Overunity.com Archives

I would like to build the Tesla switch with 4 batteries, I see the plan but
its not clear about all the electrionics needed. My electronic skills is poor so I cannot "guest" what i need, for
example from this plan:

http://www.panaceauniversity.org/D3.pdf (Start at page 25 to 36))

Can someone help me for the electronics needed for that?

What I have in mind is first made the electronics then try the device with small AA batteries
and see what is going on then try using my UPS Backup + 3 other batteries so the objective is the power
a computer from it using no current from the grid using the inverter from the UPS backup. So the load will
be connected directly on the UPS backup.

   For a start, just remember that when one side is on, the other has to be off. Other wise you have a dead short. Good rule would be to have a small delay between one switching off to the other switching on. Have fun.

thaelin

Here you can get the Bedini T.switch report from the 80's
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/962-use-tesla-switch.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/962-use-tesla-switch.html)

Steven

I know about all this link, but none show a complete diagram with a complete electrics  compomnent and guessing value in electronics is not my cup of tea!

Well here is another, but rather incomplete test
http://www.ctglabs.com/tesla1.htm (http://www.ctglabs.com/tesla1.htm)

Hi TheOne,

maybe the videos http://www.youtube.com/user/johnaarons (http://www.youtube.com/user/johnaarons) from John Aarons could be interesting for you.

Look at video 16x he has 3 projects, one of this projects is the 4 battery switch ...

John also shows some strange effects using one battery which seems to be selfcharging by pulsing a coil and getting the B-EMF back to battery.

yesterday i saw this effect live by a friends replication of the experiment done by bedini and co., look at the report.
frinds experiment: 2 NiCd batteries, 1 motor switch, a little load lamp
result: lamp first ligths normal, battery 1 full battery 2 empty. After ~ 20 min. battery 2 full voltage, battery 1 lost about 5% voltage lamp normal (a really small lamp !)
-> cool, ~ 2 full loaded batterys without power lost  :D ... ok it seems so, but after replacing the batterys and powering each one seperatly down over a bigger lamp, the battery 2 only lights this one for 2 seconds, battery one for 5 min.
dont know how long a full loaded battery would light the lamp ... so i could not say something about the losts on battery 1.

Something for the others:

I sayed "seems to be" because lead accid batteries could be almost empty and showing you 10 volts but under load you see that they are really "empty", put load away and the voltage slowly rises back to around 10 volts or so. without external circuit!

That not mean that the battery ist charged!

So to all other people who are experimenting with this device, please use a !full loaded! battery, rebuild john aarons one battery selfcharger and look if the voltage rises from this full loaded point! That i think i have to ask jhon aaron for ...

@ Nali2001

Bedini has used a 50/50 switch with the next impuls a little bit earlier as the first dies out, that mean he has uses a 51/50 pulsewidth  ;)
that could be the black pointed "mistake" in the drawings from the report paper ... but that was only for finetuning! i think not necessary...

Quote from: Thaelin on September 18, 2007, 06:45:07 AM
   For a start, just remember that when one side is on, the other has to be off. Other wise you have a dead short. Good rule would be to have a small delay between one switching off to the other switching on. Have fun.
thaelin

I believe that the switching rate needs to be at least 100 times
a second. But not more than 800 c.ps. when things could get
hazardous. There must be a ready built switching unit out there
somewhere. Who would need it? What for? If it can be found, it
might cost less than a fiver.

Please watch the new videos 204 from john aaron (the link is postet above), i think its almost the same experiment as performed by Eike Mueller and Bedini ... lets hope that john let his system run for a time longer than the power of 2 full loaded batteries could light this load for a really good proof after all the years ...

Super

john don't do a true tesla switch, the batteries are always connected without any switch at all unfortunitly.

@ TheOne

yes, its not a 4 battery switch but basics for it.

You say he isn't using a "switch", you are right, thats the reason why the second batteries didn't charge.

But he has the pulsing, you know pulsing is the big hit in this circuit ... so i ask him for longer tests to see if
the effect he has filmed is only an effect or some real.

Quote from: Nali2001 on September 19, 2007, 07:16:03 AM
Well here is another, but rather incomplete test
http://www.ctglabs.com/tesla1.htm (http://www.ctglabs.com/tesla1.htm)

HERE , THIS IS ONE OF MANY CIRCUITS THAT CAN NEVER WORK
(Naudin CLG and more)

If you schown first circuit :
3 Volt s  Batteries  MINUS reveres 1,5 Volts from an second Battery -resume-  only 1,5 Vlt SUPPLY  voltage. !!

It give not give any "sense" ,..(to understand,now )..
1,5 Volts - for POWER.SUPPLY. is to "LOW"  because
Saturation volt - from transistor  , additionally LOSSES ( Vf ) of the DIODE , make a additonally  LOST over 1,5 Volts !!!
So that circuit produce , that NO any energy can flow from batteries to the load !!

NONSENSE , withSENSE , that NOTHING was "tested"
inly "publishing" for fishing "readers" from "moneymakers"

Pese

www.pese.cjb.net
(sorry , thelinks contains also , a lot of "untrues"

[EDIT] Deleted.

[EDIT] Deleted.

[EDIT] Deleted.

@Groundloop, thank you I like PIC microchip, you can do so many thing with them!

Also what program are you using to draw your drawing? autocad?

The PIC controller is a good idea, the funny thing about it is the other week I ordered a PIC programmer tool/RS232.

I am a programmer not a electric guys, Its more easy for me working with a chip vs standard circuit. I hope receive my stuffs soon, I have an idea about the so called TPU, I begin to think the TPU is like a MEG in a ring. Since I will start work with PIC soon, I want to make my TPU with a PIC microchip and have fun with it.

And I will start a Bedini replication soon, I will use a PIC microchip also for controlling the switching, max rpm and show the RPM/TEMP on a LCD screen :)

But for the tesla switch, it something I need to test also, But i will use smaller batteries, I am about to order small 3.7v batteries (Rechargeable Lithium Li Battery) and hopefully get it soon. The tesla switch don't need to use 12v batteries :)

I have heard it said that the Tesla Switch does not really like solid state switches. It picks up radiant energy, and works better with rotating commutator type stuff.

[EDIT] Deleted.

[EDIT] Deleted.

hmmm.

You have 4 identical lossless accumulators, 2 charged with
the energy q, 2 uncharged.
After dis/recharging you end up with 2 batteries charged with
0.5 q and the others discharged.
Next cylce ends with 2 batteries, at 0.25 q. and so on.
The total amount of energy in the batteries is the series:
2q q 0.5q 0.25q 0.125q.....
The energy destroyed / transformed to heat and light is:
q 0.5q 0.25q 0.125q..
If you do that forever without any loss - you transfered the
energy of 2q completly to heat and light.
???  ;D
That the efficiency and the capacity of a lead acid battery
increases if you operate it it pulsed mode is another story.
If you have 2 identical charged batteries and have
2 different load - one with dc and one with pulses its quite
shure that you can get more out if pulsed.... ;D

Maybe you know the pulsed nicd/nimh chargers that charge
the stuff with a high current pulse - and then short circuit  the
accumulator for a short periode to "remove" the unneccesary
charge which heats up the stuff.

[EDIT] Deleted.

Hi-

Like Paul-R mentioned, a "sparking', mechanical, rotating commutator is likely the way to go for the switching. I built a 4 battery circuit some months back with slow poor switching and thus it was unsuccesful.
I am looking for an appropriate switch or build one before trying again.
It can be the newman effect from the spark switching that accounts for or contributes to any 'free' energy gains.

Hi folks,
my conclusion ->
this thing is a way too strange, information about it is rare and inconsistend.

- mechanical switching vs. very high transistor switching (see story about microwave engineer ...)
- new never loaded battery vs. old and dead battery (see cold fusion cell concepts)
- negative resistance, open system, 2 currents
- test done with voltage factor vs. test done with power factor

Bedini descripes a litte test with a few lamp batteries (splitting the dipole) this should show something interesting ... :-/

By the way, take a look at johnaarons youtube page, he has done some interesting tests about this.

Super

Quote from: Groundloop on December 22, 2007, 11:34:57 AM
@Paul-R,
Bedini used transistors and claimed o/u. I really can't see why solid state won't work.
As far as I see it, this circuit has nothing to do with radiant energy. This circuit is a
way of reusing the current we discharged from one battery and charge another battery.
Groundloop.

I'm not sure you are completely right here. I got this info from
Patrick Kelly at http://www.panaceauniversity.org/, and I did
not fully understand the message. It was about atmospheric
charges in balance with charges surrounding the poles of
the batteries, and when these latter charges go down, due
to current flow, they are replaced by atmospheric ones.
I will try and get a better explanation of the theory.
Paul.

Duplicate

[EDIT] Deleted.

Quote from: Groundloop on December 22, 2007, 08:50:43 AM
@The One,

Attached is MY control circuit. I will use the "old" and faitfull PIC16F84A micro controller.
Firm ware not done yet, this will come later. Full CAD drawing available if you want that.

Groundloop.

@ Groundloop,

I too, would like to replicate this switch. I have all the parts (including the PIC chip). If you are ready to release the software, I'll build it.

Cheers, sanmankl.

@Groundloop,

good do see you here too.

would you share, once it is completed, your design so that I could build one and play with it too?

Do you think that the solid state would be equivalent to the physical switching like relays (I know relays are horrible in timing and synchronization)? The physical contacts cause sparks that It seams they have some secret sauce there.

Fausto.

[EDIT] Deleted.

QuoteBedini did build a solid state circuit back in 1984. He states (in papers and also later on his web site) that this circuit works. I believe him. I have done a careful analyze of the papers and material available to me. My conclusion is that the transformers shown in the Bedini drawing is for controlling the base of the transistors and not for energy generating. Using a transformer like this was a common technique before optocouplers became available on the market. The transformer will insulate the transistor from the controlling circuit just as optocouplers do. So, yes, I do think a solid state version will work providing the switch it self is fast enough. The transistors I have selected is good for up to 30 MHz and that should be enough. If we use smaller batteries (say 9 V NiMh) then the 10 Amp. rating of the circuit will do fine as long as we use heat sink on the transistors.

Groundloop.

hey, good luck  ;)

be aware that transistors are often able to handle "high" clock rates but optocouplers maybe not ...
and yes, the coils are for physical seperation equal to optocouplers.

Bedini also says that he needs a lot of time to get his cigar box thing working, finetuning, time and knowledge what effect should happen hepled him ... -> will be hard work  :(

It's ok to build the switch directly if all parts are available, but if not it is more wisely to reproduce some mueller/bedini tests before ... e.g. try to reproduce the bright white spark with two batterys and fast switching (see mueller document)

For the microcontroller; use of RS232 and pc-software to set clockrates could be helpful  ;)

Best regards, Super

[EDIT] Deleted.

[EDIT] Deleted.

Quote from: Groundloop on December 23, 2007, 01:15:52 PM
@Sanmankl,

I have not done the firmware for the PIC quite yet. But I will in a couple of days. I'm currently soldering together a high speed 6 transistor switch with optocouplers. I have released my drawing on page 1 on this thread! I'm building my switch as shown in that drawing. I have six wires to solder on my switch and then can run a test to see if the switch is working ok. After this test I will start to write the assembler firmware for the PIC. Then I have to solder the capacitor and diode part of the circuit. (Waiting for parts so this will be one of week from now.)

[EDIT] Yes, I will release all information in this forum including the PIC16F84A firmware.

@Plengo,

Bedini did build a solid state circuit back in 1984. He states (in papers and also later on his web site) that this circuit works. I believe him. I have done a careful analyze of the papers and material available to me. My conclusion is that the transformers shown in the Bedini drawing is for controlling the base of the transistors and not for energy generating. Using a transformer like this was a common technique before optocouplers became available on the market. The transformer will insulate the transistor from the controlling circuit just as optocouplers do. So, yes, I do think a solid state version will work providing the switch it self is fast enough. The transistors I have selected is good for up to 30 MHz and that should be enough. If we use smaller batteries (say 9 V NiMh) then the 10 Amp. rating of the circuit will do fine as long as we use heat sink on the transistors.

Groundloop.

@ Groundloop,

My good man. Thanks for sharing. I'm "crippled" in terms of electronics and programming (writing code) so your contribution is much valued. That said, I may want to mod the circuit to use a timer chip like a 555 or something similar (TL594, perhaps?).

I look forward to your firmware release.

Holiday cheers, sanmankl

[EDIT] Deleted.

@Groundloop
thank you. Nice code too! Easy to read and very straighfoward.

Fausto.

[EDIT] Deleted.

[EDIT] Deleted.

@Groundloop,
Man, dont you rest? I am so excited about your work on this Brand device. I took my picKit1 out of the closet. Installed all the IDE's, HITECH compilers, tested my board and is running good. Next I will setup my laptop (where my bench is).

I look at the code and I am assuming you will control ALL the timing inside the program no messing with eletronics, correct? ( I programmed assembler 20years ago, what a refreshment).

And concerning the cap fix, is it the C12 on the control circuit?

I only have the pickit1 and pickit 2 debugger. Any advices on what is the best to buy for the pic development and what you are using (software, versions, programmer), just let me know I am buying today!!!

Fausto.

[EDIT] Deleted.

[EDIT] Deleted.

@Groundloop,

thanks. I am using the same that you are for the IDE. Now If I program and want to download to the Pic can I still use the picKit1?  I would assume since I can create programs today with the pickit1 and download to the inboard (but removable) pic I will be able to download any program.

Man, I can barely wait to purchase the parts and try it out.

Fausto.

[EDIT] Deleted.

Hey Guys:
   I did play around with this type of circuit a bit. I used only the 3 batt style and manually switched it using a car stop lamp for the load. I did run the batts down after a while. The light would draw around .9 amps.
   The point I wanted to make is to caution you all on the frequency of this switch. If I remember right, the switching time was 100 to 300 hz and any more than that was dangerous. Have no idea why on that but just bringing it up.
   Just make sure your switch on to switch off has a small lag in it so as not to cause a direct short. Even for just an instant would waste energy from the batts and possible excessive heating on the transistors.

   Groundloop, I like the design you did so much I will have to set it up. I have a sack full of darlingtons and so guess they need a home.   :D

Think I will just use 555's and use one to trigger the other with variable duty to make sure no overlap happens. Cheers.

thaelin

[EDIT] Deleted.

Quote from: Groundloop on December 23, 2007, 03:31:04 PM
@Super,

Sometimes I wonder if people really read the texts and circuit drawings.  ;D

The optocoupler I will use is the H11D1. If you look at the data sheet for that IC you will see that it can switch on or off in 5uSec. (Thats 5 micro second.) My transistor can handle up to 30 MHz. This is much faster than that. So the limiting switch speed for this circuit is 5 uSec. I think this is fast enough.

Yes a RS232 or USB tuning whould be nice. I have done a lot of them before. But in this project I think I keep it as simple as possible. You can probably use a 555 timer also.

I have done all the Bedini stuff so I do not need to research more on that.

Groundloop.

Hey Groundloop, you are right, reading before writing is always the better way  :)
sorry for that ...

QuoteI have done all the Bedini stuff so I do not need to research more on that.

Great to hear that, i'm 100% sure that you will get the same results as Bill Nelson and Ron Cole got.

Enough from me, will be quite and see what happens  :D

best luck, Super

[EDIT] Deleted.

@ Groundloop

...not enough research?  ;)

http://www.cheniere.org/misc/battery%20poppers.htm (http://www.cheniere.org/misc/battery%20poppers.htm)

No, i will not do bad to you here - please do not missunderstand me!
i will try to help!

It is essential to know all about this device to find later errors.
First error aspects could be the research information itself (i have postet the ... vs. ... before)

In this case your circuit is well designed and can handle these errors (variable switching frequency)
-> research or luck that you have dimensioned it up to 30 Mhz?

Anyway,

i'm interested in your further results and if needed i will try to help  :D

Super

[EDIT] Deleted..

[EDIT] Deleted.

[EDIT] Deleted.

Just to add a few more things. I have been playing with this 4 N.Tesla Switch for a little awhile. Some proof of concepts and here is another one.
This circuit is as simples as it can be. 2 coils and a switch. The switch is flipping I think at about 10 pulses per second max, may a little bit less (see the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXn2S_p4QiI) and the battery has been delivering a good current for hours and when it is finnished I switch the batteries and off it goes again.

Frequency is 16ms pulses (50% duty cycle).

It is standing a very long time compared to some load tests I have done when I playing with SSG (Bedini motor) and I never had it running and giving so much power out for so long. I really think the sudden cut off the current is THE trick.

Fausto.

[EDIT] Deleted.

[EDIT] Deleted.

@Groundloop,

thats great work. On my simple tests (as my last video) I got a very good result. The battery destination is charged up but not fully yet, after all I have a huge load (90+ LEDs fully bright to the point of hurting the eye). I let the source battery be totally depleted (I know it will hurt it, but I have done that already so many times) so when I switch them I want to see how far they will still run.

Tonight I will switch and test it again. I can clearly see that the sparks are totally different in color. The purple is simply beautifull. I will try to make a video to show the difference in colors, the yellowish against the blueish. My setup is a little different than the 4 switch becasuse what I wanted to accomplish is simulate the battery depletion part of if with a back EMF.  There is so much to explore there. One part of the circuit at the time. All at once for me is too much, too many variables.

Frequency is very very tricky because some low frequencies are perfect and I can see the amps delivered to be to the right point, not too much, not too little and the brightness of the LEDs (load) and the magnet pulses on the coil being the strongest which gives the best BEMF and high voltage. I think the ions on the battery will be "decieved" if the rigth resonance is accomplished so that they will kick electrons out of the battery but they will move toward the electrolite so that recharging happens again.

The blue spark only happens if you cut the current right after the coil is saturated and the BEMF has no place to go thats is something in that spark that is not the same as the electron sparks and I think thats the one that tricks the battery. I also think the HV will recharge somehow the battery but nothing more than what you already took out.

I am still using the relay because I think the speed of the "disconnection" is very fast and right there is something.

Fausto.

QuoteI can clearly see that the sparks are totally different in color.

:)

[EDIT] Deleted.

@Groundloop,

I would not advice to use the relay. They clumsy, noisy and they will break soon. I am using them really for quickness proof of concept and also because I do think the spark has something there for me to learn about. I think you are on the correct track with the solid-state quest. I saw your question at the other group and the response from Mike.

I even think your idea of using the pic is genius because we can hell control the timing on this thing better than electronics. I think you only really have to fix that up/down switching to the fastest that we can.

The relay I am using is the ones you can easily find at radio shack the problem is usualy those only have 2 switchs (6 poles) and for this 4 swtich Tesla stuff we need more and making them trigger in perfect synch is impossible. I am only testing the switching for one battery and coil just to see the effects I am to expect when I will be playing with the full circuit. I already concluded just doing that one test that timing IS everything and the battery DOES respond in a not very conventional manner. It does give more power than if you just use it in a steady current stream.

Remember those "decoupling" coils used by Bedini on the base of the trigger transistor? well I think they are more than just decouplers. You see, Bedini is a genius and he really makes things very simple but profoundly complex in its workings, so when I see those coils, transistors and so on I see much more that i "dont see".

Also I was thinking how he design things that are kind of self-regulators, they adjust themselfs as the signals travels through the parts (like the PN3055 transistor and the bifilar coil on the SSG triggering as the magnet pass by and shutting the transistor off imediatly because of the quick turn on of the transistor causes the magnet field and therefore the current on the other side of the coil). Nothing can beat that self-regulation at the "speed sensing" of the parts themselfs. Make sence?

We are working towards now with a , we find the timing, but it would be better if we could design something that finds that spot automatically, that's what I think those coils on the base of the transistor on the Brandt/Bedini is ALSO.

But, hey, one step at the time. Now I am learning about the coil saturation, its speed, the sparks, the response of the different kind of batteries and so on. For example the NIMH reacted very poorly compared to the Lead-Acid battery and I was expecting that because the Lead-Acid battery have the heavy ions to interect with in orders of magntude compared to the reactions inside the NIMH. Still the NIMH behaved much faster but drained faster too.

Get that design of yours going, dont give up, I think it will work it is really a matter as you know already about the fast switching fix.  :)

Fausto.

[EDIT] Deleted.

@Groundloop,

no I dont mean fast as frequency, I mean as switching rise time. The slope of the curve. Not how many pulses per second.

Fausto.

[EDIT] Deleted.

Here is a simple 4 battery relay version.

Steven

@Groundloop

check this out
"The final working model used the 2N5885 transistor instead of the 2N3055H as listed.
The control chip was the SG 3524 instead of the SG 3984 as listed. The system switched
slowly, at no more that 20 CPS."  (quote from below file)

at http://www.esmhome.org/library/john-bedini/report_on_4_battery_switch.pdf

Look into the 2N5885 instead of the 2N3055H.

Fausto.

[EDIT] Deleted.

<<This Tesla switch circuit as I have understood is simple device that
while you use (get work done) and discharge half of the batteries the
other half of the batteries gets charged with the flowing electrons on the circuit.

Is this so?

When deep cycle batteries are used for solar powered homes
this cycle is very chaotic! What I mean is: Sun can be
blocked by clouds many times a day, like wise
usage of the batteries constantly changes.
Perhaps, close to waves of the ocean!

Have ever thought about this charging speed process yourself?

Now my question to you is:
What do you think this discharge and
charge cycle speed of the circuit (fast or slow)

will be the most efficient?
Mem>>

@Mem

hello Mem. Accordingly to the related history, this switching device was tested by Tesla and a third party company. Tesla used this without stopping for months. This device (if working properly) works as you explained in a scientific explanation BUT what the findings that were related does not comply to that, instead, it runs the load and still keeps ALL the batteries FULLY charged.

You see, if we build this thing correctly it should run a load, such TV or radio for much longer than the total energy available on the batteries. It will not produce new energy (almost true) but it will run its power without loosing any power even though we still loose some on the switching, heat and other loses. That's the builty of this device.

Fausto.

@Groundloop

I have been testing my simplified node with two lead-acid batteries (5ah SLA) and I am about my 10 switch. Both batteries are to be considered depleted, below 3v. Still they manage to provide a constant 100ma of current in every switch until the voltage of the source battery goes to below 2v where the destination goes to above 7v. Than I switch both and start the process again. Whole process now is about 1/2 hour each run.

I have also been collecting (not perfectly for this first time) the voltages and currents of the source in a computer using a USB power analyser device. I already delivered in my first preliminaries over 30w of power and none of both together had more 7w each. I have been testing over this batteries for the Bedini SSG project for a long time and I never, I repeat, I never had such great performance before.

I must say the least there is a very promising technology here with this swtiching stuff.

Fausto.

[Edit: the diagram (my new drawing trial)]
ps: The impedance matching is a huge problem.
ps2: duty cycle is 10% to L1 90% to L2
ps3: [edit] It seams that I inverted the B2 and B3 connections to the diode bridge. Sorry about that!
ps4: [edit] Where is my head? oh boy, the diode bridge is all incorrect. Just imagine a correct bridge there!

[EDIT] Deleted.

@Groundloop,

yes I tried with other battery types. The lead-acid is the best to receive those high voltage spikes and convert them into real voltage and charge. The other batteries will simply get depleted faster and produce lost of "ghost" voltages.

I know about destroying the battery, but here is the thing, my worse battery "B" (long ago I kill it when playing with SSG) is now my BEST in receiving this HV and converting it to real power. It is simply amazing. I "cold boiled" it once and I think that's the secret.

BTW, good job on your designs. I am still going to play a little bit with the relays (I bought some good ones on jamenco) and after that I will try your circuit.

Fausto.

[EDIT] Deleted.

Some observations that i have:

- the batteries are depleting in this one node setup, but, they are never depleted totally. It is always producing enough energy back to run it again and generate watts for hours and days.
- faster switching is not necessarily the best. What seams to matter is that the destination battery gets some HV pulses and the source battery IS drainned so that it allows the charges to move or better, to resonate.
- impedance matching is very important, without it the source battery only drains very fast.
- There is a difference in the kind of electricity that is collected on my B3 and B2 (see drawing above) and the using a capacitor at B3 does not work as well as using a NIMH. B3 will have a "ghost" voltage but that voltage is changing the dynamics of the whole circuit.
- Switching the batteries back and forth FASTER is better.
- Having frequency pulsing IS important. So there are two things here: pulsing and switching the batteries or source of current.
- 4+ days now and still generating power with almost depleted batteries (technicaly they ARE depleted).
- The high voltage seams to be the same when B1 is giving 12v or 2v. Very strange.
- The voltages between B1 and B2 will be balancing each other. So starting with a higher voltage in one and lower in another will first cause a fast balancing and them you will be able to see some of the effects above.
- The residual voltages I have now are consistent with the drop voltage of the LEDs (load). Hmmm. ???

I can barely wait to start testing with 3 batteries (2 nodes).

Fausto.

ps: 4 day video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8TqhPbGDUE

You can try and make Tesla switch with the "back EFM recycler circuit" no diodes and FETs. Can't find those threads at the moment.

Maxc,

QuoteYou can try and make Tesla switch with the "back EFM recycler circuit" no diodes and FETs

To do that you got to have an induction coil somewhere in the circuit! I think this is a great idea...
I was thinking of that my self too.

My Tesla Switch almost ready to test, too: Mine is consist of 4 new 12 V tractor batteries,
The brain of the circuit is 2 transistor flip-flop oscilator, that turns on/off 2 solid state AC
relays (they are actualy opto coupled triacks) that turns 2 different sets of 4 mechanical relays
on & off. (This is only a test, thats why I used what ever was avalable to me)

After several hours of work, the circuit operates very well.
Now what is left matter of connecting the batteries on the circuit.

The operation of my circuit it's same as Groundloop's circuit!
Yet he's all electronic and high speed, mine is low speed
and switching of the batteries will take place with mechanical contacts.

Coming back to: Maxc idea above: My contacts will allow such
back EMF test is well, other then I don't how to incorperate induction
coil in the circuit? Plus batteries have high AMPs this couls cause problem!

Mem.>>

Get rid of the zeners diodes.  ???

[EDIT] Deleted.

Now I am testing a 3 batteries switch system based on the pdf (attached) page 21 (but changed to 3 batteries instead of 4). See also my video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dd2CeNLWahY.

It is giving a constant 60ma output at 3v. This is because of the kind of load (100 LEDs at 2.7v). Frequency is 100hz. I added a SSG coil at one of the outputs (in between one pole of the diode bridge and the cap) and the secondary (generating voltages over 400vpp - dont touch that baby) going to a "fourth" battery that is charging at 1v per hour while the other batteries are loosing .01v per hour. Very impressive.

Fausto.

Quote from: Groundloop on December 29, 2007, 04:43:13 PM
@Maxc,

Great circuit.  :D Have you built and tested the circuit?
Or is it just a simulation?

Groundloop.

I didn't build it. Somebody else posted it in another thread. I might build it I have some free time now.

just a note:  only one wire of the secondary of the SSG coils gives HV. The other one shows only small voltages. Very strange.

The fourth battery charges impressively fast. All the batteries, with the exception of one, stays at the same voltage. The one that is loosing voltage loses at 10x less, or slower, than the one the gains voltage via the coil. For each 0.01v lost I gain at least 0.1v.

The voltage created via the coils is NOT ghost voltage. Under test it stands a good charge (i.e. running a car light).

I think this is it. This 3 battery system is presenting good behaviors that are an improvement of all the others that I already noted with simplified nodes.

The next step is to replace relays with solid state (I ordered the correct ones now) and move to the 4 batteries switch.

Load is HIGHLY influent on the overall aspects of the system. Voltage on load will be automatically delivered based on the load characteristics. Current will also follow the load's needs. That will be a problem if one wants more output power and still keep the batteries charged. We can improve on that after this system is in working conditions. In other words, impedance is extremely important.

Whoever will try this, be very carefull with the coil wires. It is ***REALLY*** high voltage. 500+volts. It can kill you. I got a shock and I did not like it at all. It is really worse than sticking your fingers directly at an outlet (120vac).

Fausto.

(//)
Here is my design, low tec version. So far timer and relays works, all is left to connect the batteries.
The batteries I got are 4 standart 12 v lead acid core. Made for small tractors.
I just numbered the relay connection wires/terminals, or else it's to complicated to make the drawings.

Possibly relay contacts will burn out! If the load will be too large!. It will be interesting to see what the
come out of this experiment will be?
Mem.

I only remember having those strong feelings about something when I was living in Brazil and having many girl friends per month. A new girl friend, life was great. After break-up, everything was horrible. I feel the same with science. Experiments are going great, I am in love. They fail, I am in horrible shape.

Up and downs of life. Well. I used to that. Now back to work.

The 3 batteries switch is simply phenomenal. It was working very well until it simply died and died fast. So I decided to recharge all the batteries using my SSG and try another test with all at the same level, instead of how I had it. One fully charged and the other 2 half so.
In the process of charging the batteries I had an idea, why not use my SSG as the load, which is a much more efficient way to charge another battery instead of what I was doing with one coil that was going craizy with all that AC (magnetic field collapsing and before even finished here came another current to create another field, but ops, this time inverted and so forth).

With the SSG as the load a few things I could notice already on the begginning of the test:
1 - It adjusts itself as a load to the 3 bat switch. Its impedance changes as the charging battery changes and therefore the "load" seen by the "tesla switch" changes. That's absolutely great.
2 - SSG is charging a fourth battery much more efficiently than I could ever want.
3 - The 3 batteries are behaving a little bit different now, since all are charged almost to full capacity, but with different impedance for the load, they are much more stable in their voltages holding
4 - It seams that one of the batteries of the 3 is actually charging!!! (Time will tell).

Happy new years guys and get drunk but dont get lost!!!

Fausto.

ps: video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkPfMM3OL6c

[EDIT] Deleted.

just an update. My 3 batteries switch is running now for more than 24 hours and I already outputed about 20watts of power out of those 3 batteries plus another one that has being charged by the SSG machine that is used as a load on the 3 batteries switch.

I also tried today closing the loop, connecting not only one battery to the SSG but also another output from the same SSG back to one of the 3 batteries on the switch system.

It is working wonderfully. The wheel is spinning at about 600rpm and everything seams to be (after switching back and fourth the batteries) at stable voltages. Output increased to 12v and 200ma and fluctuates at min 6.5v and 60ma up to 16v and 500ma.

I think I already ran the power that was available on these batteries a long time ago and that is based on previous load tests I have been doing because of the SSG project (SSG = Simplified School Girl motor from Bedini).

Closing the loop seams to work well because the batteries are on and off by the switch plus the 22000uf caps that is decoupling things a bit.

I have to tell you, this thing is working at least very efficiently. Time will tell. I think if it runs without having to recharge any of the batteries for a week this is most definitely a super efficient device. I can't barely wait to try the 4 batteries switch, but one step at the time with lots of testing in between. I am also collecting all the output into the computer and running calculations based on the data. It is not super good data because of the speed of sampling but it is good enough for this preliminary tests.

@Groundloop

Man I am very curious to know how your tests are going.

Fausto.

Plengo

Fascinating results! I can see you are making rapid progress.....
If you would not mind, I would also like to give your 3 battery setup a try?
But first I will have to build a SSG similar to yours.
What materials did you use for your SSG?
Can you maybe direct me to some instructions to build an SSG like yours?
Thank you in advance and Happy New Year!

@passion1
sure. The SSG coil can be found in detail at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_Monopole3/. Look for the file section and you will find how to build one.

But here is the quickies: 315ft of 23awg and 18awg. Grab both at the same time and just go around a spool 1" in diameter until the whole 315ft is gone. You have to pay special attention to the direction of winding it so look at the yahoo group and read carefully. But there is no secret really. If you hold with your left hand the spool just wind it towards down, from your face (you looking at the spool) towards your feet or down using your right hand. Go on turning the wire and making sure they are close as possible with no gaps in between. Now ask your wife/girlfriend to bring the beer and sip it in your mouth before you die of boredom because 315ft is about 2000 turns!!!  ;D

Happy new year!!!

Fausto.

[EDIT] Deleted.

[EDIT] Deleted.

Quote from: plengo on January 01, 2008, 01:17:13 AM
Now ask your wife/girlfriend to bring the beer and sip it in your mouth before you die of boredom because 315ft is about 2000 turns!!!  ;D

@ Plengo

Thank you for the good advice!!  :)

@ Groundloop

Thank you for the circuit. I cannot wait to get home from holiday to try this....

@ Groundloop
   Hey just thought I would post this at ya and see what you think. Since you stated that the traces burn with no load on the system, then that brings to mind that you had a path for the current to flow. Namely, I mean the MosFets. They have a very fast turn on time and low internal resistance. This makes the switching critical. If you look at the pictoral in the D6b.pdf of the mechanical switch, you will notice 70 degree gaps in the conductors. That basicly forms a "Break before Make" type of switch.
   If you have a dual trace scope you will be able to see what I mean by scoping channel 1 on one set of fets and ch2 on the other. Then set to a very short sample time and see the overlap. I would suspect you are using the same signal just inverted to switch all six transistors.
   In all essence, you have an intermittent short happening and thus a lot of heat. There should be all but "NO" current flow on this without a load. Simply no load, each side will switch from parallel to serial connection but no flow between.

   On top of that, I have manually hooked up the circuit and included the caps and can get no output per se. I cant see how this will function with them in the works. Time will tell, I just finished chargeing 4 idenical 12v5ah gels and in the process of setting it up with 555's to form the break before make switching.  Have fun and lets make this fly

thaelin

Quote from: Groundloop on January 01, 2008, 05:35:49 AM
@Plengo,

I used 6 resistors to limit the max. current for each switch. My circuit is now running cool with
no wasted heat. All four batteries is slowely discharging even with no load on the output.

@Maxc

I think the circuit you posted is a better way to do it. Switching charge between capacitors and
just refill the needed power due to loss in the circuit. I will use my circuit but modify my capacitor
and diode board to switch between capacitors via a transformer.

Groundloop.

[EDIT] Deleted.

[EDIT] Deleted.

@ Groundloop

   Okies, now I see why you have constant current flow. The transformer. I have no transformer and thus no path.  ;)

   My setup is via the original Brandt 1983  bratt.jpg circuit. Verbetim. It works well. But therein lies the missunderstanding. I will be adding the triggers today and then fire it up and let it run to see what goes.

@plengo
    :P   Waiting to hear more on your setup.

thaelin

[EDIT] Deleted.

So this morning my 3 battery switch stoped running and all the batteries were at about 5 to 8v. I only stopped because the SSG will keep spinning but not really creating anything usefull now.

I outputed in all this 2 and 3 batteries systems 53.8watts of power. I usually charge each battery using a wall mart set at 12v and 100ma via the SSG. I run it for about 12 hours and sometimes for 24 hours. So right now I have no clue really how much power I put in those batteries before these runs.

This was just the preliminaries and now I will have to do the same I did for the SSG which is: measure how much I put in the batteries and how much comes out. I am impressed that I took out 53watts. If I had all 4 batteries fully charged they would, based on previous charges, have about 115watts of power in all 4 together. I took 53watts out measured so in worse case scenarios we have here a horrible less than 50% efficiency. But the reason for this first test was to really see if it would run at all.

So I think it was a success so far that I ran it for so long. Many things are strange. Connecting the output of the SSG into different batteries of the 3 swtich would produce extreme amout of power for 1/2 hour than go down. Switching again, it would happen again, and again and again. This system is very difficult to work with. But surprising too.

Now I am charging the batteries and keeping track of how long and how much they are taking IN. So I will run again the whole process and have a baseline this time. Cross fingers.

Fausto.

All:
  Well here is a simple way to get a 180 degree out of phase trigger for both sides from just a sine wave.
The diodes will inject a small pause between for the break before make. Nothing better than simple.

thaelin

Cant upload bitmaps so here is a text version of it.


                       |------------>|--------   Positive going signal
-----------------------|
                       |------------|<--------   Negative going signal

[EDIT] Deleted.

[EDIT] Deleted.

Quote from: Groundloop on January 02, 2008, 12:21:32 PM

Does anybody know if there exist power FET transistors without internal diodes?

Hi,

Unfortunately there isn't...    it is the manufacturing process for power MOSFETs that creates the internal diode.

However you can place a similar high speed/ultra fast diode in series with the drain, the diode's cathode is to be connected to the drain of the power FET and the diode's anode will be the 'new drain', I assume here an N channel FET.  This way this extra diode prevents any (reverse) current flow whenever the internal diode would conduct.  The price to be paid is the power loss on this diode (forward voltage drop times the switch-on current)

Or you could use bipolar power switching transistors instead of MOSFETs if you wish,  there are no internal diode between collector and emitter.

rgds,  Gyula

[EDIT] Deleted.

[EDIT] Deleted.

Hey guys,
I'm just jumping into this thread and may not be upto your level on circuit logic of this possible OU circuit. But..

Fets can be used backwards just as good as forwards. Same gate source/ voltage rules apply but now can forget about the FET conducting backwards!
If you see a problem with FETS conducting then use 2 back to back or front to front. Use optocouplers and drive the gates through a high impedance voltage supply. Like high resisstance to the powersupply or use diode voltage multipliers. Waste some power!

You can also use super capacitors instead of batteries.
I think this idea will work if you balance batts of line and recharge offline while your juggling the batts online with the load.

Also count on a working voltage less the the batts your using.

When I discharge a flashlamp into a capacitor I recover 80% power!

Cheers,
DGM

[EDIT] Deleted.

Quote from: Laserrod on January 03, 2008, 05:16:35 PM

When I discharge a flashlamp into a capacitor I recover 80% power!

Hi Laserrod,

Would you mind showing your schematics of you circuit which does what you wrote above? 

Thanks
Gyula

As I am charging my 4 batteries for the next step (4 Tesla Switch) I was trying to understand some phenomena that I have. Once running the "3 switch" I notice that one of the batteries had a 12.3v but as soon I disconnected momentarely and connected them again (in the same configuration - I was measuring voltages) I notice that that particular battery dropped voltage to something like 9v or lower and would not come back. The whole circuit right after would climb  down to a "totaly looser".

I was absolutely impressed. I just had posted my good findings (standing still and running good....) just right before this finding. Now, that I have plenty of time while charging the batteries and not doing anything but just prep work, I thought about it. My conclusions: for the 4 batteries to stand they MUST keep their voltages (even ghost voltages) so that IMPEDANCE is equivalent to the load circuit. As soon things change it will drop to a hill bottom.

That leads me to also, prematurely, conclude that voltage is VERY important, current is NOT.After all, there is not such a thing as current (my thoughts...).

Ghost voltage WILL hold this thing up. That's sound very interesting since Bedini and Tesla state that batteries voltages were pretty much the same as in the begginging. But as some others had done they will not stand a load.

As I was doing my experiments and changing some cables here and there (trying to balance batteries with SSG feedback) I notice many, many things. Some I have written down and some led me to more changes (Oh boy, I have to write this things down, never to believe I will remember them later). The obvious (the ones that I think I understand) I just changed but the ones that I did not understand I did write it down. Conclusions:
- the 3 battery system will not change the voltage of the "middle" battery. It will "think" it is only a conduct. But funny that that battery does not care about all the load irrelevant of how much that current is, could be 25ma to 1amp.
- feedback-ing to the MIDDLE battery (point above) will TOTATLY change the behaviour of the system. It will "think" it has a lot more "charge and potential" and will deliver a expressive voltage and current for a good time. Until the "other two" batteries "think" they lost their power. They never had any extra power to start with. Only connecting the SSG load into the system back (remember, SSG only deliver very little current and High voltage) would change dramaticaly everything until all is stabilized.
- stabilization lead always to a certain specific delivery voltage (load voltage, in my case 2.7 to 3v) because of the load itself. Current was limited by what the batteries now "think" they can deliver (since load has not changed a bit, so must be the other "system" changing, right?!!!).
- The amount of load makes NO difference. It is all about how much the batteries can receive as input without "thinking" is cost of a load. That one will be difficult to explain in my observations: More LEDs would cost my system more current but no more voltage (???!!!!). Time make no difference to how long to run, but changing the load frequently (more LEDS, less LEDs, more LEDS again, less LEDS) would make the system to adjust every-single time to it. Sometimes it would change in the sence of voltage delivery other times would change on the current delivery (which were the most costly on a long run). So I noticed that Voltage drop was VERY important (changing impedance???).
- There were poinst where thought this thing would run forever, but it changed the most right there. Could be what I see when load testing the batteries, they stand for such a time and them drop 1 or 2 volts and goes on again. But this time I could see that I would just stay running until something else changed and them bummm, it drop. The something else was me changing parameters back and fourth. Next time I will be more consistent. But unfortunately this one I can not advocate because of too many variables.
- batteries dont care about current IF they are not holding it. I think this is the MOST IMPORTANT thing I found out about this system. Think!!! how can one battery receive all the "power" from another battery after passing (let's say a lamp) and accept it? Reversal "electron flow" would charge the battery? and still leave at the other node and still think it is charging? (dumb battery, does not understand anything about savings account LOL...). No, current flow (what ever that may be) is irrelevant. This is about SIGNAL exchange. Synch is HIGHLY important. They must "think" they have not loosed anything, neither received anything, neither moved anything. Do you see what I am thinking?

I know I am stupid, but those ARE my conclusions based on my observations.

@Groundloop,
since You are the one with the most testing and progressing towards real circuits and logic here, can you express in more details your observations? (Please) I am dying to kknow what you have found out. I know you said a few times that IN was less than OUT but for me that means absolutely nothing because there is still so many variables for US to digest and work upon. Then only, then we will be able to state for sure IN < OUT (no OU). Do you have more empirical data whatever that may be?

Fausto.

[EDIT] Deleted.

Hi @ all

wow, how much to read after my last visit  :) (was in holidays over silvester)

As far as i read  ... the idea with the transformer or inductance is great, close to the mueller experiments.

I hope to find some time to study all your circuits.

Hmm, whats about double switching? Sorry did not read all for now ... double switching makes the think a way more complex as it is today.
Switching the batteries at low speeds ~ 20 cps or less (4 battery switching), and switching the main-power-way on/off  at high clockrates ~ 400Hz up to xx Mhz (optional transformer in mass connection between the batteries - mueller report 2 battery experiment ...) .

@ Groundloop, please give me some time to look at your circuit, very busy with my work (holidays are over  ;) )

@ Plengo, cool new videos thx for sharing with us!

Super

@Groundloop 
I built your circuit, (to see the original circuit, go to page #6)
and worked right away. But for some reason coil rings like a speaker when I put a magnet on it.  Output is around 50 V , input is adjustable from 40 ma to several amp. It?s a very good battery and capacitor charger.
During the operation there is low audioable ring that comes from the coil. 
I tried to close the loop by using large mf capacitor on the output, and then use that capacitor to power the circuit? It worked for 3 seconds.
I tried to charge the same battery while it was powering the circuit:
After for some trial and error I found out that 12 volt and 40 ma input was able to charge the it?s own battery in 6 minutes battery voltage from: 12.12 volt to12.15 volt. (Higher then 40 ma input amps drains it's own battery)
I left the device on more then an hour and voltage remain the same 12.15
This device has the ability to quickly charge DC capacitors more then 200 volts.
Thanks for making and sharing the circuit.
Mem>>

[EDIT] Deleted.

[EDIT] Deleted.

Hi Groundloop,

Groundloops are a BIG problem but I like your schem of bat FET opros and PIC!

I was inspired to critic your circuit so please take this as help, not DIS.

Power each optos collector through a single res with a cap across collector to to that FETs source from a single PS of 15v plus bat voltage. The resistor will isolate opto collectors when they all use a common above bat volt supply that insures FET gate drive. You want the FET to turn completly on by using 15v gate drive above FET source. Your schem won't work good as is.

It's like each Fet is opto driven from a isolated source. Have each FETs driver floating so it's driver ground stays with its FET source. Hope U get it now. Some FETs turn on at w/ gate volts others more...


Add a more opto driven FETs instead of diodes to prevent .7v x Amp power loss , as I said B4 hook it up backwards!  That's called syncron. rectifi... If the FET is off it's a lossy diode.

Sorry I can't sugarcoat it all for U.  It's a great idea and I think it will be rewarding!

Cheers

DGM

[EDIT] Deleted.

Ok guys,

I have some surprising data to explain. I decided now to test my 4 switch this time using a simulator where I would have 4 caps of a certain value arranged as if they were 4 batteries. They are all arranged where the switchs are done manually, simulating off course the 4 swtich that Brandt used but more in a conceptual format.

I performed 4 type of tests where in each test 2 caps would be fully charged to 12v (I used here 22000uf caps giving a total of 264mC for 12v). Let's call each cap by C1, C2, C3 and C4. Then connect two group of caps (C1, C2) to the other two group of caps (C3, C4) changing only the arrangement and letting the exchange of "charges" complete until no current is flowing among them.

Each test is basically this:
test 1)  C1 and C2 fully charged to 12v being equal to 264mC. Connect them in SERIES. Caps C3 and C4 are uncharged (so 0volts) and they are connected in SERIES. Now connect C1 and C2 to C3 and C4  as C1~C2 --> C3~C4 ( ~ means series and -> means connect).
   Result was:
      C1 = 12v and 264mC
      C2 = 8v  and 176mC
      C3 = 4v  and 88mC
      C4 = 4v and 88mC

test 2) C1 and C2 fully charged to 12v being equal to 264mC (Same as before). Connect them in PARALLEL. Caps C3 and C4 are uncharged (so 0volts - same as before) and they are connected in SERIES. Now connect C1 and C2 to C3 and C4  as C1 ! C2 --> C3~C4 ( ! means parallel and -> means connect).
   Result was:
      C1 = 9.6v and 211.2mC
      C2 = 9.6v and 211.2mC
      C3 = 4.8v and 105.6mC
      C4 = 4.8v and 105.6mC

test 3) C1 ~ C2 --> C3 ! C4 (C1 and C2 in SERIES and C3 and C4 in PARALLEL)
   Result was:
      C1 = 8v and 176mC
      C2 = 8v and 176mC
      C3 = 4v and 88mC
      C4 = 4v and 88mC

test 4) C1 ! C2 --> C3 ! C4 (C1 and C2 in PARALLEL and C3 and C4 in PARALLEL)
   Result was:
      C1 = 6v and 132mC
      C2 = 6v and 132mC
      C3 = 6v and 132mC
      C4 = 6v and 132mC

As you can see by the numbers we have the following conclusions:

SERIES going to SERIES
When having C1 ~ C2 going to C3 ~ C4 result is an increase in 33% final sum of voltage and mC. In other words, I started with a sum of 24v of both C1 and C2 and a sum of 528mC from both C1 and C2. C3 and C4 having 0v and 0mC. Final results were an increased total overall C1, C2, C3 and C4 to 28v and 616mC being then a 133% total or 33% increase.

PARALLEL going to SERIES
When having C1 ! C2 going to C3 ~ C4 result is an increase in 20% final sum of voltage and mC. In other words, I started with a sum of 24v of both C1 and C2 and a sum of 528mC from both C1 and C2. C3 and C4 having 0v and 0mC. Final results were an increased total overall C1, C2, C3 and C4 to 28.8v and 633.6mC being then a 120% total or 20% increase.

SERIES going to PARALLEL
When having C1 ~ C2 going to C3 ! C4 result is an net of 0% increase or loss on the final sum of voltage and mC. In other words, I started with a sum of 24v of both C1 and C2 and a sum of 528mC from both C1 and C2. C3 and C4 having 0v and 0mC. Final results were and net equal to total overall C1, C2, C3 and C4 to 28v and 528mC being then net of 0% increase/loss.

PARALLEL going to PARALLEL
When having C1 ! C2 going to C3 ! C4 result is an net of 0% increase or loss on the final sum of voltage and mC. In other words, I started with a sum of 24v of both C1 and C2 and a sum of 528mC from both C1 and C2. C3 and C4 having 0v and 0mC. Final results were and net equal to total overall C1, C2, C3 and C4 to 28v and 528mC being then net of 0% increase/loss.

Repeating the experiment using the simulator gave me the same results every single time. As one can observe the simulator correctly stated that when transfering the "charge" from two cap in parallel to another two caps in parallel it only distributed the "charges" equally among them. So I assume that the same is true for the other tests above.

I will tonight do a real lab experiment for these scenarios so assert those number above are correct. I must say already that some of my tests using the 3 swtich setup with the real batteries kind of reflected some of the tests above more specifically the test number 1 (Series to Series) where on of my batteries would not fluctuate in voltage as you guys can see in some of my previous posts.

I am totally astonished by theses results because in 2 tests the net result of voltage and "charge" was higher than the initial setup. I can barely wait to test this in real lab and to replicate this in higher frequency than I can do by one instant. This kind of demonstrates the claims done by who replicated this 4 swtich device succesfully. If done properly it is possible , at least mathematically, to use the current of the exchange of the "charges" for a load and still keep the original voltages and total net "charges".

I have available to who wants the liveWire file that I setup for this experiment. It is possible to also use SPICE.

Fausto.

ps:[Edit] I just updated the Caps orders on the tests. So it should always be C1 and C2 GOING to C3 and C4.

[EDIT] Deleted.

Hi Fausto and All,

I have checked your calculations.  I know the formula for calculating the Q charge stored in a capacitor is Q=1/2(C*V*V), ok?  So if your C=22000uF which is 0.022F, and you charge up this capacitor to 12V, then the stored charge is: (0.022*12*12)/2=1.584C, ok? 

Now in your  test 1:

C1 = 12v and  1.584C
C2 = 8v  and   0.704C
C3 = 4v  and   0.176C
C4 = 4v  and   0.176C,  ok?

Now in your test 1 when you connect C1 and C2 in series, their voltages add up to 24V but their resultant capacity gets half of any one of them! This means that when you discharge them into any load (be it two series capacitors or any other load) the resultant capacitance of C1 and C2 in series will be 11000uF i.e. 0.011F!
This means that the charge they represent will be (0.011*24*24)/2=3.168C  and this will be available to charge up C3 and C4.   
Now let's calculate if there is any extra charge available after your test 1 when we consider your test 1 results. We simply add up the charges of C1 to C4 as 1.584+0.704+0.176+0.176=2.64C,  ok?

So you have received 28V from 2*12V=24V input voltage and you have received 2.64C charge from 3.168C input charge. 

So you seem to have a gain of  16.6% in voltage but a loss of 20% in charge. This seems strange...

I have no time now to check your other 3 tests, maybe tomorrow when I have time.  If you or anyone else disagree with my calculations please write.  I hope your real world tests will bring better results and then calculations will be also closer to truth,  so far we have been playing with numbers from simulations, right?

rgds,  Gyula

Gyula,
I connected a charged cap in series with a discharged cap across a Xenon tube/inductor and simply ionized the tube with a 3 dollar Mouser trigger transformer enerzised w/scr .1uF 200v charged cap. The inductor keeps the current transfering/shuttling from cap,tube to cap.
two 450v 560uF electrolitics thats 57 WS a piece. The trick is getting a impedance match. Think of how you start out in 1st gear and shift up to match avail power to load.

I believe there is a unobservable process with discharges that captures radiant.

Ed Gray motor uses HV sparks from a carbon electrode and a special surround grid to capture radiant energy.

The Corrias copied that idea to patient "Abnormal Glow Discharge Generator." (spark between plates in a vacuum tube and plate/rectifier circuit)

And I think lightning taps that aether/gravity energy too.

I think the neon bulb would simplifie implementing my spark gap/nature sync timing idea and I've just read you guys have been using spark gap too.

The experts say lightning bolts are triggered from outer space by XRAY pulse but I beleave they have it backwards; the lightning causes the XRAY pulse; the avalanche is triggered by scaler/gravity interference then lightning generates XRAY.

Man, I heard a lightning bolt last night that I'll never forget. It was astronomaile and must have sprited out of this universe!  I'm in Mo and I bet they heard it in Colorado. Wow. Tornados around too!
H2O is the best dielectric.


@OTTO
3 layer TPU sounds great man, liked to buy U a beer. Good things come the the hardest workers!

Cheers

DGM

Groundloop,
You need to make a PS to feed you opto fet drivers. Use a diode/cap booster deal or something. FETS should not get hot because 15mOHMS at 10-30 amps is .5 watt. If you use  bipolar instead it's 21 watts device dissipation. If the FET diode is trouble; just use FETs back to back. You got to learn how to float each each opto/fet switch. Think of all the power you save compared to bipolar voltage drops!
Most power FETs need 10v or more on the gate to be full on. I hope you understand what I'm saying.
Fets are great! They need lots of volts to turn on & the gate is a @.0001uF  load & needs to be driven hard so while it's turning on it's dropping voltage, it should be quick enough as to not get hot.
Transistors/bipolar need current. FETs need voltage to vary output power.
When a FET is full on you can disconnect the gate and the gate charge will linger to keep it on.
The FET power savings adds up when your running 30 amps or so.

BTW the best music amps uses a FET PA. FETs are as good or better than tube amps.
Less heat less problems with FETs!
Tubes and FETs are both voltage linear.

Cheers
DGM

[EDIT] Deleted.

Quote from: Groundloop on January 09, 2008, 04:53:29 PM
[EDIT] Deleted.

Groundloop,

Sorry to see you have deleted your contributions.  I hope your excellent experiments brings you the desired results and much fun too.

Gyula

@ALL
I wish we would never piss people off!!!

@gyulasun
I understood what you said, even tought I think there was a little math error on your calculations. I am still working on the simulation to see at what level things get the "charges" transfered from cap to cap and how much is lost or not.

You see, I think it is impossible for the 'charge' to get lost or waisted but i understand that "energy" is lost during the process, I dont quite agree with it tough.

In real lab tests so far I did notice that the conservation of the "charge" is there and transfering from 2 parallel caps to 2 in series back and forth DOES work but looses about 15% or so of "energy" in each transfer, still one can loop this thing for a long time with just one "charge" from the battery source to the caps and let the caps feed a load until the whole "charge" is lost. (I keep saying "charge" in quotes so that all see that I mean "charge" = displacement of unequal distribution of charges on space, such as the plates of the caps or poles of a battery terminal, in other words, charges are the particle carriers of its energy sign and they not necessary move around space even tought they can, but their energy makes the space around be changed).

What is puzzleling me is the fact that 2 caps in parralel would transfer to 2 other caps also in parallel without ANY LOSS, being that all have the same Faraday capacity. That's something. So I am trying to figure out, before my next lab test, what is the BEST compination of transfering those charges back and fourth with the minimun loss as possible. Off course I am trusting (assuming) that the simulator is taking care of the mathematics for me to the absolute perfection known to the developers.

Fausto.

@All,

I deleted my posts because they are no longer relevant to this discussion.

@Plengo,

Have you seen this document: http://home.no/ufoufoufoufo/FECAP/cond.zip

Groundloop.

@Groundloop,

man THANK YOU that document is exactly inline with what I am thinking. Even the concept of charges they think the same that I just explained before. So you know that I am looking for now is what that document is showing, how to get the "energy" not lost and distribute that over the caps but in a way that we can use it again and keep that loop, looping.

I think also that when they explain about the Whimshurst-Machine is what happen in the battery ( in different ways off course) and which allows the "energy" to be not lost in the process of switching the batteries.

I really think we are at something here. Good theory, some experiments done. Let's accomplish more and the best, knowing "why" it works.

Fausto.

@Plengo,

Now that we know what we are up against, let us take this in small steps. My first goal will be
getting my HEXFET based switch up and running. We really need a good test bed that waste
no power at all. (Or at least as little as possible.) I have tried this before with my FECAP device
with poor results. So this time I will tweak my circuit until I get it right even if I have to turn
some HEXFETs the wrong way around and use higher gate voltages. I'm also thinking on using
some FET drivers ICs. I will have my next prototype PCBs in house around the 17 th. so I
guess I have to wait until then before I get any further with this project. I will be testing on my first
prototype while waiting for those PCBs to see what configuration I need to have for the best result.
I have also started to look into using small signal transformers instead of opto-couplers. The
transformers I have will handle signal rates up to a maximum of 15 MHz pulse ramp time. This should
be fast enough for this project. The big advantage with those transformers is the low power needed
to operate them. A opto-coupler waste up to approx. 20 mA at 5 Volt. A transformer do not. So sometime
in the near future I will have a good working loss-less switch for this project. I just need to slow down a
bit and think through this concept at a different angle.

Groundloop.

Quote from: plengo on January 09, 2008, 07:16:16 PM
@ALL
I wish we would never piss people off!!! 

Hi Fausto,  I fully agree with your wish!

Quote from: plengo on January 09, 2008, 07:16:16 PM
@gyulasun
I understood what you said, even tought I think there was a little math error on your calculations.
What is puzzleling me is the fact that 2 caps in parralel would transfer to 2 other caps also in parallel without ANY LOSS, being that all have the same Faraday capacity. That's something. So I am trying to figure out, before my next lab test, what is the BEST compination of transfering those charges back and fourth with the minimun loss as possible. Off course I am trusting (assuming) that the simulator is taking care of the mathematics for me to the absolute perfection known to the developers.

Fausto.

Well,  would you mind pointing out my little math error in my calculations?  Often it is easier to see others' mistakes than realize our own mistakes...  ::)

Regarding circuit simulators, one has to be careful with the results received from them. It all depends first on the component models the simulator is using. In case of capacitors it is advisable to check if the model has got a series (or parallel) equivalent resistor to account for the losses that surely appear in a real electrolytic capacitor for instance. Because if your simulator just uses an ideal capacitor model then results will differ from real practical behavior. I suggest to connect normal resistors in parallel with all four capacitors in the simulation for your test 1 and run it again and see then the voltages on each capacitor. The value of the resistor could be 10 MegaOhm each.

In Groundloop's link, in the cond.doc there is a good point: to transfer charges through a coil (or transformer) so that a gain of 1.41 can be received.  I do not know yet if this is going to manifest in practice, I wish it would!
This same circuit was a topic on other Forums (for instance by Marcus Wagner in a Bedini yahoo group if I recall correctly) but unfortunately I have never ever seen it built and measured and what results may have been received from it.

Keep up good work,

Ciao,  Gyula

Hi guys,
Groundloop,
I would have apriciated a mention or thank you for helping you. Your work will be rewarded anyway.
Sounds to me like your focus on succsess had precise acuracy now.!

Cheers,
DGM

Quote from: Laserrod on January 10, 2008, 07:39:09 AM
Hi guys,
Groundloop,
I would have apriciated a mention or thank you for helping you. Your work will be rewarded anyway.
Sounds to me like your focus on succsess had precise acuracy now.!

Cheers,
DGM

Dear DGM,

While I cannot fully understand  why your mainly general notices on this MOSFET switching you wrote in this thread to Groundloop would be of much, much help,  it is just you who tend to ignore some response...
I mean my question for instance in this thread on January 3 put to you: http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3316.msg67888.html#msg67888  and you elegantly slipped that over.
Don't tell me you have not noticed it....

By the way, Groundloop wrote he would prefer using small signal transformers to opto couplers and it was NOT your advice.  This is an open Forum, once you write about an idea/circuit/advice, it will be seen by many people and unless you say you copyright your circuit/idea etc. it may get into public domain.  Of course it is up to each person reading it to make a reference where, when and from whom he/she has taken that idea/circuit/advice, from my part I always refer to the particulars, for me and for many other persons this is natural,  PROVIDED there IS something important, propriatory, etc in that circuit/idea/advice in question.

I mean no offence with this letter, I simply felt writing out this for you.

Respectfully
Gyula

@Laserrod,

Thanks for your comments. I think I need all help that I can get on this project.
It will also be helpful with real circuit drawings and suggestions on how to solve
a particular problem. BTW: I did delete my post because of the "sum" of Internet
feedback lately, NOT because of you or another single person.

@Gyulasun

You have good points. Sharing circuit solutions is a good way to solve a problem.

I will repost my circuit drawing when I have the new prototype (version 2) ready.
I have tried to get this to work before with poor results. I made a circuit I called FECAP.
You can see that project here: http://home.no/ufoufoufoufo/FECAP/fecap.htm
I still has the circuit drawings if someone want to have a look. But that circuit did
not work at all.

After I have tested the version 2 then I will try out the transformer idea. This circuit will be more
like the Bedini/Brandt circuit. But I think we must go slow and do a lot of tests before we can get
any good results.

Groundloop.

@All,

I guess you have looked at the document found here: http://home.no/ufoufoufoufo/FECAP/cond.zip

This document describes the method of filling a cap via an inductor coil so that we get a 1.4 Gain.
Is there anybody reading this that can check the math in this document? (I'm poor with math.)

Now if we look at the attached document, is this (described in the document) what we are doing here?
First we charge up two caps (in parallel) via an inductor coil. Then we series those two caps and dump
them into the other two caps (in parallel) via an inductor coil. Any comments on this?

Groundloop.

@gyulasun 
sorry about that. I think I am not thinking right. I "thought" I saw an little math error (just adding the numbers) but there is none.

I will try that idea of the resistor to mimic more of real life scenarios. My goal now is to first proof concept if it is even possible mathematically using the simulator that could be doing things in a more than perfect but the margins of erros here would be neglectible because if it would show a 10% gain here and there would be just enough to show if it "could be possible" or not. Real lab will really dictate the success, but before that long hours running things I want to see where is the best spot to test first.

@Groundloop,
yes, that what we are trying to do at least for now. I have not thought of another explanation yet for the success of the 4 switch system. Either the caps are doing something in a not very linear phasion, just as explained by the square relation between voltage and charges, and or, the coil is doing something interesting.

I think the two is the secret really. I always thought that, but I really want to test one and each one of them at the time so that if we are succefull we will also know where to improve.

I am still playing with more configurations of caps being charged and discharge with all sort of combinations and I am seeing interesting things. Caps in series discharging to caps in series are different beasts. Also, what would happen if as in the document, we discharge a cap to the coil but having a load right there in between, then another load right after the coil discharges to the second cap? twice the same 1/2 energy utilized? Would that be a total of 1 "energy" therefore not loosing any really?

Why coils do that? is it because they are really hundreds may be thousands of little caps in series or parallel inside? ???

So many tests to run.... This is so exciting! ;D

Fausto.

@Groundloop

Can you post this?

QuoteHave you seen this document: http://home.no/ufoufoufoufo/FECAP/cond.zip

I've had no luck at all in downloading it as it times out.

tak

@tak22,

I have tried several times to post this document but get this error message:

" The attachments upload directory is not writable. Your attachment or avatar cannot be saved."

[EDIT] I have tried approx. 20 times now. Both as .zip and as .doc
          The document has drawings and is useless as .txt formet.
           Check your PM, I can mail it to you.

Groundloop.

thanks for the attempt. are you trying to post the cond.zip file? maybe try posting the unzipped document, or if it's just text you could insert it. thanks.

tak

Quote from: Groundloop on January 10, 2008, 11:32:25 AM
This document describes the method of filling a cap via an inductor coil so that we get a 1.4 Gain.
Is there anybody reading this that can check the math in this document? (I'm poor with math.)

Hi Groundloop,

Well, maybe I am wrong but following the logic introduced first in Pages 3 and 4 and then in Pages 8 and 9 the math seems ok BUT I have not seen anybody reporting he has got a 1.4 Gain in practice. I have not done this personally either.

Quote from: Groundloop on January 10, 2008, 11:32:25 AM
Now if we look at the attached document, is this (described in the document) what we are doing here?

Well, not exactly because of the different number of switches and capacitors.  In the cond.doc file there is only one real on/off switch and they suggest a diode for the other switch to transfer the charge to C2 ( Page 8, Picture 9, the right side of the toggle switch is not needed and can be substituted by high speed switching diode).

Quote from: Groundloop on January 10, 2008, 11:32:25 AM
First we charge up two caps (in parallel) via an inductor coil. Then we series those two caps and dump
them into the other two caps (in parallel) via an inductor coil. Any comments on this?

I think this setup you refer to has been simulated and -with small changes was tested by different people and nobody has managed to prove ou by correct measurements. See this link here: http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,133.0.html 
or this one is much more interesting: http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1942.0.html  (seeing the different brightnesses of the lamps visually does not neccessarily mean ou...)
and from an earlier thread here: http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,204.0.html   

So I think that as a first step the circuit in Picture 9, Page 8 of the cond.doc is to be tested with real components to check for the 1.4 Gain.  Then the second step could be Fausto's 4 cap test 1 (SERIES going to SERIES via a coil) because he says strange behavior in that case. I am sorry for not able to do real hands-on experiments now due to another commitment but will try to be of help here with schematics discussion etc.

Rgds,  Gyula

@Gyulasun,

Thank you for taking time to read the document. I did look at the links you provided. Very interesting to see that other people had a go at this replication also. According to the math it is possible to charge up a capacitor through a coil and then discharge the same capacitor through a coil again without big loss. I will continue my work to get a (almost) loss less switch for this project. I'm currently learning to do simulations in various programs. Never to late to teach an old dog new tricks. LOL Those advanced simulation programs was not available "in the old days" because the computer did not exist. I will take this in slow steps as said before. First goal for me is getting a good simulation going. Then I can model real life on my first prototype switch. Next goal is to get the battery switch to work. So I'm working on both methods for switching. Third and final goal is using signal transformers instead of opto-couplers.

Groundloop.

@ Groundloop
   I just got 4 of the audio transformers from RS (1K/8ohm) to play with. The switching characteristics is great. Using the amplitude of the sig gen I could control the length of the on time. Using square wave signal was the best. I am using them in a different situation but can see where 6 more will be going.

thaelin

@Thaelin,

Thats great. If your planning to replicate the Bedini/Brandt circuit then you will need two more.
Do you have the RS order number for those transformers?

Groundloop.

   By order number I presume you mean the RS part number. That is 273-1380  and was $2.99 each.  Hope that helps ya.

thaelin

@Thaelin,

Thanks.

Yes I meant part number. My english will probably improve as time goes by, I hope. :D

Groundloop.

    It all works as long as we get there. Just finished my last test and thoes little trannies sure dont like 2mhz very well. Still triggers but just strange looking wave form.
   Should do fine for the switch as it will be below the 20k area.

thaelin

@groundloop,
Your welcome and I'll post some schematics in future when I have built them but in thhe meantime I'll harp in with some ideas
when I have em. Computer monitors have alot of little hifreq Txs. rectify the output to the gate, have a cap and res across gate source.
But I would use optos and make a 3v PS to volt supply them and save powerand I'm doing soon with a diode floating gate drive circuit.
There is one on the net somewhere I bet.

@guyla,
I did respond to you question with some delay. I'll be glad to answer your questions in time.

Sorry if I was abrasive.

DGM
Keep posting guys so we all can share.

@Laserrod,

You help is appreciated.

I think if we work together with this project then maybe we can get the replica going.
I still have to wait some few days for my new PCBs.

Groundloop.

Hi All,
@Groundloop,
You have my highest respect, I am at your service at my limits. I need people like you to push me with that kind of momentim you have, it helps me focus, it's a win win.

Cheers,
DGM

It has often annoyed me to respond to a post that magically disappears.  I probably need to review this thread to understand what is being said but that's irrelevent to the point I'd like to make.  Here is the point.  You make comments based on what  you see then "magically" what you see is no longer there!  Is that amazing or what?!?  Magic is a hell of a thing

To protect yourself from that magic I'd suggest you quote in its entirety everything you're responding to.  If you do that you can create or establish the context of your response.

As far as I can see if you don't do what I suggest you might as well keep your friggin mouth shut.  Can anyone see something here that I'm missing?

Please share.  I'd like to know.  Below is a link to culprit in question.

Quote from: Groundloop on December 22, 2007, 08:46:47 AM
[EDIT] Deleted.

delted my friggin arse.

Quote from: Bessler007 on January 12, 2008, 08:06:58 PM
It has often annoyed me to respond to a post that magically disappears.  I probably need to review this thread to understand what is being said but that's irrelevent to the point I'd like to make.  Here is the point.  You make comments based on what  you see then "magically" what you see is no longer there!  Is that amazing or what?!?  Magic is a hell of a thing

To protect yourself from that magic I'd suggest you quote in its entirety everything you're responding to.  If you do that you can create or establish the context of your response.

As far as I can see if you don't do what I suggest you might as well keep your friggin mouth shut.  Can anyone see something here that I'm missing?

Please share.  I'd like to know.  Below is a link to culprit in question.

Quote from: Groundloop on December 22, 2007, 08:46:47 AM
[EDIT] Deleted.

delted my friggin arse.

@Bessler007,

When you get a lot of mails with virus attachments, a hacked computer with deleted files and comments like this then you want to quit this forum. I was really thinking of quitting this forum, deleted my files, ready to unsubscribe,  but then a member urged me to stay. Now I'm not so sure I why I did stay. There is just too many bad people out there, but I do not think you are one of them! What do you want to know? I can repost the circuit drawings if that is what your missing.

Please do not use foul language, I do not deserve that and neither do any other member on this forum!

Groundloop.

   There will always be some out there that have nothing better to do than jump on others. Like I said, just ignore them.

Now onto better things. I have finished the 4 batt system.  Have a goof somewhere in it. Tranny six gets hot, but motor tries to run. Can see the switching going on with the scope. I did find a goof in the schematics. The one I used has the bridge rectifier set up wrong. If you make it your self like I did with 3amp diodes, check the polarities or just use a reg bridge.

thaelin

@Thaelin,

Did you build the battery switching unit? (My version attached.)
Or, did you build the transformer version? (My basic method circuit attached.)

[EDIT] Updtaed the circuit drawing.

Groundloop.

   It is the standard 4 switch that bedini had at the symposium with the nicad batts. I just substituted 12v 5 amp bats instead. I am needing some sleepy time so will go over the board to see where I made the mistake. Transistor 6 gets hot and shouldn't. When I wire up the 4 bats manually, it all works good. Over 25v opposed to 13 giving  a good strong 12v for the motor to run off of. Ran it for a couple of minutes manually and the parallel bats went up over 16v so need to keep the switch time less. Promising tho. Time will tell. More later.
   At the rest of y'all
           Lets do it

thaelin

@Thaelin,

Did you build it just like the attached drawing shows?
Can you post your circuit drawing?

Groundloop.

Hello  Groundloop,

Do not attempt to make an equivalency between you and the other members of this forum.  There is none.  The overwhelming, vast majority of people that post here do so and let it stand.  You delete your posts eliminating any context of the responses.

By doing that you waste people's time (like mine) that attempt to understand what happened.

You are not like the vast majority of people that post here.  You deserve to be cussed up one side and down the other.

I might add I don't need your understanding of a circuit.  I've taken circuits from my imagination and built them.

Quote from: Groundloop on January 12, 2008, 08:29:48 PM

Quote from: Bessler007 on January 12, 2008, 08:06:58 PM
It has often annoyed me to respond to a post that magically disappears.  I probably need to review this thread to understand what is being said but that's irrelevent to the point I'd like to make.  Here is the point.  You make comments based on what  you see then "magically" what you see is no longer there!  Is that amazing or what?!?  Magic is a hell of a thing

To protect yourself from that magic I'd suggest you quote in its entirety everything you're responding to.  If you do that you can create or establish the context of your response.

As far as I can see if you don't do what I suggest you might as well keep your friggin mouth shut.  Can anyone see something here that I'm missing?

Please share.  I'd like to know.  Below is a link to culprit in question.

Quote from: Groundloop on December 22, 2007, 08:46:47 AM
[EDIT] Deleted.

delted my friggin arse.

@Bessler007,

When you get a lot of mails with virus attachments, a hacked computer with deleted files and comments like this then you want to quit this forum. I was really thinking of quitting this forum, deleted my files, ready to unsubscribe,  but then a member urged me to stay. Now I'm not so sure I why I did stay. There is just too many bad people out there, but I do not think you are one of them! What do you want to know? I can repost the circuit drawings if that is what your missing.

Please do not use foul language, I do not deserve that and neither do any other member on this forum!

Groundloop.

@Bessler007

We are trying to work here. Make history. Be difference in the world. We are creating new things. Please. Post your work. Let's be productive. He has a reason well understood by some for removing the posts. Even that is posted before.

We need to work together. Eliminating all unecessary comments and disagreements. The goal is to create something new, learn and be productive. If the intent is NOT that we shall look elsewhere.

Certainly this thread is NOT waste. Even if things are missing. We will suceed.

Fausto.

Hello Fausto,

It is work to read and understand some threads.  When major parts disappear it becomes even more work.  Thank you for restoring some of your posts, Groundloop.

I do understand the frustration of having people treat your property as if they have some right to use it by attempting to hijack your machine.  I think I use Linux for the same reason I have a loaded double barrel sawed off handy to greet some people.  You never know who might come knocking.

I think you have to decide what you're willing to share and once you've made that decision to let it stand.  This thread began last year in the middle of September and has over 140 replies.  It is a lot of work to read and digest.

In my not so humble opinion, when you've given something to a community you shouldn't take it back. If that's a tyrannical opinion well then . . .

Bessler the Tyrant
mib HQ

Quote from: plengo on January 13, 2008, 01:59:28 AM
. . .   . Post your work.
. . .

Hi Groundloop:
   Yes that circuit by bedini with the signal transformers it what I used. I traced the problem to a dead transistor, high leakage and thats why it got hot. Partialy on when it should have been off. Ready to install a new one in its place. Should fix.
   Did another manual run of the circuit for 7 minutes just using jumper cables and to my surprise, both sets of bats showed more voltage after resting for over a half hour when I walked down to RS for the trannies. Intersting to say the least.  No ureka but sure is funny. Just wired two serial and two parallel and put a motor in between that has a 3 amp draw under load and let it run.
   To the trany. Then the test begins.

thaelin

@Thaelin,

Just remember that when you load a battery then the internal resistance drops and the battery gain voltage. The charge in the battery is dropping. Only a long time run with the battery swapping circuit will tell the truth.

Groundloop.

   What my expectations are is that I will see loss over all for the work done. AKA the motor spinning the low drag gen will consume some. Just in this mode of energy transfer the excess is being transfered to the other batteries instead of nowhere. What I mean by that is once it hits the ground lug, its gone. The point I want to persue, is how much of that work can I harvest back as to how much used. I intend to try and capture the emf from the motor as well.
   But to do that I will have to figure out why the bedini circuit heats number six trannie. Output is only around 9v and not much amps. This is where a six channel scope would be great to have. Fear I have lag in switching times. That is where I need to focus now.  More as it happens.

thaelin

@Thaelin,

Although the output current is low, the currents that are circulating between the batteries is very high!
If you have a battery that is lower in charge than the others then the current to that battery is much
higher and the transistor gets warm. You should check that all four batteries start out with the same
charge and voltage before you run the circuit.

Groundloop.

Hello Groundloop,

I've read the thread and the paper you sent and also I've followed some of the links posted here.

I'm wondering if you could post the theory of operation for the Tesla Switch.  Also if there is a Tesla patent to reference that would be nice.

If anyone else would like to post a theory of operation for the Tesla Switch I'd be interested in hearing that also.

Thank you.

@Bessler007

Here are some of the links with all the info you may find about this tesla experiment and some more.

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/962-use-tesla-switch.html
http://drspark.com/idea003.php
http://home.comcast.net/~onichelson/Fuelless.pdf
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/scalchrg.htm
http://www.icehouse.net/john1/tesla.html

Fausto.

Thanks Fausto.

I have read quite a bit.  What I am really interested in is if anyone could simply state the theory of operation of the Tesla Switch.

When I look at this image posted by Groundloop . . .
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2Findex.php%3Faction%3Ddlattach%3Btopic%3D3316.0%3Battach%3D16457%3Bimage&hash=2360b10a57da65816049f0949fa5825f52565277)
I see pulsed dc on one side of a transformer with the other side being output.  It quacks like an inverter to me.

Hello Fausto,

A point from your first link:

• I think that Mr Bedini wants us to understand the nature of things by ourselves, He doesn't want to spoon feed us, but wants us to understand.     .....elias

is pretty revealing for me.  Who is it that actually could reduce into a sentence or two the theory of this switch?  I need to be spoon feed!  I'm starving here!!

I've just recently looked at Tesla (I'm no expert) and his work and I don't see anything where he suggests that a closed system can generate energy.

Bessler
mib HQ

Quote from: plengo on January 14, 2008, 10:46:26 PM
@Bessler007

Here are some of the links with all the info you may find about this tesla experiment and some more.

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/962-use-tesla-switch.html
. . .
Fausto.

@Bessler007,

Quote from: Bessler007 on January 15, 2008, 12:21:45 AM
Hello Fausto,

A point from your first link:

• I think that Mr Bedini wants us to understand the nature of things by ourselves, He doesn't want to spoon feed us, but wants us to understand.     .....elias

is pretty revealing for me.  Who is it that actually could reduce into a sentence or two the theory of this switch?  I need to be spoon feed!  I'm starving here!!

I've just recently looked at Tesla (I'm no expert) and his work and I don't see anything where he suggests that a closed system can generate energy.

Bessler
mib HQ

Quote from: plengo on January 14, 2008, 10:46:26 PM
@Bessler007

Here are some of the links with all the info you may find about this tesla experiment and some more.

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/962-use-tesla-switch.html
. . .
Fausto.

The simple explanation of this switch is to put two capacitors in series and dump the charge to two capacitors in parallel on the other side of the transformer. Then reverse the process. The transformer has a low resistance primary. If we use switches with low loss then we can switch electrons back and forth many times before (the always present losses) will deplete the charge in the capacitors. We can not destroy or create electrons but there is no law in nature that prevent us from using the same electrons more than one time to set up a magnetic field in the transformer. The electrons that power the load is not the same electrons that we use to switch charge between the capacitors. The other variant is to use batteries instead of capacitors. In this variant we switch charge between the batteries via a low resistance transformer. The batteries will be depleted at the end but the free electrons we move in the transformer to the load is not the same electrons we switch back and forth so the net output MAY be greater than the total capacity of the batteries.

I personally do not know if this circuit (or the battery switching variant) works or not. So far I have been struggling to design a low loss switching circuit for this setup. In a day or two I will have my new pcbs. I hope that my new circuit will be able to switch between four 4,8 Volt 2 amps. NiCads without any big loss in the system. Time will tell................

Groundloop.

Thank you, Groundloop.  My initial sense is if what you're proposing is true, you're approaching the matter in the wrong manner.  I need to think about this a little more.  The crux of it might be in the rate work is accomplished or power.  You might have a point.

Bessler

Quote from: Bessler007 on January 14, 2008, 10:22:56 PM
I'm wondering if you could post the theory of operation for the Tesla Switch.
Thank you.

Try this
http://www.panaceauniversity.org/Chapter6.pdf

Read page 18

...and then alter the URL to Chapter 1 for further information
which may be useful to know about at some future time.

Paul.

Quote from: Bessler007 on January 14, 2008, 10:22:56 PM
Hello Groundloop,

I've read the thread and the paper you sent and also I've followed some of the links posted here.

I'm wondering if you could post the theory of operation for the Tesla Switch.  Also if there is a Tesla patent to reference that would be nice.

If anyone else would like to post a theory of operation for the Tesla Switch I'd be interested in hearing that also.

Thank you.

hi

Bessler007, in my opinion the only resonable theory is descriped over quantuumphysics.
Leadatoms have to be in resonance, timereversed effects can occur, chemical reaction is time reversed.

You can call me crazy but thats it.

For more information look at "Lawandy" "Boosted light: laseraction in white paint"
the effect equals in some  cases, but is easier to reproduce...

if i find the time, i will post some more references ...

Super

lot of reading.

The Tesla switch sounds to me like holding up opposite ends of a 2x4 at the same time.  I'm still thinking about it.

Super,

Electrons orbit but I don't think we know why.  If they're like everything else we know about there is some cause or energy input to allow them to work.

I don't think a Tesla switch can work if it's pulsed dc.  Tesla made the point of using energy that didn't make drastic changes (eg his turbine).  I think the switching has to be sinusoidal.  Just guessing here.  :)

If you're putting electrical pressure on one side of a transformer with twice the frequency (or some harmonic of that) compared to  the other side, there would be more power in the higher freq.  The question is what supplies the power to produce the higher frequency?  It sounds like a switching nightmare to me that would need more than just a center tapped transformer.  I have no idea right now how you could put 100hz on one side and produce 50 on the other (for example).

That would cause an imbalanced transformer.  There is more energy in higher frequencies.  Then there is the efficiency of the transformer plus system losses.

Lots to think about.

Bessler007,

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
hello
? Sent to: Groundloop on: January 16, 2008, 07:51:30 PM

How's the circuit going?

Bessler
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I will post information about my circuit as soon as I have something to post.

Groundloop.

:)  I should get my breadboard out and knock the dust off it.  I think I still remember how to launch op amps off it and crack them to pieces.

edit:  I have formed some interesting questions. 

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I do remember reading somewhere that the so called Tesla switch has absolutely nothing to do with Tesla or any one of his devices.

Someone just called it that. (presumably the originator of the circuit)

Hans von Lieven

EDIT:  Found it.

As can be seen in the first file, the original circuit was developed by Ronald Brandt. The 1983 date of the Brandt circuit pre-dates John's work on this system. Ron's circuits used mechanical contacters as switches, but apparently worked quite well, as long as the contacters lasted. John was the first to adapt this circuit to solid-state switching, using the SG 1524 dual flip-flop functions and bipolar transistors as the switches. So, exactly why this is called the Tesla Switch is beyond me.

Source: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/962-use-tesla-switch.html

@Bessler007,

That is the spirit. Build, test and research! :-)

@Hansvonlieven,

If you follow your own posted link you will find this:

SNIP
THE CIGAR-BOX SIZE TESLA SWITCH

Bedini was then invited to speak at the Tesla Centennial Symposium in Colorado Springs, CO, on August, 11, 1984, The symposium honored the 100th anniversary of the arrival of Nikola Tesla in the USA, and was sponsored by the Tesla Committee, by the Institute for Electronic and Electrical Engineers (IEEE), Pikes Peak Section, and by the Ford Aerospace& Communications Corporation,Colorado Springs Operation. At the symposium, Bedini demonstrated an inexpensive, cigar-box sized Tesla-type converter witch he had recently built. Throughout the demonstration, which lasted a full 24 hours during the symposium, a constant load was being drawn out of the system to do work, Nevertheless, the converter kept the nickel-cadmium batteries fully charged! The concept, witch had been originated by Nikola Tesla, was given to John Bedini by Ronald Brandt, who was a personal friend of Nikola Tesla. Brandt is reputed to have a similar converter which he has used for years without loosing the battery charge. Bedini presented the schematic diagram showing how to build the solid-state device, and then released copies of the schematic diagram.
END SNIP

Link: http://www.icehouse.net/john1/tesla.html

@All,

I have my new PCBs now and has started to solder the components. Hope to get started with testing this weekend.

Groundloop.

@All,

I have four 4,8 Volt 2000mA Nickel Cadmium batteries. Does anybody here know a safe way of initial charging those batteries from a lab power supply? I do not have a NiCad charger so I need to make one. Any circuit drawings of a simple NiCad charger? I will be glad to get some help on this.

[EDIT] My NiCads are 700mA/h, not 2000mA as stated.

Groundloop.

Quote from: Paul-R on January 15, 2008, 10:02:23 AM

Quote from: Bessler007 on January 14, 2008, 10:22:56 PM
I'm wondering if you could post the theory of operation for the Tesla Switch.
Thank you.

Try this
http://www.panaceauniversity.org/Chapter6.pdf

Read page 18

...and then alter the URL to Chapter 1 for further information
which may be useful to know about at some future time.

Paul.

Sorry, fellas. I got this wrong. It should be:
http://www.panaceauniversity.org/Chapter5.pdf
(specifically: page 5 to page 16).
Paul.

Quote from: Groundloop on January 19, 2008, 09:29:17 AM
@All,

I have four 4,8 Volt 2000mA Nickel Cadmium batteries. Does anybody here know a safe way of initial charging those batteries from a lab power supply? I do not have a NiCad charger so I need to make one. Any circuit drawings of a simple NiCad charger? I will be glad to get some help on this.

Groundloop.

Hi,  here are two links: http://www.uoguelph.ca/~antoon/gadgets/ccharger.htm and http://www.zen22142.zen.co.uk/Circuits/Power/nicad.htm

There is a third one with the LM317 adjustable voltage regulator: http://www.dprg.org/projects/1999-05a/
You have a minimum of 4*4.8 V input voltage need + the required voltage drop of either the LM317 or the transistors, so you need to choose your power supply output accordingly. I think you need some heat sink on the active pass device too.

rgds, Gyula

@Paul-R,

Thanks for providing a link to that pdf document.

@Gyulasun,

Thanks for providing the links to the NiCad chargers.

Groundloop.

@All,

I finally got my tswitch soldered (minus the regulator).
Next step will be ordering the regulator IC and then make
a charger for the 4,8 Volt NiCad batteries. Will take some
time.

Groundloop.

@Groundloop

Hi
   Well that sure is a lot of trannies but if it works, great deal. I have finally decided to put together a relay powered one to play with. Had to pack the relays in foam to quiet them down. Was very surprised to find what I did.
   Using 4 4.5 ah 12v and driving a 1amp motor, I already have 4.5 hours run time logged and have dropped from 13v down to 12.8. I have a switch time of around 12 a second. I am depleting the batteries but at a very slow rate. At 1 amp, I should have killed the bats by now.
   So to conclude, I see this upping the run effective run time for the motor. As I intend to run an electric motor to power my bike, this should give me a greater distance of travel overall. Will look into solid state relays for the switching as they will trigger on 5 v and can use a 555 to run the pulse train with.
   The other board still has a heat problem with transistor 6 and I cannot figure out why. I have been over the circuit many times and its wired exactly as the diagram states.
   The only problem is if I lose a relay, I will have a dead short on one side every half cycle. Had to fuse between each pair and both sides as well. So far so good. More run time to see what will give.

   Next is to recharge and see how many consecutive hours run time the system will give without going below the 12.4 save level as these are the standard gel cells.

thaelin

@Thaelin,

If you look at the circuit diagram (some pages back) then you will see that there is 8 diodes also.
I use TO-220 diodes so that I can avoid any heat sink. The other six TO-220 is hexfets.

If we use some math on your circuit:

4,5 A/h * 4 * 12 Volt = 216 W/h.  Motor 12V * 1 A/h = 12 W/h so ideal maximal run time is 18 Hours.
(Much sorther if you do not want to deplete the batteries below a certain level.) I think the best load you
should have is the C20 rate of your batteries, approx. 10 Watt/h.

Groundloop.

Hi

Finally got my NiCad charger together.  :D

Next Job, soldering 4,8 Volt NiCad packs. Need four of them.
Then I must mount my electronic and batteries into a box.
Will take some time..............

Regards,
Groundloop.

   Hi all:
   Well guess its time to lay it down for all to see. I have finished my 4 batt switch and it runs using relays at 20 cps. I will be subbing them with SS relays so I can up the transfer time. I am able to have a 3 amp motor run under load for extreme long times. This motor will be used for an electric bicycle. From estimates I am seeing around 100 miles and that is with 4.5 ah batts. I actually will be using 18 ah  on the bike. Nothing will tell better than the trip out the highway soon. The motor will be driven by pwm from the 4 batt switch.
   I did notice that I had no output from the tesla switch with the two caps in place. As soon as I removed them, I then had over 12v and high amps available from the FWB output. The motor I use right now is an old windshield wiper motor from a 80's vintage GM. I got the largest motor available and it has a worm gear to another gear reduction. I use a 8500uf 85v cap to pad the output during switch times.

thaelin

@Thaelin

please, kill the thirst of our minds and show pictures of your setup.

Fausto.

Thaelin

That's excellent!
Did you build your circuit according to the schematic of D3.pdf? (see attached)

    >:(   Well after all my attempts to make a drawing for all of you all I could  was a bmp and cant upload them. Circuit maker saves in native format only "ckt" and not sure any of you can see it.  This is frustrating as heck. A simple thing and yet no cigar.
   The circuit in d3 had diodes I do not use. I simply use a SS relay for each batt connection and then trigger series on one side while parallel on the other. The inline caps have to go as they impede the flow. The SS relays will make the switching a seperate circuit from the motor. It could be run on the same one for the lights as well. No inductive kickback to kill the timer.

thaelin

Thaelin

Thank you for sharing with all of us!

Here is a procedure to capture and save whatever is displayed on your screen:
Press the printscreen button on your keybord 'PrtSc'.
This will capture an image of your screen and save it on the computer's clipboard.
No, open Windows Paint (use Start, All programs, Accessories) and select 'Edit, Paste'.
Now the screen image that was captured will be transferred to the Paint program.
Now select 'File, Save' and Save as type JPEG because JPG files are much smaller than BMP's!
Hope this helps!

   Just taught the old dog a new trick   ;D. Didn't realize you could save as any but bmp. Why I never used it.

   So here for your enjoyment is the  screen capture of the designworks schematic. The switches are SS relays the same.
S1 is the master on off. S2,6,7 on and S3,4,5 off and alternate back and forth. Since the SS relay is internal led driven just need to use the direct output of the 555 timer and set for correct interval time. Standard PWM circuit used to drive the motor from the cap side of the bridge. Would most likely be a good idea to install a current limiter as well so you can set the level of I delivered to the motor or said device as a precaution. Actually very simple when you get to it.
   I have found why my transistor circuit was heating the #6 transistor. This unit transfers power back and forth like ac would. One direction the transistor works as it should. When it is reversed, it leaks so will never be viable. I have to question how the bedini one worked at all. Was not there so ..... water under the bridge. Mine, many hours of run time now. Just be sure to include the three fuses or circuit breakers. If you short a SS relay out it makes a dead short and poof goes the wires. Mechanical relays work ok but are very noisy and have to run around 10 cps to function equaly on both battery sets.
   I have not tried this part yet but will be adding to see how it fares out. From EVGRAY forum they talk of a diode plug for capturing emf. Will be trying to add this to keep the batt for the lights/PWM/555 circuit charged all the time. That way, all I have to do is charge the 4 main batts when needed.
   The last added feature is a programming plug that the charger connects to. When the run plug is in, normal operation. When removed and the charger plugged in, the batts are all wired to parallel status for charge.

And for the pic

later   thaelin

@ Thaelin,

Great work.  :D

What type of solid state relays are you using? Type number?

Groundloop.

   Can only answer that when I have them in my hot little hands.  I am just off to go and get them. Hope I dont have to buy them new but will if I cant find 6 matched, ouch. Not cheap things but what has to be. Also 18 ah batts too big for the frame, have to use 7.5's I guess.

thaelin

@Thaelin,

I checked my supplier and those units are very expensive.
410,- NOK pr. unit * 6 = 2460,- NOK. (473USD).

The one in the picture can handle 50Volt DC @ 30A. Max. pulse is 160 Amp.

Groundloop.

   Funny pic, that is the basic one I have.  all the characteristics are the same. Mine are 10 amp 120v. $11 each.   :D

Love that gizmo house.

thaelin

Hi Thaelin, you wrote: Mine are 10 amp 120v. $11 each

Now, let me guess that would be an AC one?
There is a big price difference in high power ac or dc relays.

Can't wait to hear your system results, Good work and good luck!

Regards,
Steven

   Looks like a problem with the ac type I have. They are zero crossing and I suspect that it will latch on and stay on. Not sure how I can get around this problem. Since I am using DC, it will never cross zero for the turn off. I need the MosFet type instead. $66 to find that one out.
   Now if I can do the same thing using plain mosfets, then I can still get it done. Have to tinker with it.

thaelin

Hi All!
I have read this thread and though it might be helpfull to a project I have in mind
for an e-bike.
If you have any idea of RC motors you'd know the standard configuration of
the circuit that runs those motors. Those are 3 phase motors operating through an
ESC (Electronic Speed Controller). The ESC takes DC input and pulses the waveform the motor needs to operate. We don't care if those motors are called DC or AC as it makes no difference to us.
Now what I am thinking is if we can possibly use an arrangement as in the picture
and switch between the two batteries with some sort of Tesla switch to get some power gain. I wouldn't talk of overunity but any possible gain in battery's runtime is highly desireable.
The parts are existing and any details one might need are available.
Motor ESC is up to 25V 100A. Motor can drag up to 50 A cont.
Batteries are of LiFePO4 type, (A123-Dewalt packs),
they can provide this kind of surge and they can be recharged very fast also.
Charger is able to feed up to 40A on to the charging battery.
As you realize we deal with real life application with high power involved.
Switching has to be appropriate, able to handle this power.
I would appreciate your thoughts and suggestions on it.
Regards
Manos

    Original tesla switch only has 12v potential between the batteries. That is why I have had such a pain in finding a motor that will work. There are 24v and 36v in hub motors all over  the place. Just dont have the power to work at 12v. Using the wiper motor at 2 amps, I am sending the unused power to the other set of batts not the positive pole. The cost is only the work done, heat and other losses. I even have a high and low speed.
   Even this motor will not run a long time as it was not meant to do this with. It is a proto use and will be justifying the worm gear setup to get the necessary torque to the wheel that is needed. I just finished the mounting of the gear to the motor and ready to mount to the bike. I will need to get 4 7.5amphr batts yet.
   Someone here on this board said that they believed that the answer would lie combining more than one type of unit to achieve the goal. I cant realize the batts staying charged but should go quite a ways on a charge.

thaelin

The RC motors come in any voltage you desire from ~6 volts to 36-40.
Each of them works in a wide range of voltages.
In my example 26 is maximum 12-24 is operational.
The ESC is taking DC and suplies the PW-Modulated current the motor needs to run.
You could use any of them as your load in the voltage you like.
They have decent efficiency (80% - 90+%) and in case of "outrunner" type,
huge torque for the size. Google it.

The most important questions are if the principles of this kind of switching are usufull,
universal and scalable.
If it would work somehow @ 12 volts, why wouldn't it work in a similar manner for other voltages?
Since Bedini used different chemistry and voltages I guess the trick would work for others too.
My schematic is very simplistic, only to show the logic, which I believe is basically the same as in different variations of the same theme as shown in this document
http://www.panaceauniversity.org/D3.pdf
A source battery is connected with the load and (in series with it) the charged battery .
Then we switch between the 2 batteries.
I have include the ESC and the charger box as are components of the arrangement I have in mind.
One could see the ESC-Motor combo as the Load and the Charger-Charged_Battery combo as the Charging battery of the original design.
Switching and the means of it as well as other components (diodes, capacitors) are
left out just to show the main idea.
So if you think it would work in a similar manner then we can proceed to figure out the details of it.
Thanks for replying, I appreciate!!

@all
You may find this interesting, what you are building is called a "charge pump" and can be found here---http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charge_pump.
Here is a litte of the text--

QuoteA charge pump is an electronic circuit that uses capacitors as energy storage elements to create either a higher or lower voltage power source. Charge pump circuits are capable of high efficiencies, sometimes as high as 90-95% while being electrically simple circuits.
Charge pumps use some form of switching device(s) to control the connection of voltages to the capacitor. For instance, to generate a higher voltage, the first stage involves the capacitor being connected across a voltage and charged up. In the second stage, the capacitor is disconnected from the original charging voltage and reconnected with its negative terminal to the original positive charging voltage. Because the capacitor retains the voltage across it (ignoring leakage effects) the positive terminal voltage is added to the original, effectively doubling the voltage. The pulsing nature of the higher voltage output is typically smoothed by the use of an output capacitor.
This is the charge pumping action, which typically operates at tens of kilohertz up to several megahertz to minimize the amount of capacitance required. The capacitor used as the charge pump is typically known as the "flying capacitor".

The only diference is you are using batteries instead of capacitors, but batteries also have a much higher resistance than capacitors, leading to more losses in the system. I think in these kinds of systems we should use non-resistive loads such as solenoid coils which can then be phase matched with the circuit driver to produce high voltages and current flows in oscillation. In this case it could be said that we have a truely "reactive" circuit in that the phase differentials are not acting on the source and "work" is dissipated in only the load.
Just a thought :)

P.S.---- I just through together the circuit below based on the "charge pump", you may find it interesting.

The object of this thread is to develop a power shuttle between capacitors or battery's.
We need to match impedances to get the maximum power from the source through load  while using a complementary circuit to suck up and store the power and reuse it for the next cycle and top off the shuttle as needed.
Use floating independent circuity. I like opto switched FETs powered independently.
Goggle T.W. Barret,  his patent on "oscillator shuttle circuit", very Tesla ish.
The man is a my favorite genius still living! I've spent days trying to understand and reconcile his 4 space math equations.  quaternion. Conjugate mirror circuitry.
It's the neatest thing in electrical, I can think of!

Remember the 1st thing electronics teaches us is matching impedance to get maximum power. But our power company's only give us a a pole pig and we pay them so we can  reflect power back to it, and it waste power.

Now I hope this inspires you, like it does for me!

Cheers Peace & Love ,
DGM

EDIT: removed politics

Hi Over_Unity_Dot_Com_Guys,

I must confess that I have not read carefully all the posts of this very topic. So, sorry if it is not new.

What about this patent, already quoted in another topic and that I have uploaded to my web site?
http://freenrg.info/TESLA/Tesla_Switch/US2008030165A1.pdf  (http://freenrg.info/TESLA/Tesla_Switch/US2008030165A1.pdf)
"METHODE AND DEVICE FOR SUPPLYING A CHARGE WITH ELECTRIC ENERGY RECOVERY"
Lisac - Madrid - Feb. 7 2008

IMHO, it sounds like a Tesla Switch.

In this folder: http://freenrg.info/TESLA/Tesla_Switch/  (http://freenrg.info/TESLA/Tesla_Switch/)
you will also find some 'simplifications' of the patents's figures, the D3.pdf file and the cond.doc file (BTW: Thanks for this cond.doc (from cond.zip)).

About this "Condenser Problem" and the lost of half of the NRG when you charge up a capacitor with another cap, I have done some very simple experiments, it is on: http://freenrg.info/Condos/ (http://freenrg.info/Condos/)

Best

@NerzhDishual,

How on Earth did this guy get a patent on this when it has been on the Internet for years?

There is no way that this patent can be valid!  It was John Bedini and Ronald Brant that
invented these circuits. And, the circuits has been open source on the net many years
before this patent.

Groundloop.

@All,

I have started to wire up my switch. See attached drawing.
I will use 4 switches, one to each battery, so that I can
connect the batteries direct to the output terminals. I have
done this so that it will be easy to charge all four battery
packs at the same time. One extra switch controls the
output terminals so that I can get output from the circuit
when it runs. Soldering now.....................

Groundloop.

@All,

Done!

First run shows me that I need higher voltage on the battery packs.
I will order a set of batteries so that all my battery packs will be 9,6 volt.

[EDIT] Attached the PIC16F84A-20 firmware version 2.0.

Groundloop.

 @GroundLoop

Quote from: Groundloop on March 22, 2008, 03:51:22 PM
.....
There is no way that this patent can be valid!  It was John Bedini and Ronald Brant that
invented these circuits. And, the circuits has been open source on the net many years before this patent......

Yes I'm aware of that..

I guess you can get a patent for a device that already exists or is not new, but in that case your patent would be useless and worthless and you just have wasted you time and your money.

Anyway I do like this patent because:
1) the figures are simple and can also be more simplified.
2) The Bedini/Brant's circuits were too complicated for me as I do not like to use my left brain (and I'm not an electronics specialist)... :P

Best

   Actually it is only an application and most likely will be denied. Brandt's was put into the public domain so therefore cannot be granted. Waste of time and money but then its his. If it does get granted, it will never hold up and be reversed.

   @groundloop
     Like the noise level of the relays?  I only have 4 and they are unbearable.

thaelin

Hi 'OU' dot com  guys & fellows,

This post is huge. Sorry.
To me, this 'Tesla Switch' is (one of) the keys/secrets for 'OU' (COP >1).

About capacitors:
In the very interesting cond.doc file (from cond.zip) it is stated (page 1):
"But a much different and way more trivial problem occurs, once you want to charge up a capacitor
by another capacitor.  If you do that, in a mysterious way, HALF THE ENERGY IS LOST."

And also (page 9):
..................
The total-charge in both capacitors together is now GREATER by a factor of SQRT(2) than
the initial value!!!
---------------------------------------------

Jean Louis Naudin is also proposing an experiment that could suggest a similar result.
I' m just setting-up this JLN's test. So, more to come soon (if any positive results).

The JLN proposed circuit:
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffreenrg.info%2FPic%2FJLN_exp.gif&hash=a0ae3e56a465e5a1ea0c4c67a54a4af513524b00)

===================================================

Now, the rest of this pots is Off Topic but worth to be read, IMHO...
Non solum dico sed etiam probo...

I'm now becoming very doubtfull about (some of) Jean Louis Naudin's circuits.
I mean: are these circuits accurate enough as to be reproduced by a non specialist = the average
do-it-yourself (OU - or not :)) ) enthusiast?
---------------------------------------------
I'm also, By The very Way (BTvW), highly dubious about JLN's ultimate motivations.His he, still, really 'questing for OU'?

Or, his he, now, mostly questing/crusading for fame and official (= 'powers that be') recognition?  According to some Internet sites, it sounds like JLN were now working with the French CEO of Tazer's international company (Di Zazzo).

Tazer: this funny (officially non lethal) gizmo that is sometimes used against pregnant women and are actually proved to be (sometimes) deadly. Ask Goggle.

In German (with a picture of JLN and Di Zazzo - JLN name is quoted ):
http://politblog.net/nachrichten/2007/11/27/1832-ein-weiteres-todesopfer-polizeilicher-gewalt-taserdrohne-gegen-demonstrationen-geplant/ (http://politblog.net/nachrichten/2007/11/27/1832-ein-weiteres-todesopfer-polizeilicher-gewalt-taserdrohne-gegen-demonstrationen-geplant/)

In English (JLN name is not quoted):
http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/11/french-reveal-p.html (http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/11/french-reveal-p.html)

In French (JLN name is quoted) :
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.politics.activism.vie-privee.actu/825 (http://article.gmane.org/gmane.politics.activism.vie-privee.actu/825)
---------------------------------------------
Now, two examples about (purposely?) 'twisted' JLN's circuits:

First example:
This experiment (with one 2N2222):
http://jlnlabs.online.fr/cnr/negosc.htm (http://jlnlabs.online.fr/cnr/negosc.htm) does not work as claimed with the indicated specifications (1 nano cap and a  6mh inductance, 32.8 volts pk-pk out). After some tedious trials, I got only about 15 volts pk-pk-out out of a 0.8 nano cap (measured) and an about 2.8 mh inductance (measured)). I do not dispute his results (out-volts), I just contest his specifications.

Second example:
Do you remember this (in?)famous MEG?,
JLN claimed to get 'OU' with his own reproduction of the MEG. Why not? That is not my
point. My point is that his proposed circuit (which, BTW, has been removed from his Web
site) is not accurate and misleading:

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffreenrg.info%2FPic%2Fmeg31dg.gif&hash=5ec601e7962c44067642fd166efdadf6a45a2112)

Just remark the #9 and #10 TL494 pins.

Now, have a look at this excerpt of the datasheet:

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffreenrg.info%2FPic%2FTL494_Pins.jpg&hash=c5845b241a1ead04ab7b8b3e6cfd6b4f3b97cb5e)



The #9 and #10 pins are to be grounded.  So?

Best

@NerzhDishual,

There is NO error in JLN's drawing. The TL494 has a transistor output. In his circuit
drawing he puts both collector to plus and use the emitter following to drive the FET transistors.

The "capacitor problem" circuit also looks OK to me. I'm looking forward to your test results.

Groundloop.

@GroudLoop

OK about the JLN's TL494 circuit... Noted.
I'm not an electronics specialist. :P
I was told about this 'error' in the  JLN's circuit  by an old friend of mine who, I guessed, was better than me in these stuffs. ???
----------------------------------

About the other experiment with capacitors : it seems to work.

I use two 100,000 microF (=0.1F) capacitors Cap#1 and Cap#2.
The problem is that the nominal values cannot be always thrusted and I cannot measure
the real capacities. My meter range is not over 20,000 MicroF.

Obviously, these 2 caps are not identical (but are very close).
Anyway, if you swap cap#1 and cap#2 you can get some hints.

My first trials showed  that the results (with 13 volts) was better with
Cap#2 as 'input' and Cap#1 as 'output'.
So, I now use Cap#1 as 'input' and cap#2 as 'output' to get the
'less favorable configuration'.

For the moment, my best result is, in this 'worse case', and With
the following specifications:
R1= 100K
C1= A 2nf (measured). Or 3nf? my notes are upstairs!

Begin:
Cap#1 =/= 26 volts. (Two '12' volts bats)
Cap#2 = 0 volts (empty)

End: (about about 25 seconds)
Cap#1 =/= 20 volts
Cap#2 =/= 13 volts
These voltages remain stable (save the caps small leakages)

This inclines me to believe that there is something unusual here.

I have to make more trials, and measurement. More to come asap with a web page.

Best

hi all

first of all, apologies for long post and also i don't mean to hijack this thread -  i'm just responding to what appears to be some very relevant posts above - happy for this stuff to be moved elsewhere if necessary.

i'm very excited to see that someone else is getting confirmatory results with switched cap charging - i was beginning to doubt my measurements (only have very basic facilities available)

i've been running some experiments on & off over the last couple of years with a kind of Jensen UDT transformer i made, with both negistor osc & switched pulse types of input, very similar to this thread - looking for evidence of more energy transferred & reclaimed (no clear evidence so far)

however, i was recently inspired by reading one of H. Aspden's 'papers' where he was discussing the possibility of anomalous energy behaviour of capacitors

i decided to setup some simple experiments to extend my experiments & repetitively charge & discharge caps & look for evidence of unexpected results

well, with pretty much my first attempt (CCT 1, if i manage to upload the JPGS) i found i got a resulting charge anomaly:

i pre-charged 3 1F super-caps in series to 6V & disharged into a 1F super-cap, stopping when the output cap was at 2V (the caps are rated at 2.3V), input cap had 2.7V remaining

If my understanding of cap charge maths is correct (& i don't claim to be an expert here) this is the outcome of the experiment:

Total charge in: (Q = V * C)
Qin = 6V * (1/3)F = 2 Coulombs

Total charge out: (sum of charges on all caps)
Q1 = 2.7V * (1/3)F = 0.9 Coulombs

Q2 = 2V * 1F = 2 Coulombs

ie.  total input charge: 2 Coulombs -  total output charge: 2.9 Coulombs!

er, didn't somebody famous mention something about 'Conservation of Charge'

ok, so i've gone on to refine the circuit a few times - looking to investigate the energy implications of these findings

in a later circuit, which includes a transformer in a kind of feed-forward mode i managed to discharge a 0.25F cap stack from 8V down to 6.5V, resulting in a charged similar second stack to 2.5V - PLUS - i reclaimed 0.6V in a third similar stack thro' the transformer

so on three equivalent cap values i used up 1.5V worth of charge from one to generate over 3V total of charge on another pair

(again, if i've been able to upload, scope trace '2 cap charge.jpg' showing input cap dischrge & final charges on output cap & 'reclaim' cap)

i should mention that the switching for all these experiments were self-powered by the charge on the input caps - no external Sig Gens or PSUs (i used some CMOS schmidt trigger inverted NAND gates with RC feedback)

i realise that a charge anomaly is not yet an energy anomaly  - but it's a start!

i'll see if i can get these JPG uploaded now

sandy

circuit 1 for my post above

circuit 2...

circuits 3 & 4 (including supposed 'UDT' transformer)...

sandy

@nul-points
I think your post is the first one in this thread that is exactly "on" topic because nobody has fully addressed "what" happens when energy is moved from one place to another and where losses are incurred.There seems to be this preoccupation with electronics and switching which is part of the problem and not part of the solution. To put it simply--- your circuit works because you have added an inductance, you will have large losses when shuttling energy with caps or batteries unless you add a large self-inductance to give your circuit the necessary momentum. A tuned LC circuit has very few losses relative to a pure inductive circuit (motors, generators) or a pure capacitive circuit (batteries,capacitors). L and C must always be used together for maximum efficiency as they complement each others actions.
There was a question in a previous post as to why equalizing capacitors magically lose half of there energy, add a large self-inductance to the circuit and I can assure you your energy will magically reappear--- the question is why? I think if we are to move forward we have to start looking past the equations and component values and start looking at the properties and qualities of every component and how they interact together.

Hi Nul_Points,

Thanks a lot for your posts. I will study  them more fully.

The JLN proposed experiment: http://freenrg.info/Condos/JLN_exp.gif

My pictures:
http://freenrg.info/Condos/JLN_Caps_Exp_Replic_01.jpg
http://freenrg.info/Condos/JLN_Caps_Exp_Replic_02.jpg
http://freenrg.info/Condos/JLN_Caps_Exp_Replic_04.jpg
http://freenrg.info/Condos/JLN_Caps_Exp_Replic_05.jpg

Best

@allcanadian,

I agree with you 100%. Today I got my batch of NiCads and now my Tesla switch is running on four 9,6 volt 700mA battery packs. The circuit is running fine switching at approx. 20 Hz but I got NO usefull output. Only 2,8 Volt. This was enough to lit a ultrabright LED very dim. So I can say that my circuit as it is now is flawed beyond recognition. I will try to do some modifications but all in all it was wasted time and $845 USD. I think the way to go is as you state with both L and C in a circuit.

Groundloop.

@allca. Nerzh & Ground

thanks for comments & info - i'll look up your links ND, too, thanks

yes, the inductances have certainly helped (feedforward Xfr & enabling flyback diode action) but oddly i seem to remember that my very first charge anomaly results were obtained with Cct1 before i included a serial coil with the switched cap

anyway, i can confirm that the 'magical' 50% loss of energy is not happening with these circuits - i've been able to drive 24 mW into a resitive load for a power draw on the input caps of 29mW - a fairly respectable COP of 0.83 (83% efficiency)

i know its not out of the ordinary by commercial PSU standards but not bad for a few simple components stuffed in a breadboard (and my first-ever attempt at designing a switched-mode PSU, apparently!) - way better than the 50% limit insisted on by some heavy-duty dudes writing peer-reviewed papers about cap to cap discharge being a dipole aerial and half the energy being 'I^2 * R losses' or 'radiated away'

most significant for me is the 'Conservation of Charge' issue - What conservation?!?

if charge isn't being conserved (as required by Kirchoff & Maxwell) then maybe Energy isn't quite behaving like these guys claimed either!

something is definitely going on in the Physics Department after all the Professors have gone home for the night

Game On!!

Hi Nul-Points

We are on the same page. Sorry for repeating myself, but  did you check this link: http://freenrg.info/Condos/ ?
(This page is not still updated).

Actually, according to very simple experiments, I 'lost' nothing when discharging
a filled cap into an empty one.  That is also:

Quote from: nul-points on March 30, 2008, 05:30:44 PM
.......better than the 50% limit insisted on by some heavy-duty dudes writing peer-reviewed
papers about cap to cap discharge being a dipole aerial and half the energy being 'I^2 * R losses' or 'radiated away'

Is it not?

Best

@Nerzh D
same page definitely!

yes, i've just checked your links and that is one cool rig!

you could lose my breadboard setup inside one of those caps!!!

you're right about neither of us having 'lost' in our experiments - but only as far as charge is concerned:

my test started with 2 Coulomb (C) of charge and ended with 2.9C - a 45% charge gain ...BUT...

started with 6 Joules (J) of energy and ended with 3.215J - a 46% energy loss!

and your test started with approx 2.6C and ended with 3.3C - a 27% charge gain ...BUT...

started with 33.8J of energy and ended with 28.4J - a 16% energy loss

so we're both seeing anomalous charge enter our circuit from somewhere but in both our tests we've used up a positive amount of energy in charging the second cap from the first

at the moment, the anomaly which appears to conflict with conventional circuit theory is that both our experiments have violated the "conservation of charge" rule - pretty impressive in my view

...and if that's true, that means that Kirchoff & Maxwell owe us a beer!!   ;)

Hi Nul-Points,

Yes, I agree with you.
Some (fractions of) coulombs seem to appear. However,'Joules-wise', some energy
(even if not half the NRG) seems also to have vanished (as stated by mainstream science).

I was just wondering (dreaming :)) ). Should a modified JLN circuit (or another one)
be able to give the following results:

C1 = C2
VC1init = 26 volts
VC2init =  0 volts (empty)

VC1end  = 20 volts
VC2end  = 16.61 volts (instead of about 13 volts)
Or something like:
VC1end  = 19 volts
VC2end  = 17.75 volts

Or any combination that gives  VC1end^2 + VC2end^2 = VC1init^2

No NRG would be lost....
And, I that case, Kirchoff & Maxwell would owe us champagne! ;D

-----------------------------------------

I'm so weak as to think that is possible.... Why?
As stated in the D3.pdf document :

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffreenrg.info%2FCondos%2FD3_Page16_%2520Excerpt.jpg&hash=05f36965da96a88d68981d432535d17873f6ffbf)


Electrons are not used up when they 'feed' a circuit (multiplication of bread?) .

The following experiment is also promissing:
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffreenrg.info%2FCondos%2FCaps_Discharge_and_Motor.gif&hash=fd44a2bd152712dc6a737f889dd0c60e04c2fa2a)

Best

@NerzhDishual
It's about time somebody started getting this ;D
As I said in my last post you need an LC circuit---- both capacitance AND inductance, an electric motor is an inductance and it has another important property as well--- inertia. When the power is disconnected from an electric motor and this motor is still in series with a capacitance not only will the inductive discharge from the inductance charge the capacitance but the electric motor becomes an electric generator and will use the momentum given to it to charge the capacitance as well.
The next problem you are going to encounter on your journey is the" voltage drop ", in your light bulb circuit the amperage in the circuit is continous in every part of the circuit but the voltage is not -- power in watts is volts times amps. Now you have to deal with the voltage drop, there are ways to always produce a voltage rise in a circuit and I am sure you will find them soon enough. If you want to fast track your progress try googling --DC/DC step-up converters.
We should remember that every component you add to a circuit increases resistance and other losses therefore the best circuit will have a minimum number of resistive components.This includes diodes, transistors and resistors which will add to the voltage drop.

@ND , AllCanadian

yes, useful work can be done during the charge transfer and AC's comments are the way

you can see in Ccts 3 & 4 that i've been able to combine both requirements by feeding the 2nd cap stack via the primary of a transformer, giving some LC in the 1st transfer and also do some useful work via the secondary in feeding forward a pulse into the load before the new charge on the 2nd cap stack itself gets switched to the load

the diodes are also able to reclaim some of the 'flyback' energy from the coils into the caps

all these different packets of energy contribute to the output - but my best COP is still only just over 0.8

i look forward to hearing whether your JLN circuit replication can reduce the losses even further ND - good luck!

@Nul-Points

Thanks for your 'feedbacks'. I'm very interested in your experiments. Would it be possible for you to give me more accurate precisions? IMHO, your pictures do not allow a rigorous replication.
I'm retired now. I was a computer programmer. Then I have time and I could try to reproduce your circuits.

I'm very doubtfull about the JLN circuits specifications.
For example:
In http://jlnlabs.online.fr/cnr/negosc.htm (http://jlnlabs.online.fr/cnr/negosc.htm) (non 'OU' experiment, BTW)
He claimed:
Bat =  12 V
Cap =  1nF
Inductance = 6mH
I= 6 mA
36 volts out pk-pk.
It did not work for me (should the 2N2222A be blamed?) .

I got, after some others tedious trials:
Bat = 12 V
Cap = 500 pifs (0.5 nano)
Inductance = 2.7mH
I= 7.2 mA
30 volts out pk-pk
That is not so bad, but I had to divide the claimed values by 2.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@AllCanadian

Thanks for your remarks. I guess I see what you mean...  LC circuits...

I'm not completely newbie (moronic) in basic DC electricity, Ohm's Law ,voltage divider, Th?venin, Norton and all these these sorts of fascinating guys and things  :-\

Basic AC electricity is also even not entirely over my mind yet it uses imaginary numbers and all these kind of strange & funny gobbledegook... However, I must confess that things like transistor 'Common Base Stage' or else are saturating my few left brain neurons... :P

Anyway, I cannot help thinking ('feeling' would be more accurate) that there are somethings 'wrong' (= uncompleted) in mainstream science notably about capacitors, Faraday Electrolysis, Lenz Law, Magnets Resonance, Relativity, Gravity, etc.

Consequently, I firmly 'believe' that OU (COP >1, not efficiency >1) is possible.
Am I able to 'achieve OU' is another question.

I guess that spending my time posting things in this very forum and designing some simple experiments should be better than boozing myself outside in some fishy bars where smoking is no more allowed.  ;D

Best

@ND
happy to help if i can, let me know what info you want - my circuits weren't critical values, i was just experimenting to look for general trends

your rep of the JLN negistor results seem reasonable to me - always going to be differences even if you used same value components

regards
sandy

Hi Nul-Points,

Quote from: nul-points on April 02, 2008, 03:14:24 AM
....
happy to help if i can, let me know what info you want - my circuits weren't critical values, i was just experimenting to look for general trends.

your rep of the JLN negistor results seem reasonable to me - always going to be differences even if you used same value components

About your circuits drawings:
Should they were as 'accurate' as the JLN ones would be fine. ;)
You are using 'small' but 'strong' capacitor, I guess, (1 farad, 5 volts for example)?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
About the JLN 'Negistor' circuit:

A very 'hectic' (no insult intended) ,intuitive and sharp-witted 83 years old friend of mine
has 'reproduced' (improved) this experiment.
At phone, this very afternoon, he told me that:
The voltage must be accurately tuned.
He was able to got more than 100 volts with a single 2N2222 (or others trans, BTW)
and virtually no amps consumption.  ???
He gave me the specs. It did not work for me this afternoon. :-\
I guess that he his using some strange stuff (caps, coils) from his attic.
I will phone him again.

However, as soon as I used a variable voltage device (what do you call that?),
I was able to got 40 volts pk-pk with 12.1 volts input (it did not work far beyond this
voltage limit). No OU claimed here!

Actually, I previously had been using a mere '12' volts bat. and had noticed
incomprehensible breakdowns in this (very simple) circuit.
So, Worth to be more investigated and more to come ASAP.

----------------------OT (Departure from the subject) ----------

Sorry for any mistake in my English. I'm not so comfortable in English grammar (tenses).

BTW: Just for the fun:
If you Google "It would have had to have been" you got more than 15000 pages.
But Googling "It would have had to had been" just gives me 2 pages.
And "It would had had to have been" gives no page. :D
English is a strange language. Is it not? Of course I'm kidding...

In Italian the Imperfect Subjunctive is very common (it is obsolete in French) .
Future Subjunctive exist in Portuguese and Spanish.

Best

@ND
you did better than me with the Negistor - i used 8.4V NiMH & only got about 18V using primary of a transformer as a series L with the cap - think the current draw was about 6mA from memory

got some WILD waveforms too, under some circumstances - looked like chopped AC at many different freqs & some patterns appeared visually to be going in opposite directions on the scope!  i forget what i'd been drinking but i must get some more in! ;)

there's been a rather disturbing development with my switched cap PS cct - i've started a new thread to ask for reps & checks of my calcs

i've posted an updated cct (i took the L reactances out and er, wow!)

the new thread title is: 'near OU / COP 1 switched cap PS cct...

PS your English looks good to me - i find that speaking English is like riding a bike... if you start to think about it too much you can't do it anymore :)

Hi Guys,
              So, as this thread seems to have been motivated by the commentary of Patrick Kelly's writings, I am wondering why no comment has been made on the alleged three year trial by one "Electrodyne Corporation". A company that may now not exist. The results which, after the difficulty in replicating Tesla's notion of energy conservation during this thead, seem to be somewhat dubious.

Back to the dreaming drawing board and the thoughts of eternal optimism!!

Regards
           

Quote from: ourbobby on June 13, 2008, 09:19:25 AM
Hi Guys,
              So, as this thread seems to have been motivated by the commentary of Patrick Kelly's writings, I am wondering why no comment has been made on the alleged three year trial by one "Electrodyne Corporation". A company that may now not exist.....

If you had done research, you would know that it exists, having merged with a
company that makes generators.

Quote from: ourbobby on June 13, 2008, 09:19:25 AM
...after the difficulty in replicating Tesla's notion of energy conservation during this thead...

Back to the dreaming drawing board and the thoughts of eternal optimism!!

way-aye ourbobby

on the contrary, shortly after posting details of charge anomalies which NerzhDishual and i reported on this thread, i found that i was able to make a simple mod to my switch-charge circuit and achieve COP >1.2 for (Useful Energy)/(Total Input Energy)

details on my website linked below and at my own thread on this subject:  http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4419.0.html

dreaming & optimism rewarded!  ;)

all the best
sandy

---

Doc Ringwood's Free Energy site  http://ringcomps.co.uk/doc

Quote from: Paul-R on June 13, 2008, 10:01:46 AM
If you had done research, you would know that it exists, having merged with a
company that makes generators.

That is possibly so - merged that is -  which I think it is that you are stating. I still had not found conclusive evidence of the Tesla switch being proven to work and with such heavy inductive loads, such as a 35 HP motor. Now, you have a nice day today.

To Nul-Points (Sandy),
  yes had I read some of your latest results, but, I was inclined to think that you were not absolutely convinced yourself that the tests were producing unambiguous results. I do however think that you are indeed a very dedicated and persistant engineer. Also, I have had trouble reading your circuits and I am not sure which amended circuit we are now looking at. Thankyou for sharing your experiences with us all - newbies too!

Regards

Quote from: ourbobby on June 13, 2008, 07:44:29 PM
To Nul-Points (Sandy),
  yes had I read some of your latest results, but, I was inclined to think that you were not absolutely convinced yourself that the tests were producing unambiguous results. I do however think that you are indeed a very dedicated and persistant engineer. Also, I have had trouble reading your circuits and I am not sure which amended circuit we are now looking at. Thankyou for sharing your experiences with us all - newbies too!
Regards

hi ourbobby
thanks for the kind (although probably unjustified) words - i must show your post ("very dedicated and persistant engineer") to my boss, sometime ;)

i'm absolutely convinced of the results i'm recording - i'm just measuring volts on capacitors and i believe i've taken reasonable precautions to avoid significant error in doing that

however, i have to admit that i was a bit hesitant about announcing the fact that my results appear to be OU - as an engineer i'm very aware that this is considered not only impossible but it's also perceived as an indication of heretical thinking on the scale of threatening to undermine the very fabric of civilised society

having seen people, such as Eric Laithwaite and Ivor Catt (one of whom i've met through work), whose thinking ability and contribution to engineering was exceptional, get vilified and prevented from presenting papers and discussing anomalies which might possibly upset the scientific status quo, one realises that inertia isn't a property confined just to mechanical or electrical systems!

fortunately there are arenas where it's possible to discuss theories and results of this nature without being viewed as a threat to established science - this, of course, being one - so now i'm waiting for some supporting evidence that other people can achieve the same results from this experiment


the unfolding record of my progress with the charge, and then energy, anomaly experiments has been rather muddied by the fact that the editing arrangements on the forum were changed just before i achieved the OU measurements on the overall system (as opposed to just the final charge transfer to output) - when i went back to remove my remaining intermediate piece-meal results i found that it was no longer possible to edit them

the full schematic, and parts details, of the circuit which provided the results posted indicating (Useful Energy)/(Total Energy) = 1.2  are given in replies #25 & #26 on page 1 of the thread i gave you above
    http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4419.0.html


i'd welcome any considered comments you feel you have the time & interest to make on the nature or the implications of the experiment

i appreciate that my experiment isn't immediately applicable to driving 35HP loads either, but i think it's important to establish first whether the principle of Conservation of  Energy applies just within the macro boundaries of the circuit elements or are we justified in extending that boundary to include a background energy pervading the fabric of the Universe

if the latter is true, then we should all be putting our best efforts into developing and applying methods, such as this one, which are giving indications of charge & energy conservation imbalance, to replace or augment existing technology wherever necessary & appropriate

all the best
sandy

Hi there Nul-Points,
                             Thankyou for your reply. I totally agree with you regarding the nature of open discussions on forums such as these. And, especially when sometimes information that might not be readily available to some, others on the forum share so as to contribute to a possible expontially based learning curve - even if the learning tells us that something does not work!

I shall be building a Tesla switch very shortly, once I have a bit more research under my belt. I am also researching magnetic power trains too. My ultimate goal is to power a self sustaining motor vehicle. Hopefully to emulate the vehicle that it is claimed that Ronald Brant designed and successfully ran. I have not yet found very much information on this. I also have found a couple of circuits by Mueller using the Tesla switch designed after Bedini. One is pulsed with a simple motor pulse using  contact points the other using a more sophisticated control circuit with a sg3524. Incidentally, the  IC numbering on this diagram - if you locate it - is wrongly numbered: 9 should be 3. Interestingly enough, this latter circuit contains small step-up transformers coupled between the the emitter and base of the 2n3055 used - which I attribute as being a major Bedini influence to enable a surer way of transferring volts or electons or whatever is going on. I notice that you found an increase in efficiency with the use of inductors. Mueller probably did too. I intend to build both circuits and then test for corresponding differences and try to discover the best way to use the Tesla switch for my own purposes.

If you would like copies of these circuits I can post them for you or any one else who would like them as a starting frame of reference.

Regards

hi ourbobby

sounds like a worthwhile and honest approach

there has been a lot of heat generated recently, on the 'Feynman builds a Bedini ..' thread,.about the lack of solid evidence for/against some of the Bedini designs

if you're able to address that gap it should cut down unnecessary arguments

is it worth starting a fresh thread, perhaps, when you're ready?

yes, i'd be interested to learn a bit about what you plan - doesn't have to be in too much detail if that's better for you

all the best
sandy

---

Doc Ringwood's Free Energy site:  http://ringcomps.co.uk/doc

Need help, No charging of battery, battery drains......... >:(

Maximum power transfers when source resistance is equal to load resistance......No overunity

hello, this is a different project, but take it as a suggestion for future exploration as my data maybe incomplete

i am a newbie and really like to simplify and cheapify stuff, and i had obtained this pdf and i got some ideas (the pdf is now hard to find on the net, when i found it it was on a few places).

after going through a few ideas i finally got to this solution:
(not sure about starting a thread, wouldn't be able to keep adding to it...)

the idea is to use isolated power supplies to do siphoning. using:
12v to 230v inverters
and
240v to 12v computer power supplies

since computer power supplies are common and inverters are cheap, alot of power should be able to be obtained for little money and modification, the min 12v output on the PSU needs only to be the calculated efficiency loss of the inverter, at 70% this is probably half the OU output, so find a 90% eff inverter.

the 12v psu output is to provide a power source for the power coming out to reference to.


because of the high switching frequency the caps need only be small, the inverter is a lightweight one, not a huge heavy transformer in it. the power gets converted at 100kHz or so and then made into mains frequency (50Hz is the only output of the heavy ones and is unusable). the 230v dc is taken out before the final conversion.

so far no go as i am lacking caps (i think that's the only prob), i predict i need 1500uf on the 230v side (using a 110-150w inverter). (output is 218v as 230v-12v is 218, efficiency is higher than using 110v psus as there is a 98v remnant and there is more watts if there is a bigger difference - i think). the input cap in the inverter exceeds the requirement for the low volt cap so no extra needed..


connecting the wires after the bridge on the inverter and onto the PSU (suggest removing the bridge to put wires and remove components that would connect the input power that to the chassis because a risk of shorting the PSU 12v exists)

note: if the inverter input rises above 12v it becomes more efficient (and switches off at 15v)  but also the PSU power will not input so much and so keeping the inverter in safe operating zones.

so as it says: electricity does not go away,
while it does work, it just moves,

but then i think,

what happens when the efficiency is low and heat is generated.
does electricity evaporates?

or for example i put electricity in a coil and then collect the magnetic field with other system,
does the amount of electricity remains the same?

Dear All ! In order to build and mordern battery switch, we need to develop the battery selfcharger !!! Based on this point we can move forward WITHOUT energy drop in case of battery switch load.

I use TS with mechanical swich DC motor
contacts from power relay
But no positive results
2 akm recharge and 2 charge
This result may use no swich

I use Rone Cole scheme with 2 condenser and akum
2*100 mkF 1 scheme
2*10000 mkF  in 2 scheme
And effect is zero...

And try use kickcharge with  ordinary charger and my swich in series
Result is badly than usualy charger

This swich is noisy

I  try use now  like Bediny charger by Ossy Callanan http://www.overunity.com/6005/4-mhz-solid-state-radiant-battery-charger/#.Upw3CeWZkng (http://www.overunity.com/6005/4-mhz-solid-state-radiant-battery-charger/#.Upw3CeWZkng)
Process is still...
Charge 1 batery durind 3 day to 13v
This result is normal
Now continium my experiments

Akum is acid 55Ah old use

detail is http://x-faq.ru/index.php?topic=2246.0 (http://x-faq.ru/index.php?topic=2246.0)

regards!