This is a redundant post but I think it is important enough to carry the subject title. I'm using two rebuilt motors. The PM is an ancient, high speed (can't remember the rpm but close to 3,600) 7.5hp three phase 9 wire unit. The alternator is a Baldor 5hp three phase low speed (somewhere close to 1600rpm) 9 wire unit. The units are coupled at 1:1.
My best non-loaded result for the set-up is:
PM: 5.4 amps @ 121VAC = 653.4 watts
Alternator: 8.7 amps @ 420 VAC = 3,654 watts inside the alternator
The first sucessful test outside of the alternator with o/u is today with these results:
PM: 5.5 amps @ 120VAC = 660 watts in
Alternator: 5.22 amps @ 274 volts = 1430 watts
The load is an old cooktop with all four burners set to maximum. The tag states 7.6kw @ 240VAC.
Anway....YESSSSS!!!
Rich
lol, yep an extra "0". I'll edit that out.
Rich
.
Quote from: oouthere on July 21, 2007, 04:41:21 PM
This is a redundant post but I think it is important enough to carry the subject title. I'm using two rebuilt motors. The PM is an ancient, high speed (can't remember the rpm but close to 3,600) 7.5hp three phase 9 wire unit. The alternator is a Baldor 5hp three phase low speed (somewhere close to 1600rpm) 9 wire unit. The units are coupled at 1:1.
My best non-loaded result for the set-up is:
PM: 5.4 amps @ 121VAC = 653.4 watts
Alternator: 8.7 amps @ 420 VAC = 3,654 watts inside the alternator
The first sucessful test outside of the alternator with o/u is today with these results:
PM: 5.5 amps @ 120VAC = 660 watts in
Alternator: 5.22 amps @ 274 volts = 1430 watts
The load is an old cooktop with all four burners set to maximum. The tag states 7.6kw @ 240VAC.
Anway....YESSSSS!!!
Rich
Hi Rich,
could you please make a video of this test ?
Many thanks.
For all Rotorverter users,
please document your results with videos and post them here.
I really would like to see such an overunity video
where you can really see input and output power
measurements and driving a real load.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
Hi Rich,
As I understand it the idea is quite simple in that you use different value capacitors for different RPMs, across the field windings.
I have a single phase induction motor in my drill press that I could try to experiment with.
The only thing that puzzles me is that this is such a simple change, why has is not been picked up before?
Also, are you using a three phase supply, or perhaps creating your own 3 phase supply?
Rob
Hi Rich,
Have you tried to hook up the output to the input?
(closing the loop) to try and make it free running?
with a emergency cut out in case it does free run of course,,
Cliff,
Hiya Cliff,
It is not possible because the alternator is being driven nearly twice as fast as it was designed so the output frequency is nearly double as well.
Rich
Quote from: hartiberlin on July 21, 2007, 05:55:25 PM
Hi Rich,
could you please make a video of this test ?
Many thanks.
For all Rotorverter users,
please document your results with videos and post them here.
I really would like to see such an overunity video
where you can really see input and output power
measurements and driving a real load.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
Hi Stefan, I'll try to get around to that but it will not be this weekend. My garage is a mess so this is an embarrasing request ;D My daughters race motocross and we are off to the track for the rest of the weekend to do practice.
Quote from: MeggerMan on July 21, 2007, 06:26:29 PM
Hi Rich,
As I understand it the idea is quite simple in that you use different value capacitors for different RPMs, across the field windings.
Not exactly. My 3 phase motor has a set rpm to run (with some frequency slippage). You tune the motor for minimal current draw only, not rpms.
I have a single phase induction motor in my drill press that I could try to experiment with.
The only thing that puzzles me is that this is such a simple change, why has is not been picked up before?
I never would have thought of it!!!
Also, are you using a three phase supply, or perhaps creating your own 3 phase supply?
The idea behind the RV is to use a three phase motor 240/480 volt wired at the highest voltage and ran off single phase 120VAC between two of the three phase (1 & 2 in my case). The cap bank is placed between the hot lead (2) and the other unused lead (3). I have no idea how to run a single phase motor in RV but they say it can be done.
Rob
@mramos
Your well pump (assuming deep well submersible pump) already should have a pump start box with a capacitor already in it. Also depending on the depth of the pump in the well, you may need all the power. When converting a 3ph motor to RV, instead of the motor runnniign on 460V it is running on 120V on two of the phases. This brings down the HP to half or less then the original design spec. So it may not be a good idea to fiddle around with your well pump. Also, well pumps usually run at at 220V.
Quote from: oouthere on July 21, 2007, 04:41:21 PM
This is a redundant post but I think it is important enough to carry the subject title. I'm using two rebuilt motors. The PM is an ancient, high speed (can't remember the rpm but close to 3,600) 7.5hp three phase 9 wire unit. The alternator is a Baldor 5hp three phase low speed (somewhere close to 1600rpm) 9 wire unit. The units are coupled at 1:1. My best non-loaded result for the set-up is:
PM: 5.4 amps @ 121VAC = 653.4 watts
Alternator: 8.7 amps @ 420 VAC = 3,654 watts inside the alternator
The first sucessful test outside of the alternator with o/u is today with these results:
PM: 5.5 amps @ 120VAC = 660 watts in
Alternator: 5.22 amps @ 274 volts = 1430 watts
The load is an old cooktop with all four burners set to maximum. The tag states 7.6kw @ 240VAC.
Anway....YESSSSS!!!
Rich
Hi Rich,
I would like to tell you the followings:
The label/tag on your old cooktop says 7.6kW @ 240VAC. This means that when you normally use the burners from the grid, the current is 7600Watt/240V=31.66Amper from your 240V AC mains, when all the four burners are fully on, ok?
So I would suggest to check carefully the AC voltage drop across the cooktop terminals to really know how much output power you really have when you insert the cooktop in series with the cap bank at the alternator.
One more thing: Could you estimate your RPM so that you know the resonant frequency of your alternator (and then your PM due to the joint common axis)? Because if you use measuring instruments for current/voltage checkings that are calibrated for 50 or 60 Hz mains frequency and your resonant output frequency is much different (obviously higher), then you can be misled by your instruments. You could use oscilloscope for checking the frequency or a digital multimeter with freq measuring capability some friends near you may help you out if you don't have such DVM.
One question: have you considered using your Baldor 5HP as the Prime Mover and the 7.5HP motor as the alternator? I cannot say if it were better or not but maybe would be worth trying which combination results in less input and more output power (putting the 7.5HP motor to generate would normally involve less copper loss than you have now with the Baldor because the inner resistance of a higher HP motor usually is less than that of a lower HP motor).
Regards
Gyula
Quote from: oouthere on July 21, 2007, 07:07:14 PM
Quote from: MeggerMan on July 21, 2007, 06:26:29 PM
As I understand it the idea is quite simple in that you use different value capacitors for different RPMs, across the field windings.
Not exactly.Ã, My 3 phase motor has a set rpm to run (with some frequency slippage).Ã, You tune the motor for minimal current draw only, not rpms.
Yes, same thing really, you start off at zero rpm so you use one value of capacitor, when its up to runnung speed you use a different one to reduce the current required.
I suppose your start and run capacitor could be the same value, so you tune it for the 3600 rpm speed (60 cycles/sec x 60 seconds = 3600rpm), or 3000rpm for 50Hz (UK frequency).
I looked at the circuit diagram off the Panacea website again and rember how it is done.
I think the capacitor creates a second phase across windings 2 and 3, mains input provides the phase across 1 and 2, the only bit missing is a phase across 3 and 1.
I look forward to your video and live test results.
Regards
Rob
Hello,
I am a missionary in Mexico. I am starting a community in a small town here and was sent first of all a Newman motor link by a friend. Then I got on this forum and have been reading for the last couple of days. I noticed the comments about the rotoverter having more practical torque and decided I would begin my journey into the unknown. I am oblivious to all the terms and equations and my mind does not even no where to begin. I see a lot of information on this subject but I do not know where to start my project. I would like to power the community on something like the rotoverter. I have 110v lines on the property. Do I need to take a course in electricity or am I out of my league. I am going to build a little newman motor for educational purposes eventually. I will be reading all your discussions, and try to figure out what all the terms you all or using. I hope someone comes out with a dummies version of this technology. Thanks, Jason
Quote from: gyulasun on July 22, 2007, 04:23:12 AM
Quote from: oouthere on July 21, 2007, 04:41:21 PM
This is a redundant post but I think it is important enough to carry the subject title. I'm using two rebuilt motors. The PM is an ancient, high speed (can't remember the rpm but close to 3,600) 7.5hp three phase 9 wire unit. The alternator is a Baldor 5hp three phase low speed (somewhere close to 1600rpm) 9 wire unit. The units are coupled at 1:1. My best non-loaded result for the set-up is:
PM: 5.4 amps @ 121VAC = 653.4 watts
Alternator: 8.7 amps @ 420 VAC = 3,654 watts inside the alternator
The first sucessful test outside of the alternator with o/u is today with these results:
PM: 5.5 amps @ 120VAC = 660 watts in
Alternator: 5.22 amps @ 274 volts = 1430 watts
The load is an old cooktop with all four burners set to maximum. The tag states 7.6kw @ 240VAC.
Anway....YESSSSS!!!
Rich
Hi Rich,
I would like to tell you the followings:
The label/tag on your old cooktop says 7.6kW @ 240VAC. This means that when you normally use the burners from the grid, the current is 7600Watt/240V=31.66Amper from your 240V AC mains, when all the four burners are fully on, ok?
So I would suggest to check carefully the AC voltage drop across the cooktop terminals to really know how much output power you really have when you insert the cooktop in series with the cap bank at the alternator.
One more thing: Could you estimate your RPM so that you know the resonant frequency of your alternator (and then your PM due to the joint common axis)? Because if you use measuring instruments for current/voltage checkings that are calibrated for 50 or 60 Hz mains frequency and your resonant output frequency is much different (obviously higher), then you can be misled by your instruments. You could use oscilloscope for checking the frequency or a digital multimeter with freq measuring capability some friends near you may help you out if you don't have such DVM.
One question: have you considered using your Baldor 5HP as the Prime Mover and the 7.5HP motor as the alternator? I cannot say if it were better or not but maybe would be worth trying which combination results in less input and more output power (putting the 7.5HP motor to generate would normally involve less copper loss than you have now with the Baldor because the inner resistance of a higher HP motor usually is less than that of a lower HP motor).
Regards
Gyula
Gyula,
I was so excited by just seeing my measurements that inaccuracies on the DVM due to frequency changes never crossed my mind.
Guys, I have to apolojize...this is not over unity. The cooktop has eyes that you cannot see (cast iron covers), yes they were getting hot. But I decided to place two-250 watts heat lamps in series so I could at least look for bulb brightness....not even close to standard brightness out of the wall. I then placed a single 120VAC/250 watt heat bulb as the load.....not even close.
I did measure correctly but apparently these things have to be measured with an o'scope and not a DVM that is frequency sensitive.
The best guess on rpms is 3,200 to 3,300. But since the alternator is a low speed motor it cannot be used to drive the 7.5hp.
>:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
Rich
I went and looked at many of the videos including the Bellerians video....I can do anything they are showing with the exception of the 1000watt bulb. But, the 1000 watt bulb would be to bright to video without some sort of protection of the camera and is being fed from about 1/2 the power it would normally require.. IMO, there are many people just as myself that are making faulty measurements using only DVMs. The 15hp RV replication video was one of the most convincing that this is the case. You have a 15hp RV, do not show your input power and then show it powering two HUGE 60 watt bulbs.....yep....overunity. But the good side is, his 60 watt bulbs are brighter than the 1000watt bulb.
Rich
@oouthere
I don't get it at all.
Volts are volts regardless of frequency. A generator turning at 3600 rpm will be turning at 60hz and produce X volts at A amps. If it turns at 3000 rpm it will be at 50 hz and produce Y volts at B amps. Regardless of the above X x A and Y x B = watts. Watts are watts. So watts the problem? (Pardon the pun.) Hey I could even ask "wattsup". (Always wanted to say that.)
When you put your load onto the caps, you check the voltage at the connection point to get your voltage and you put your ammeter onto the same wire to get the amps. So what does it say?
Use of the 1000 watt bulb is OK because it is more than you think the generator will produce. This enables you to pull the maximum draw from the generator while you measure the voltage and amperage. Seems perfectly valid to me. Who cares if the burners are not hot enough, load is load. The burners could have a high initial current requirement, but it is still a load.
Also, frequency has no relation to your hand held meter. It does not care about the frequency. When I put my meter on my TPU and blast it with 5 small VAC at 150K hz, and I measure 3 vdc out, I don't care about the frequency. I'm getting 3 vdc. Definitely not OU. lol
Also, if the alternator is rated to run on 230/460, it should be wired at the 230. PM wired to highest, alternator wired to lowest voltage.
Is there an official EEer in the house!!!!
We need arbitration here!!!!
Quick. I want my two eggs sunny side up. Keep those burners going!
Hiya Wattsup,
The digital meters are calibrated to average to voltages using a 60hz signal. So if anything other than 60hz is used then it distorts the data because one of the fixed formula values is incorrect.
When I placed 2 120VAC bulbs in series and they did not light to full brightness, this proved my meters are not measuring correctly.
Now I'm doubting the prony brake as well due to the digital weight scale. If there is even the slightest sticking point, it may be using this as the actual displayed output. Let's say you have your 60 ounces of ft/torque at only 1/10 of the revolution it measures this and the rest of the revolution is only 20 ounces, this will completely throw off the measurement. A prony brake consisting of a mechanical spring or weight scale would be more evidential since this would be a mechanical averaging and not a locking in on the highest weight in a given time of samples.
Rich
Hi Rich,
I think Wattsup has right in the RPMs that 3600RPM=60Hz and 3000RPM=50Hz. I "managed" to frighten you with my previous letter where I mentioned the differing frequency measurement problem. In fact it cannot be a big, only a negligible error when your estimated RPM is in between 50 and 60Hz (you mentioned 3200-3300RPM). And because your alternator is tuned to resonance the voltage and current should be pretty sinusoidal, your measuring instruments must handle them with acceptable precision. Sorry for this.
I think it would be wise to go over your setup and discuss how you hooked up the motors.
So you run the prime mover with 120VAC 60Hz single phase and the current draw is 5.4A, right? This is the best achieable minimum current draw possible, right?
You have 1:1 (direct) connection between the prime mover shaft and the alternator shaft, right?
Your alternator is tuned to resonance with a cap bank and you measured an unloaded 420V AC voltage on the capacitor (or the same voltage on the appropiate output coil of your motor because the cap and the coil are in parallel) and you measured (I assume with a current clamp meter or with AC amp meter) 8.7A current which circulates in the parallel resonant circuit the motor coil and the cap bank constitute, right?
You inserted your load in series with the cap bank as you wrote elsewhere and the AC voltage dropped to 274V from the unloaded case of 420V and current also dropped to 5.22A from the unloaded case of 8.7A, right?
Now let's stop a little at this point: you understand why these voltage and current drops occured in your alternator circuit?
Put it very simple: the quality factor or figure of merit of you parallel resonant output circuit has been decreased the moment you inserted the load into and inside the resonant circuit.
The load (your 1000W lamp or the cooktop or whatever) appears in SERIES with the copper resistance of the motor coil(s) and increase it, so the resonant current inside the resonant circuit has to go lower.
You may ask why the unloaded circulating current inside the resonant circuit is 'only' 8.7A?
Because your copper loss in the 5HP motor coils defines it! This is why I tried to suggest for you in my previous mail to place the 7.5HP motor for the alternator because it probably has less copper loss, hence the circulating resonant current could be higher than 8.7A and although that value will be lowered by your inserted load later, it could allow more output power to appear in the load.
The way you connected the load or in other words you inserted the load into a parallel resonant circuit is your solution, I cannot recall such energy extraction suggested by Hector or by others in Rotoverter discussions, maybe I am mistaken here?
I think this way of taking power out from a parallel resonant circuit (ie. from an alternator tuned to resonance by a capacitor) would be more successful only if you could find an unloaded resonant condition where the circulating AC current is the higher the better ie. in range of over 15-20A at least. This would mean a motor with very low inherent copper loss to find.
Regards
Gyula
PS: Does your Baldor 5HP motor have 3 coils or 6 coils? See what I mean: page 24 of this file:
http://panacea-bocaf.org/files/RE-OU-v6_1.pdf If it has 6, you could wire it lower output voltage hence bigger circulating current. OR if you are aware of this, then sorry...
Hi Gyula,
The frequency difference is greater as the PM is high speed (3450 rpm) and the alternator is low speed (1770 rpm) which is the optimal set-up according to the RV documentation. Since this is a 1:1 coupling the frequency of the alternator is nearly twice what it would normally be. IMO, the o'scope is going to be the only accurate form of measurement for the frequency and voltage. I believe the amp meter will be ok regardless of frequency or voltage type (i.e. ac or dc).
You didn't frighten me in the letter but the evidence is in the bulb brightness, it simply is not there. I plugged into the wall for a comparison brightness of the bulbs and this is unquestionable. I have a mini o'scope but I believe it only goes to 20V and it's been ages since I've used it.
I'd love to see this work but at the same time when the lights go out from a storm I'd like to have something that works. Honesty has to be the highest factor in our observations and report what we have done. Only in this way can we focus on the correct solution to our problem of energy slavery.
Even thinking of the dc generator tests holds true. If a pulsed dc was being measured and the pulse was only 1/5 of the full duty cycle then those measurements are way off as well. The o'scope has to be used in all measurements imo.
You are correct on all of your observations except I did not mention I retuned the system after the load was inserted and those were the highest measurements attainable. I tried the cook top as I knew (thought I knew) the voltage was to high and elements may burn. I also knew I needed the closest load to a short that was possible in order to extract the most energy according to previous information. But I think the higher the voltage is driven with a change in frequency the more inaccurate the DVMs become.
The Baldor has 6 coils and is wired for 240 from the 240/480 option. The 7.5hp would be driven to slow imo to produce useable power as it would wired for 240VAC and driven at less than 1/2 of it's required frequency for standard usage.
Thanks guys, if you have any ideas I'm more than willing to try them within reason.
Rich
@oouthere
If the PM is 3450 rpm and the alt is 1750, I think what is happenning is your alt is losing power by turning too fast, believe or not. There is not enough time for the magnetic drag to sweep accross the stator windings.
I have done this before. Just put a light reostat (dimmer switch) in series on the T1 of the PM and lower the rpm of the PM. Otherwise you will have to get a gear system to go 2:1 ratio from the PM to alt which will open a whole new can of worms. A reostat is the cheapest solution.
Also, if you can give us a reference document, page of the diagram of the alt/cap connections this would help. I am just wondering if your cap should be in series and not in parrallel to the load.
Hiya Wattsup,
If you go to page 31, the first graphic diagram is my alternator set-up, except only on one leg as they recommend for initial testing. If my alternator is being over driven with greater losses then this would go further in proving the information is incorrect from panacea and this probably should not be pursued further. Since these motors try to synchronize with the grid frequency they cannot be rpm controlled by a pot as this will only cause a decrease in shaft power and cause it stall if it gets too much slippage.
http://panacea-bocaf.org/files/RE-OU-v6_1.pdf
Hi Rich,
Thanks for mentioning Page 31 where your alternator circuit setup is shown. This is what I did not recall as a way for extracting power from the alternator.
Have you considered to continue your test with adding further 2 loads to the other two legs of the alternator? for you so far used a single leg tuning.
Does the current draw of your prime mover change when you switch on the load at one leg of the alternator?
On Page 32 there is a Note: "be careful with a combination of smaller bulbs (parallel and/or series) as there is a mass radiation parameter that must be taken in consideration using series/parallel connection, some filaments being partially
magnetic will not glow at all even having same ampere loading character (resistance ). Ohms law does not cover this nor other book data.
I wonder if the 1000W bulb was slightly magnetic so that it could explain the lower brightness... ;)
Also this text from the same page I quote for the frequency change problem at the alternator because the windings with the motor laminated core are inductances whose Q quality factors (their figure of merit) are changing with frequency and for any geometry/size/core type there exists an optimal frequency where the Q is the highest and this frequency is desirable to look for to get the highest circulating resonant current. Here is the text:...That is 1000W must be run with 618W at input at unity PF; same luminance as lightbulb directly connected 220VAC. These experiments were done using 60CPS; as frequency increases so does efficiency. The idea is to series resonate LCR as to make virtual power becoming real manifest within
physical entity of bulb to create a pure current node were voltage drop of bulb is less than 19.8 VAC
So it is wise to change the PM's RPM and always look for a resonance with the cap bank at the alternator side while monitoring its circulating unloaded current to find the biggest current which would mean you have found the sweet frequency where the highest quality factor for your particular alternator inner inductance manifests. This is possibly NOT corresponding with the original frequency the motor you use as an alternator was manufactured but this should not bother you for the moment.
I think Doug Konzen from the EVGRAY yahoo group made prony break test on an RV setup and he is convinced having OU (maybe Stefan included this results on the Forum) and I can accept Doug's measurements. I personally have not dealt with such because I do not have a shop where I could store such motors and do experiments, sorry if this disappoints you, for how dare I suggest anything without hands-on experiments... I have other knowledge in EE and it can help in this area I think and so far I have not said anything wrong on RV for you ;D
Regards
Gyula
Well, a little good news. I started playing with my o'scope and it reads to 600V. Not enough time to duplicate my earlier tests and use the o'scope plus DVM but I'll get to it eventually.
Rich
Well, I'm really confused at this point and will need to think abit. Here are readings from a quick test, no great tuning just something to compare the DVM to the o'scope.
PM: 4.7 amps @ 121VAC
Alternator without load: 398VAC @ 7.5 amps @ 116.2hz
TRUE FULL BEAUTIFUL SINE WAVES
I want to believe and the meters say it is there but this is just out right strange.
Rich
Hi Rich, what load do you drive, so you get the 7.5 amps ?
What is the phase angle between voltage and current at the load ?
Hiya hartiberlin,
This is without load, basically shorted and testing across the parallel cap bank. My caps are on double pole/double throw switches so this is not a residual charge in an unused capaciter but the active capaciters. My scope is only a single trace and I have no shunts in place.
Oh yeah, the DVM measured 2VAC less than the o'scope.
Now, a theory. The o'scope and DVM measure peak-to-peak voltages but cannot distinguish non-current carrying pontentials from current carry potentials. Let's say we have 200amps @ 1VDC with 120VAC potential riding on it, this would show-up as 120VAC on a DC potential but the amp meter would indicate 200 amps with a wattage of 12,000. This seems to explain exactly what is going on in the videos and why no one can manage a similar load to what the instruments are indicating. It could very well be possible that due to the three phase set-up, the capaciters changing the phase angle, and the o'scope being basically blind to anything but an outline form that it is combining the residual voltages of the other two phases and super imposing this static charge on the true current carrying voltage sine wave thus making it look like something it is not. This only way to veryify this would be to remove two of the three coils from the alternator.
This is the only thing that makes sense to me at this time.
Rich
@oouthere
Your Quote
PM: 4.7 amps @ 121VAC =568.7 watts
Alternator without load: 398VAC @ 7.5 amps @ 116.2hz = 2985 watts
End Quote
If the alt is wired for 230 VAC and you are producing 398 VAC, then you are turning to fast and your alt may be producing more harmonics.
This is one reason I recommended putting a reostat on the PM. Just a slight decrease in run current may make all the difference. Your alt voltage will drop but amperage will rise because the rotor drag will have enough time to charge the stator.
Although the RV directive on page 31 gives alternatives when PM rmp is higher than the alt, I would try to sync the rpms with a reostat and see the effect. Just make sure you start the PM with reostat shorted first then put it online. It will heat up a bit but for short periods it is a good and cheap way to try this.
Quote from: oouthere on July 24, 2007, 08:17:10 AM
Well, I'm really confused at this point and will need to think abit. Here are readings from a quick test, no great tuning just something to compare the DVM to the o'scope.
PM: 4.7 amps @ 121VAC
Alternator without load: 398VAC @ 7.5 amps @ 116.2hz
TRUE FULL BEAUTIFUL SINE WAVES
I want to believe and the meters say it is there but this is just out right strange.
Rich
Hi Rich,
I am not sure what you find strange? The fact you see pure sinewaves across your tank LC circuit? (because the self inductance of your alternator windings and your cap bank capacitor constitute a resonant LC circuit and the resonant frequency of the LC circuit is 116Hz as you wrote). In a resonant LC circuit the waveforms are always sinewaves.
Or you find it strange the frequency is 116Hz and your DVM is well within ballpark?
The oscilloscope shows you the peak to peak value of the voltage across your resonant circuit and your DVM shows you the effective (RMS) value of the voltage. So if you have standard 120V AC mains voltage, you must see 120V directly on your DVM (of course +/- a few volts due to peak hours or off peak hours) and if you watch the same mains voltage on your scope (use 1:1 safety transformer if your scope input ground needs it!) then you must see 2.82 times 120V peak to peak amplitude on your scope display, right?
No need for other theory this time to explain what you measure.
The current of 7.5A is maximum then what can flow inside your alternator resonant circuit and this is fully governed by the windings copper loss and to some extent the iron loss.
If you multiply your 116.2Hz by 60 seconds you get the RPM your alternator's shaft rotates.
What value of capacitor did you happen to use to arrive at 116.2Hz, if I may ask?
Now if I may suggest to look resonant current higher than 7.5A by changing somehow the PM's RPM and see if the alternator's windings are happy with higher (or lower) frequencies? You can see this by watching the resonant current at the alternator how it changes for the RPM changes. Of course you have to readjust the cap bank to reconstitute resonance for each change in RPM.
Regards
Gyula
Hi Rich,
There is one more thing that occured to me to ease finding the best resonant state (which would mean the highest circulating current in your alternator or in any other motor you assign for alternator). It is using an electric hand drill with variable speed and you could connect directly the drill head to the shaft of the alternator and control the rotation speed. of course the drill should be fixed somehow to a base where your motors are.
This is only to explore relatively quickly how the changing RPMs will change resonant current, no need for reostat. Perhaps next door neighbours can lend you a variable speed drill if you happen to not have...
Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on July 24, 2007, 10:11:27 AM
Quote from: oouthere on July 24, 2007, 08:17:10 AM
Well, I'm really confused at this point and will need to think abit. Here are readings from a quick test, no great tuning just something to compare the DVM to the o'scope.
PM: 4.7 amps @ 121VAC
Alternator without load: 398VAC @ 7.5 amps @ 116.2hz
TRUE FULL BEAUTIFUL SINE WAVES
I want to believe and the meters say it is there but this is just out right strange.
Rich
Hi Rich,
I am not sure what you find strange? The fact you see pure sinewaves across your tank LC circuit? (because the self inductance of your alternator windings and your cap bank capacitor constitute a resonant LC circuit and the resonant frequency of the LC circuit is 116Hz as you wrote). In a resonant LC circuit the waveforms are always sinewaves.
Or you find it strange the frequency is 116Hz and your DVM is well within ballpark?
The oscilloscope shows you the peak to peak value of the voltage across your resonant circuit and your DVM shows you the effective (RMS) value of the voltage. So if you have standard 120V AC mains voltage, you must see 120V directly on your DVM (of course +/- a few volts due to peak hours or off peak hours) and if you watch the same mains voltage on your scope (use 1:1 safety transformer if your scope input ground needs it!) then you must see 2.82 times 120V peak to peak amplitude on your scope display, right?
No need for other theory this time to explain what you measure.
The current of 7.5A is maximum then what can flow inside your alternator resonant circuit and this is fully governed by the windings copper loss and to some extent the iron loss.
If you multiply your 116.2Hz by 60 seconds you get the RPM your alternator's shaft rotates.
What value of capacitor did you happen to use to arrive at 116.2Hz, if I may ask?
Now if I may suggest to look resonant current higher than 7.5A by changing somehow the PM's RPM and see if the alternator's windings are happy with higher (or lower) frequencies? You can see this by watching the resonant current at the alternator how it changes for the RPM changes. Of course you have to readjust the cap bank to reconstitute resonance for each change in RPM.
Regards
Gyula
What I find strange is 178VAC does not burn-out a 120VAC bulb plus it is not burning at full brightness. And, 270VAC will not cause two 120VAC series bulbs to glow at full brightness. To me, this is indicative of a static voltage riding the current producing sine wave and the static voltage measurement is not dropping out because there is no load on it to cause it to drop. IMO, since there is less current in the rotor to drive the static potential under load the wave will always be symetrical and appear as a full sine wave.
Best guess theory and it would explain everything I've seen thus far for my own research and the others I've seen.
Wattsup, the motor is not at a constant rpm as it does change some. The higher the rpm the higher the indicated voltage. Tuning is pretty easy actually. I can load down the PM with more capacitance, show a voltage surge in the alternator, but after a few seconds it also lowers the indicated voltage after the initial mechanically induced stored power from the weight of the rotor is drained off (kinetic energy rather...). The tuning is simply finding the best cap for the current load and the rpms will simply fall where they do.
Rich
Quote from: oouthere on July 24, 2007, 11:39:55 AM
What I find strange is 178VAC does not burn-out a 120VAC bulb plus it is not burning at full brightness. And, 270VAC will not cause two 120VAC series bulbs to glow at full brightness.
Hi Rich,
The 178V AC is measured across the 120V bulb when inserted or measured across the capacitor when the bulb inserted? Please make it clear.
Thanks
Gyula
This is measured across the capaciter which is directly connected to the T1 & T2. The load is in series with the capaciter bank.
It really does explain everything that is seen on the videos and there appears to be no magic.....Anybody want to buy an RV set-up!
Rich
Hi Rich, please measure the voltage directly across the bulb load and post the voltage please.
Better yet get a few high power ratings 10 Ohm resistors and put them in Parallel or series and measure the voltage across this load.
As the voltage and current are always in phase at ohmical resistors, you dont have to care about cos phi factor problems as you face them now...
Quote from: oouthere on July 24, 2007, 12:24:32 PM
This is measured across the capaciter which is directly connected to the T1 & T2. The load is in series with the capaciter bank.
...
Rich, ok you measured it across the capacitor. Now it is a 100% sure that the AC voltage across the bulb must have been way under 100V because you saw it lit under the normal 120V brightness. Please recall what wattage bulb was it? 100W?
Now I am puzzled by your new T1 and T2 abbreviations what they might mean? Are they two windings of the alternator? If yes you used Star configuration just then?
You see it is difficult to help if we have to find out what circuit you tested or which config you refer to. So may I suggest to draw even in Windows built in Paint program a hand made sketch about the circuit you are talking and indicate the measuring points. I know you do not like taking pictures (not mentioning video) and I know it takes more time from you but you surely will be rewarded by the possibly helpful pieces of advice others and I try to give you.
Regards
Gyula
Quote from: hartiberlin on July 24, 2007, 12:46:08 PM
Hi Rich, please measure the voltage directly across the bulb load and post the voltage please.
Better yet get a few high power ratings 10 Ohm resistors and put them in Parallel or series and measure the voltage across this load.
As the voltage and current are always in phase at ohmical resistors, you dont have to care about cos phi factor problems as you face them now...
The voltage is the distorted figure imo, but a known resistance value and an amperage (which should be correct in any circumstance) will give us the true current producing voltage and not the non-current producing voltage riding on top. I'll have to see what I have.
Rich
Hi Rich,
every voltage at a pure ohmical load is in phase with the current at it,
so if you measure there the voltage at the pure ohmical load like a bulb or
a ohmical resistor you will know the power at it.
Surely if it is not sine wave, please use a scope and post screen shots,
then we can try to use optical analysis by integration
the voltage area benath the curve.
Read the Imris-publications, the relationship of induction/impedance/capacitance
under condensator use conditions ! Ohms law,partially neutralisized .
Less Ohm influence = less Kirchhoff influence ?
S
dL
I did not have any resistors powerful enough so I did the next best thing and used a bulb's measurements from the wall:
100 watt bulb at the wall:
.84 amps @ 120VAC = 143 ohms
Same bulb in the alternator:
(measured only across the bulb is 245VAC) .35 amps @ 142.85 ohms = TRUE 50VAC
The bulb was barely lit, equal to perhaps a 2.5 watt night light.
So, imo only 20% of the actual voltage is current producing and the other 80% is simply static voltage baffling people.
Rich
I took a few pictures of my messy set-up but due to house renovations I can't find my camera transfer cable. I also got a picture of the o'scope readings....nice sine waves. I'll post a few when I find the cable.
Rich
In order to save others heatache, disappointment, money and time, I'll run a leverage arm set-up using a known weight and rod length. This will take the electronic mismeasurements out of the equation. This will be done using my most effecient motor (5hp Baldor). I don't know when I'll be completed though.
Rich
Hi Rich,
if you run your 100 Watt light bulb from the grid wall, then you have 143 Ohms resistance, when the filament is hot glowing.
But when the filament is cold and not yet glowing, you might only have a resistance of 10 Ohms. So better use real resistors to measure the voltage across them.
It will be much more easier to buy a few high power ratings 10 Ohm resistors and use them instead of trying a prony brake setup I guess. If you have a real sinewave at the resistors, power can be calculated very easily and you could feel it, cause they are getting warm. No need for cos phi then at the static load resistor....
Hi Hartiberlin,
The resistance change with heat is why I did not even try a cold resistance test. I'm really not even interested in any more tests as this is obvious to me as stated earlier. I want to run the hp vs power test to prove conclusively that all of these readings are inaccurate and we are on a wild goose chase.
IMO, the world is in dire straights and if people continue to place limited resources into worthless research areas it needs to be stopped. I believe the others that have worked on the RV did it in an altruistic manner but we need to cut our losses. I personally believe the self running lawn mower does not exist. He put a short post up stating he no longer has it looped with insinuations of "his people" being threatened. I think that was nothing more than him trying to save face when people started asking for details and put his feet to the fire. I can't answer them or they'll hurt my family...yeah, right. It's time to separate the BS and move forward.
Rich
Rich, i feel its better if you stick to circuits you can replicate, the compilations are full of them i just posted a recent on from Gene.
In answer to your yahoo group post,
Norman wootan has reported success (OU)
Plus Daviud Kou's Neon switcher.
I would try the Neon man, i just updated the compilation with new circuits and ideas all look good in the simulation.
Will post them in the updated thread when done
Hi ashtweth,
imo, the proof is in the pudding. The test is simple enough and not one replication....place a 1kw generator head on a 7.5hp motor. Irregardless of the effeciency of the 1kw head, it it driven commercially by a 2hp motor. If the RV is supposed to be so efficient then a direct loop back using an invertor will work without any other circuitry. I, originally having faith in the RV bought a 1,200 watt generator but the head is part of the combustion motor.
From by understanding and experiments it seems the looped back mode of Hector's is more in line with a highly efficient Bedini type battery charger (high voltage spikes) and not from excess power. Even the florescent light bulbs are easily explainable. You have a small amount of true current producing potential coupled with a high voltage none current producing potential and it excites the bulbs....rather like a potential coming from a radar with no current that is used to light bulbs when dealing with "green" avionics troops.
The prony brake test is not done as my wife is not well and things are rather hectic at this time. If Norman has truly produced ou does he not have a looped-back design? I'm personally inclined to think not. My guess is the DC servo motor was not a full sine wave and perhaps more of a pulse type motor and that's why no others have been able to replicate his work. The pulse motor could have indicated a higher voltage but the output wave form could have been as low as 10% of a complete sine wave thus the average power being considerably lower. I could very well be wrong but this would explain it reasonably to me.
It sounds like I am negative but if someone proves me wrong with a simple off the shelf STOCK generator head being run from an invertor I'll build one in short time. IMO, the only way we are going to prove the free energy cover-up is by a simple self runner being demonstrated openly. My intention was to have a self running RV at two of the local fairs but I no longer see this happening. I believe this would be enough to make people furious when they realize we have been slaves to the energy industry for over 100 years due to nothing more than greed. Petitioning congress will do no good as Dr. Steven Greer has already stood before them. Congress already knows free energy exists and they are part of the problem. Unless we have a self runner being demonstrated across the world we will never be free of the clutches of greed and lies. The devices will have to be simple to build, like the RV but with true power output like the SM power ring.
The power ring uses radiant energy (I suppose) and none of his powered devices are effected by the higher 5k hz frequency....the light bulbs love it! To me, this is the biggest evidence of the RV simply being as I stated above....20% (in my case) of the potential is current producing and the rest is simply non-current producing potential combining to make a full sine wave.
Anyway, all will have my full apologies if/when I'm disproven.
Rich
Hi Rich,
No need to waste your energy on negativity, you should apply it to LEARN more about the RV.
Kones prony can only produce OU under certain [mechanical]Tunning conditions, when you load it (the RV shaft) and its not tunned as kone did with the prony's conditions (like a pulse) then it will go out of OU.
its not as easy as plug in and go, this is evident in the compilations we explain this in allot of detail. U can try Norms test with a Freq drive instead, conditions are not as easy for Norm, and human nature isn't always as simple, Norman has had his fair share of trouble with the MRA also.
no your understanding with the Bedini SG hybrid is not consistent, i suggest you READ the compilations carefully and re evaluate the teachings.I would not comment on the radiant energy bulbs until after you try them as describe in the compilation.
I suggest you try the circuits posted in the RV compilations, do not worry as i stated in my former post about Hectors, if you try your own ideas and expect them to work we can only offer advice. Dont forget you got your hopes up with out thoroughly researching what you were doing [measurement], please do not blame the Rv for your wrong interpretation of the measurements and the circuits suggested for the RV, its not productive science Rich.
We say you prove it doesn't work, do our experiments ;), im not sure what schematic you tried it cannot of been one of ours thats all i can say :).
Im sorry you feel that way, i suggest you learn more and follow my advice. ;)
Well, I made a video but it's a little to rednecky ;D
I'll make another one when I'm not so tired and you'll see why I've come to my conclusions and chances are you will as well.
After looking at Kones prony brake info, he stated he did not retune during the different loads. Also, his hp rating is considerably less than what is stated in the typical RV documentation so the series winding effect is typical power consumption imo. I still have yet to do the prony brake test but time is at a premium.
Looking at my above post it would appear I do not understand the difference in an a/c sine wave and a dc signal. I just wrote it wrong....meaning not a sine wave but only a pulsed dc signal and not a full/uninterrupted signal in reference to the dc servo motor generator.
Rich
Point, the speed of the alternator, the faster a magnet sweeps past a coil the higher the frequency change, the higher the frequency change the higher the coil reactance(look it up) the higher the reactance the less load it can supply, reactance is loosly the AC equivelant of DC resistance(look it up).
reactance is also where a lot of accounting errors take place, you cannot calculate reactance in the same way as resistance since current lags voltage by 90 degrees in a coil and current leads voltage by 90 degrees in a capacitor.
I will not argue that!
It's just when something says 270VAC @ .35 amps (94.5 VA) is going across a 110VAC light bulb (measured with both a DMM and o'scope) and the light is not burning brightly obviously something is amiss. You can plug the same bulb directly into the wall at 120VAC and it will burn many times brighter. The SM device is pulsing at 5Khz/875VDC with 10 bulbs which is well below their intended voltage and much above their intended frequency.....the same as the RV setup except the SM bulbs are really bright and the RV's is extremely dull.
Rich
Quote from: oouthere on August 10, 2007, 04:18:58 PM
I will not argue that!
It's just when something says 270VAC @ .35 amps (94.5 VA) is going across a 110VAC light bulb (measured with both a DMM and o'scope) and the light is not burning brightly obviously something is amiss. You can plug the same bulb directly into the wall at 120VAC and it will burn many times brighter. The SM device is pulsing at 5Khz/875VDC with 10 bulbs which is well below their intended voltage and much above their intended frequency.....the same as the RV setup except the SM bulbs are really bright and the RV's is extremely dull.
Rich
I understand the confusion, but not difficult to explain
There are high frequency componants that the meter and scope will be picking up, you have to consider
time also, I can pulse a 120 volt lamp with 1000 volts and not have it burn out, simply by making sure that the 1000 volt pulse is very short in duration, in other words not on long enough to push the lamp filament past it's stress point.
Indeed, I understand what you are saying but the input wave into the light bulb is a perfect sine wave and a little over 100hz. That would easily be enough to light the bulb fully imo if all of the potential were indeed current carrying potential. The only reason I'm making the video is to show that only a small percentage (less than 20% calculated in my case) is actual current carrying voltage.
Rich
Quote from: oouthere on August 10, 2007, 05:30:54 PM
Indeed, I understand what you are saying but the input wave into the light bulb is a perfect sine wave and a little over 100hz. That would easily be enough to light the bulb fully imo if all of the potential were indeed current carrying potential. The only reason I'm making the video is to show that only a small percentage (less than 20% calculated in my case) is actual current carrying voltage.
Rich
At a guess I would say that most of what your measuring is actually returning to the excitation coils in the alternator, but alternators are not my speciality.