Chas Campbell free power motor

[Humbugger]

Hi Guys, am soo sorry to be in late , i had had an influx of people ringing and Inquiries, plus still have the non profit org to maintain. And my mobile phone sux!!

Thanks to Laurence, Hum and Stefan and ALL!. This has helped, and is why we need a Granted research and development center!! http://www.panacea-bocaf.org/ResearchandDevelopment.htm

I will add all this into the Chas Video presentation, so we can help educate the world and faculties. We will be AT a university soon with our Water fuel cell (Ravi/Daves replication).I will be presenting allot of research in support of you guys. http://www.panacea-bocaf.org/RandDprinciples.htm

Now...what an inspiring day, First i must mention Chas is true to his word and wanted independent replication and just grant support. Chas never stated he could load his devices and maintain the proper tuning. He still wants to improve and wants you all to build his perpetual Wheel and or improve his motor/Gen/flywheel system, he is still looking to get some grant endorsement to build a better system. His ideas are sound.We will prepare this for him in the video presentation.

Chas also understood, that to be a 'marketing genius' or for disclosure you have to allow INDEPENDENT REPLICATION OF THE DEVICE, then it becomes science. If you claim OU, you propose the theory and device, you then let people (if your not open sourced -under non disclosure) reproduce your results, Then it becomes science, live and learn Steorn.

Just to clarify what Stefan said, the duty cycle is important!, so is pulsing gravity devices.
http://www.panacea-bocaf.org/VeljkoMilkovic.htm
http://www.panacea-bocaf.org/WangShumHo.htm
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=203.0;attach=9173
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,203.45.html

The RV was pulsed with a prony Break, and for 500 watts gave out 1HP
@Hum, please prony break the RV, a man as vigorous as you can find out that centrifugal force and pulsing needs more experimentation and understanding by us.

"Doug Konzen?s prony Break testing


For the third time I tested the 7.5hp Baldor motor with the series adding wiring which
gives 5.9 ohms resistance to each phase. This time I tore the motor all the way down
first, photographed the internal wiring and labels, and also oiled the bearings just a bit
with some "Kroil" brand hi-tech lubricant.

The phases are wired in Y fashion - and the motor is run in Hector's roto vertor-mode
with a 7UF run cap across lines 2 and 3. At 1650rpm no-load idle, the motor draws
.3Aac @ 120Vac with the 7UF cap.

Any amount of force from the prony brake that exceeds approx 80 ounces on the scale
with the corresponding amps input of approx 2.3Aac will bring the motor to a stop.

In this testing, and the previous too, it has been found that this particular RV'd 3ph
7.5hp Baldor AC motor only likes just a couple narrow "notches" of speed and torque
being squeezed from the shaft by the foot-long Teflon-collar prony brake.

And as before in the two earlier test-runs done this week, it was possible to keep a
consistent force of 54 ounces (3.375LBFT) on the scale, which corresponds to a
simultaneous reading of 1 Aac @ 120Vac input to the motor showing on the meters.

And also a force of 43 ounces (2.687LBFT) and the simultaneous .8 Aac @ 120Vac
input to motor on the meters was another narrow notch-of-power from the shaft to
extract.

So again, it is almost a full HP (746watts) of shaft-power from under 120 watts
electrical input, and still haven?t tried out more UF values to the run-cap in order to
fine-tune it to the load.


RESULTS:

1/20/2007

120VAc grid-power input
7.5HP Baldor motor
.81 power-factor rated showing on label (stock rating)


88% efficiency rating on label (stock rating)
7UF run-cap used in both tests

Test #1:
.8Aac X 120Vac = 96watts input
2.687 LBFT X 1550rpm / 5250 = .793HP X 746 = 591 watts output

Test #2:
1Aac X 120Vac = 120watts input
3.375 LBFT X 1500rpm /5250 = .96HP X 746 = 716watts output"

End

At first we connected two 500 watt restive load lights, and it de tuned the system exactly like Chas said it should. All this pointed to the energy being stored in the fly wheel. After two of my engineers had to leave, i had an idea to pulse the load out based on my research with panacea, mainly konesheads proney break test.

We connected two AC amp meters, on on the drive motor, and one on the alternator where the load went through. You will see on the video, Chas and i pulsed out the power tools, a drop saw and a hand saw, we also put it under load as you will see on the video.

The figure on the video shows the tools drew 10 amps when pulsed on and off in 2-3 seconds, (prob more like 2) The input remained steady on 6 amps. This was for about 5 minutes constant. We will conduct more tests and will conduct what ever you all  request. We will be attaching the RV which i predict will take the input down to 3 amps/10 amps pulsed out 1-2 seconds all at 240 volts. We can also Gear it down and freq drive the fly wheel from the RV. http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=9089608413203959523

@hum

Alt is 240 volts

Now, Before any one passes judgment and or gets excited.Chas has built a perpetual wheel, the big one you see  in the video has been made to spin just using gravity, using snooker balls and Chas wants you all to improve and build the system, ill be sending it to Patrick Kelly to write up.

He explains the system himself via diagram and we show you how the wheel spins, he proved the concept by using 3 balls which made the wheel continuous and should it would go onto do what he said it would if the balls were constantly cycling.

He could not build it as robust as he wanted, so it vibrates and makes the balls fall off and de tune his wheel, he has had to use very primitive materials (TIN), he needs better materials/grants etcs. You will see this is amazing on what he had to build, and you can see on the video that if the big wheel didn't wobble the balls would consistently cycle and turn the wheel!!

Guys please be patient for the video and PM wheel instructions, we have allot to edit and present, my partner had to goto Sydney for the week and is editing now, ill give you the ratio's of his motor gen flywheel system, as he wanted, we will above to wait for the perpetual wheel instructions till we finish the edits please be patient  .

Conclusion, more is needed to be done to assess and provide a better presentation. This will be done, on the 15th of Sep.

RV drive motor will be added to cut the Crappy 6 amp draw down to 3 amps
Duty cycle will be more vigorous for Stefan
FET IGBT pulsed circuit into a load will be constructed
Freq driven RV test will be done

On his perpetual wheel
conclusion IT WORKS!!! Chas's expertise is in Gravity wheels so far, his ideas remain plausible based on his understanding of how his system preforms, he never claimed any thing which wasn't going on.

Chas's spirit was to give this away, his heart is in the right place and he should be supported [Granted] and encouraged here are his ratio's till we get the edits done

He is also on video explaining these for you guys. Editing will be done soon
On Behalf of Panacea-bocaf and OU forum, i would personally like to thank Chas for his altruism.

More to come...

Drive motor-1430

motor speed 1430rpm pulley -2.75inches to 5.5inches
cuts the speed of the motor in half.

then 5 inch pulley
8 inch pulley
4 inch pulley
9 inch pulley
4.5 inch pulley-> ALT 3146 watts 240 volt 50 hertz.

fly wheel 72 inch thick
12 mil custom
6 lay
10-20 kilos

Guys you have to wait till the video is done to see the new set up and apply these raitos, THIS IS NOT THE OLD SET UP

This does the same as the old set up but is the simplified set up.

"Now when the drive motor has to power all the flywheels and the alternator
it has an input current of about 6 amps, which means the input power
is about 1440 Watts . (Power factor cos phi not calculated in...)
When Ash connected 2 x 500 Watts halogen bulbs this drove the flywheel
setup down in RPM and the system became unstable, so they
were only able to do this for about 10 seconds.
This seemed to be too much load on the alternator..."

[a bit more detail taken from Stefan's report]

@Wattsup 

I can see how you missed the few words of hard fact Ashtweth gave.  It was literally buried in a lengthy tome mostly about the RV stuff.  It's pretty clear he doesn't want to talk much about it and I've volunteered to shut up in this thread lest I'm blamed for all the world's problems.

I thought I'd help you locate the one tiny bit of information Ashtweth actually reported on the electrical performance with normal resistive continuous loads. 

It's those sixteen words I've underlined, bolded and put in red somewhere near the middle of his "report".

It will be extremely interesting to see whether this perfectly valid and extremely revealing test is shown on the edited video.  1440W input 1000W output induced the machine to crash in ten seconds.

If we read Stefan's report exactly as stated, then the results are even worse.  Notice Stefan says that the 6A 1440W measured input was before the 1KW load was put on.  If that's indeed the case, then I wonder how much the input current increased when the 1KW load was added for those horrible ten seconds of truth.  2KW, 2500W?  With increased I^2R losses plus 1KW new load...very possible.

And whether the lamps were really getting a full 1KW.  If the whole machine was slowing down so bad they yanked the loads after ten seconds, it's quite likely the output voltage was drooping as well.  We may never find out the actual numbers.  If he got them, it seems like he has not told them yet!

Humbugger     Over and Out

[Iosh]

Call me distrustful, but why didn't a simple "total power in/total power out" kind of measuring was taken instead of having to deal with esoteric methods?

[GraViTaR]

@GraViTaR

I know you are seeing it this way but here it is again.

If A and D share the same axle, and B and C share the same axle, then,
all that's happening is A and D are turning B and C.

Now if A is off center to D, then they cannot share the same axle and your picture is wrong. In this case if there is one axle for A and one axle for D, and A is off center to D, and D is required to help turn A, then at one point there will be a drag to equalize the off-center of what is used to turn A using D. This drag will stop the wheel.

I thought the description I wrote explained it pretty well. I can only assume that either you didn't read the description, or you just don't understand it.

There is nothing wrong in my picture. The only way there would be drag is if all of the wheels are not the exact sizes necessary to turn in perfect unison.

D is a ring and has no axle. It sits freely within A. The weight of D, freely resting on one side of A keeps A out of balance and constantly turning clockwise. Do you understand now?

What I need are the exact ratios for all the wheels; taking into consideration the fact that A contacts D on the inside surface and B on the outside surface. This means that the thickness of A must be calculated into the ratios.

[shruggedatlas]

I thought the description I wrote explained it pretty well. I can only assume that either you didn't read the description, or you just don't understand it.

There is nothing wrong in my picture. The only way there would be drag is if all of the wheels are not the exact sizes necessary to turn in perfect unison.

D is a ring and has no axle. It sits freely within A. The weight of D, freely resting on one side of A keeps A out of balance and constantly turning clockwise. Do you understand now?

What I need are the exact ratios for all the wheels; taking into consideration the fact that A contacts D on the inside surface and B on the outside surface. This means that the thickness of A must be calculated into the ratios.

This setup cannot work.  You rely on D to turn A, but D will not turn A.  The only way D could turn A is if it contacts A on one side and thereby pulls it down.  This can certainly be set up, but it will be a very short experiment, and D will quickly fall to the bottom of A and rest there.

What is happening in your drawing is D is balanced on C and A, and therefore it is not inclined to turn anything, as it is not causing anything to be off balance.  Try it.

[hartiberlin]

This setup cannot work.  You rely on D to turn A, but D will not turn A.  The only way D could turn A is if it contacts A on one side and thereby pulls it down.  This can certainly be set up, but it will be a very short experiment, and D will quickly fall to the bottom of A and rest there.

What is happening in your drawing is D is balanced on C and A, and therefore it is not inclined to turn anything, as it is not causing anything to be off balance.  Try it.

I would agree, that this setup will not work,
cause they are coupled fixed.

But try to couple all the wheels via springs only, so one wheel can get
faster while the spring between it can wind up and wind down
after it again.
This could be the only way you could MAYBE get something to work..
So never couple these things with fixed connections...