Is this the first selfrunning overunity motor w/o batteries ? Mike?s motor

[Omnibus]

@fesearcher,

Since you have lots of motors that run on batteries you may have noticed that batteries discharge in time while running the motors. Won?t it be amazing if there?s a motor whose battery always stays charged while powering it?

[gezgin]

I stopped it for a little while last night and tried some different capacitor configurations, as I don't have a BC 47000uF. I am using 2x10000uF 65v  in series which are the biggest I have.

SPP-48

SPP-48, have you connected 2 serial 10.000uF capasitor? so total capasitor 5000uF,
You must be connect parallel for 20.000uF.

[dingbat]

SPP,

gezin is correct - if you are going for a higher capacitance value, you must connect them in parallel.  Your series connection yields 5000 uf at 130v.

Where did you get your long magnets?

Dingbat

[dingbat]

So the lower NPN has probably a "Snubber" safety diode in it, so the path A
is condcuting in your compensation diagram...

Hmm, is the upper PNP also conducting due to this Snubber safety diode ?
Or doesnÃ,´t it have one ??
This is the big question... now...

Stefan,

I can't read your german posts, but it sounds like your friend thinks the npn transistor may have an internal diode.  My solution to the problem was going to be to add a diode around the transistor externally if it proves to be a problem.

I am having trouble deciding what the circuit will do if there is no diode there.  We need the coil to kick into the capacitor, which will "collect" the electrons, so I'm not sure that current needs to flow through point "A" or not.

If you study the "critical" scope shot from Mike, consider that the scope ground probe is connected below the transistor.  I believe that the scope ground is floating until the npn transistor is switched on.  I think that this is why the scope trace is floating around, and why it dips toward the right side when the ssr is on.  I think the dip is because the scope is properly grounded at that point, and the hump is indeed the main winding coming up to it's peak.

In short, I don't think there is a "dip" or "negative spike" in that scope shot.  I think it is the scope becoming grounded when the npn transistor is on.

When the npn is on and the ssr is on (at the same time), the scope is effectively connected right across the main winding.  I think the sinusoidal looking portion of the trace is the main winding positive peak.  The downward shift of the wave is due to the grounding of the scope lead when the npn conducts.

That is what I think about "the negative spike".

Someone also argued on gn0sis that the spikes should be negative when the coil discharges.  This is also false in my opinion.  If you charge a solenoid with +24v, for example, when you suddenly disconnect the solenoid, it will produce a large POSITIVE (Correction - NEGATIVE, as z_p_e correctly points out below) spike as the magnetic field suddenly collapses.  The voltage depends upon the solenoid parameters and how fast the discharge occurs.  The faster the discharge, the higher the voltage.  This is why a "freewheel" diode is commonly placed around a solenoid - to dissipate the arc produced when the solenoid is turned off.

Therefore, when the main winding transistors switch off, we should expect a large (NEGATIVE - corrected) spike to come from the main winding - (which is actually the wrong polarity to feed back to the cap.)


Have you looked at the scope shots being produced by the Bedini replication going on right now?  Do you know where the scope leads are in those scope shots?  They show 3 spikes and a hump for each cycle.  Without knowing where the leads are, I don't know how to interpret them.

[z_p_e]

Dingbat,

The spike WILL be in the negative direction. The freewheeling diode does not conduct when your +24V is applied right?

Then the diode conducts when the inductor de-energizes, but in the opposite direction. This is basic electronics/ electrical theory. So relative to gnd and the +'ve supply, the inductor voltage IS inverted.

I don't understand why there is so much confusion about this easy, and well-known concept.

Mike's scope shots are inverted, as verified by my work (I'll post scope shots if anyone is interested), and fesearcher's scope shots.

Darren