and output.  That will drive what you need to do to get accurate measurements.  If the voltage and current are both DC or almost entirely DC with some minor ripple, then life is easy and you can use meters to measure the voltage and current and just multiply the two to get power.  If the voltage and current are AC or mostly AC then you will get an accurate measure of the power from multiplying average (actually rms but for simple waveforms we can easily correct) voltage and current only when the load is purely resistive.  Even this will have problems with error budgets if the load is very reactive, because the real power will be buried beneath a much larger reactive power, and even small measurement errors of the overall values translate to large errors relative to the small real power.  For examples of people who have gotten this wrong look at Bill Alek.  For the past couple of years he has thought that he would have market ready product in another three six months and it just keeps pushing back, because his measurements are bonkers.

A simple way to circumvent difficult and complex measurements is to insert low loss low pass filters between the power source that the thing you are testing on the input side, and between the output side and any intended load.  With an appropriate low pass filter then you are back to measuring DC and meters will work just fine.

There are ways to increase production from the coils without  compromising the low amp draw, and I am working on those, but will probably not be posting that here. You can also run it with a pulse motor and decrease the input required because a pulse motor can be run as a generator during the off cycle. There are many, many ways to improve this. My earlier version would speed up under load, but changing the coil cores changed some things, and now I need to change the coils. Lots of rewinding to do if I still want it to speed up under load. I need to invest in a coil winder!!


I am far from done with this, and I learn more every day about what will and won't work.


Dave

Have fun pursuing your investigations.  There should always be joy in experimenting and learning things.  My recommendation to you is that if you have not already done so, take a look at your waveforms to see what your measurement situation is.