I want to share with this community my testing results with energy savers are using free energy principle, in this case I show the basical concept of one uses a single pair of capacitors, as load I've used a single DC motor used in coolers for motherboards of PC, this overunity single circuit has been builded for single students with succesfully results and too much people try to build this will get fast results, will be interesting for me other people can replicate this for show the easy is test this
Needed materials are:
* Two electrolytical capacitors or banks of at least 10000 microfarads each, 25 V minimal voltage
* A 12 V DC motor, is suggested a little motor as a cooler used for microprocessor , any little DC motor of maximal 500 mA will work fine
* A 12 V DC power source, can be a regulated Power supply, or a battery
* Any thing for time measurements, can be a chronometer or other
For a briefing explanation please see the attached drawing:
The main objetive is charge a capacitor and then discharge it to the load or DC motor, register the time until the motor stop its spin and compare the other time the same charged capacitor is again discharged to the load using a passive setup, if there is more energy added to the system the motor must spin too much.
In a testing I've used 2 capacitors of 22000 microfarads each, a 12 VDC CPU fan or cooler, and a regulated power supply of 12 VDC.
* First both capacitors are dischargued and C1 is charged at 12 VDC
* C1 is dischargued to the DC motor and is measured a time of 22 seconds until the motor stops
* C1 is recharged again and now is used the circuit shown in the attached drawing connecting the switch in the position A
* Switch is now in position B and C1 discharges to the load and C2 becomes in charge, the motor spins until get stoped, capacitor finish charged at 6 VDC and the motor stop in 12 seconds
* Then with both capacitors charged at 6 VDC we use the other connection shown in the STEP2 of the drawing
* When the switch is connected to the position D , C1 is full discharged to the load and the motor spins about 10 seconds
* When the switch is connected to the position E , C2 is full discharged to the load and again the motor spins about 10 seconds
And ready, testings finished and now we have the following conclusions:
When C1 was full discharged from 12 VDC to 0 V its total energy power the DC motor in 22 seconds
When C1 was discharged in steps using the passive setup using the other capacitor C2 discharged at starting the motor spin 3 times and total time was:
12 + 10 + 10 = 32 seconds
This is 32 - 22 = 10 seconds of extra time is about 50% of extra energy
If capacity and voltage are raised then extra power have a tendence to the 100%
This testing can be repeated attaching a mechannical load to the axis of the DC motor, a pulley can be used for pick up a little weight and again the weight get a more greater altitude using this method than a single capacitor discharge
This is a low scale test concept proof for some watts in the load, but using switching electronics and high capacity capacitors, useful power savers can be builded
This device is the basis for a type of Capacitive power saver for save up to the 100% of the electric bill and I wait testing results get the same conclusions and you can verify the easy is get good results with this setup.
Bye
Giga
Quote from: gigawattgratis on December 31, 2008, 11:56:15 PM
I
This testing can be repeated attaching a mechannical load to the axis of the DC motor, a pulley can be used for pick up a little weight and again the weight get a more greater altitude using this method than a single capacitor discharge.
Hi Giga,
Have you personally done the mechanical load test you mention above in your quoted text and if yes, what was the difference in the height (altitude)? That would be already interesting.
Thanks, Gyula
Gyla, thanks for answer
Yes, I do the mechannical testings, results are the following at the same conditions of starting voltage and capacity:
A thread was fixed to the shaft of the motor allowing it to wind up a 74-gr. weight
Using the direct discharge of C1 to the motor I got lift the weight at 71 centimeters
Using the step1 and step2 procedure of the drawing with the same input capacitive energy I got:
50.5 + 22 + 22 = 94.5 centimeters
This is 33 % of energy gain !!
May be you ask why in the free running case the energy gain was about 50% and now in lifting test only 33%, you will see that gain will be raised too much if power and energy are too much, that is say, more capacity, more voltage and a DC motor of more power, but this is not the main, the main here is you can see there is overunity and the basical principle of this capacitive power saver is working and is too easy for build and test not only with DC motors as loads, you can test with any type of loads as resistive, bulbs, etc, for this demonstrative principle I've used a motor is more easy to see the principle
Of course your results will change according to capacity, voltage and the DC motor you can use, but always you will get overunity
Will be welcome you can share your own results for show to this community the easy is get overunity in this setup and then deduce an useful device can save power from the power grid or any other input power source
Bye.
Giga
Gyla, now I have a question for you
What do you think about an engineer believes capacitors C1 and C2 are in series?
What do you think about the future of the company works that engineer?
I wait in this time you got succesfully results in this basic concept testing.
Bye
Hi Giga,
It is good you have returned to this topic. While I am puzzled why anyone else has not commented this topic (except me) now I think it would be good you could share some more details on your setup you used.
I actually tested it too but always got 3-4 cm less distance with respect to the 50 cm C1 lifts the weight.
If you think it over a DC motor with brushes (at least I have used such available) normally has an efficiency of 70-75% at a given input power specified by the manufacturer. And it has much less efficiency when you use it at less inputs like the case for a discharging capacitors. So it means your setup should manifest a COP of at least 3-4 of even higher to come out with your claimed COP of about 1.3 ok? Agree with this?
It is true I could use only a used DC motor, not a brand new its bearings were rather weared out by hearing the noise when otherwise it runs normally with specified DC consumption (about 12V @ 90 mA).
Thanks, Gyula
hey,
i tested it with 2x 1miliF 10V caps(electrolitic) and red LED.Voltage came from 2xAAA alcaline batteries in series.
I measured time in dark room untill i could not see any light from LED.
C1 only gave me 1m42s +/- 2s.
C1/C2 gave me 1m +/- 3s
C2 i couldnt se no light at all(doesn't matter how i connected the LED to it)
C1 around 40s.
i will have to repeat this measurements like 10 times to get the accurate average,now i did it only 3 times.
Interesting that C2 gives no power to LED...although when charged from battery it behaves like C1.
Can u try it on ur setup with like 4 LED's in series?
Hi Creativity,
I think you have to consider the red LED forward voltage drop (must be about 1.3 - 1.4V) that cannot reach C2 hence the voltage in C2 is already too low and this must be the reason you could not see any light when fed the LED from it.
You can check this with a DC voltmeter how many Volts is left in C2 and also what is the voltage drop across the red LED when it is lit. This way you would have a better insight to the energies left in the capacitors (because there remains at least 1V or maybe max 1.2V in C1 too, LEDs do not consume current below their forward voltage).
The funny thing with LEDs in this particular test is that you cannot really use higher voltage in C1 to "counterbalance" the LEDs forward voltage drop because if you start with a high enough voltage, the initial current may exceed the the current capabilities of the LEDs and they get ruined.
Using more LEDs in series increases the forward voltage drops, unfortunately. Maybe using them in parallel sounds good, this increases the current capability to survive at some higher starting voltages.
I have not done test with LEDs in this setup, will think on using other simple loads.
rgds, Gyula
Dear Gyla
DC motors is not the main, this setup is only for concept testing purposes, in fact if you want to work with high power DC motors or AC motors you must change switches for thyristors and the adequate controller for the high speed of the capacitors discharge and get overunity in a practical system,not only motors, any type of loads, however in this basical conceptual setup the main is get overunity and proof the concept
If you want get more performance in the lifter testing, you must use capacitors of more capacity.
Thanks Creativity for your led testings, I was using a DC motor for this testing and not bulbs or leds because light you can see go in dependence of your viewpoint, for a serious testing with this type of loads you must use a light sensor as a LDR or phototransistor for control the light level you want assign as "off state", however in a DC motor the off state is easy to see when the motor stop its spin, may be you have a trouble with the capacitor C2, because the expected is you get the same time than for C1, that is say 40 seconds, may be the voltage is too little, the suggested testing is at 12 VDC, 3 VDC is near to the critical voltage value for common leds, 20 mm leds fall the light about 1.5 VDC, however I can see you go for the right way and your testings is near to the overunity.
The question about the engineer thinks C1 and C2 are in other connection is open for you too creativity, what do you think?
Bye.
probably we should consider the "default" test as best option.I mean resisitve load in calorimeter and check the temperature rise.
One question... just came to my mind.
@gigawattgratis
how did u measured the rise of the weight?please describe the procedure step by step.Have u let the motor to drop the weight down after every step?Was it like this:
discharge C1->weight risen.
let the weight go to it's start position.
discharge C2->weight risen.
let the weight go to it's start position.
and so on?
PS:capacitors r connected in series here,if u ask about step 1 with switch in position B.Actually i see it as discharging of C1 into C2 throught the resistor(motor).
wit leds , you wil never find any "values" that you can "true" calcukate.
Only with filament bulbs (as resistor-load) , you will find , that you are
on an way -to learn -
G.Pese
second try this time with calorimeter.
I put like 1 ml of water in the small container together with digital thermometer probe and 38 Ohm resistor.This all went into the thermos.
2 caps of 1miliF each and voltage from power supply 9 V.
I let the temperature to stabilise,after 15 min i got 13,1degC.
I zapped the resistor with C1 but unfortunately no temperature gain.
I will have to choose higher voltage caps and lower resistance i guess.What do u all think?
PS: i checked the setup if it is working with 1s of direct current 9V.Temperature has risen and stabilised to 13,8 degC after 15 min.
Yes, it sounds better to vary the resistor values and the voltage level. You have had a time constant in the some tens millisecond range if I calculate correctly and this may be very quick and would need a fast response and higher resolution thermometer.
in calorimeter the time of discharge has no importance,just the total energy supplied.I let it for 15 min to stabilise the temperature over the whole volume of liquid.
To invest in more accurate thermometer is pricy way to go.
Instead of water I will try methanol or ethanol as it has much lower heat capacity(order of magnitude)+ i will use less liquid so it should be easier to see any changes in temp even with lower discharge energies.
BTW: i dont really see where the extra energy should come from in this setup.i thought that maybe original experiment was done wrong by letting the cap to partially recharge from the falling wheight.
...it is not just time to meassure here but when using motor it is allso - speed, when using diode - current through it
when connecting motor to fully charged C1 (and C1 only) motor will all the time run faster (higher overal voltage)
then when C1 is "poured" through motor to C2...
I'm just saying that one should not oversimplify this. Would be nice to see actual test of lifting weight but when it is done it allso
needs to be taken in account not only height but allso time to lift weight on certain height. - cause at different speeds (RPMs) of motor
different are losses or gains...
I would love to see test simmilar to test that genesis (motor with PermMagnets) conducted.
motor has constant 300rpms speed and lifts 4 times larger weight(with PM) at same height then without PM.
that would be proof...
Wiz
Quote from: wizkycho on January 22, 2009, 10:24:19 AM
...it is not just time to meassure here but when using motor it is allso - speed, when using diode - current through it
when connecting motor to fully charged C1 (and C1 only) motor will all the time run faster (higher overal voltage)
then when C1 is "poured" through motor to C2...
I'm just saying that one should not oversimplify this. Would be nice to see actual test of lifting weight but when it is done it allso
needs to be taken in account not only height but allso time to lift weight on certain height. - cause at different speeds (RPMs) of motor
different are losses or gains...
I would love to see test simmilar to test that genesis (motor with PermMagnets) conducted.
motor has constant 300rpms speed and lifts 4 times larger weight(with PM) at same height then without PM.
that would be proof...
Wiz
time is playing its role in power(how fast something happened).Work done (energy) is not time dependent(how high wheight got lifted,what the end temperature was etc.).But sure it would be nice not to sacrifice power in this setup.If u have a link then post it please.
@Creativity
I think Wiz meant the link Jack Hildenbrand gave in his mail here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=5992.msg136214#msg136214
See the links I included in my answer to Jack too. (In the meantime Jack got his own patent, fortunately.)
Basically they add permanent magnet flux to the electromagnet flux just like Jack does in his setup or parallel path technology does by the Flynn's, only the mechanical setups of each to achieve the same goal are a bit different.
rgds, Gyula
Dear friends
Is not needed fall in more complex variations of this testings using leds, calorimetrs, etc, please go in reference to the "default" testing using the little DC motor, this testing is for a single inspection of overunity, too much people has made this testing with succesfully results and I expect the overunity community get the same results, once the expected results can be done then will be welcome a more deep analysis or using other instruments
Is suggested the DC motor as load because there is a self oscillation in resonance between capacitors and the inductance of the DC motor increases the overunity gain
The lifting testing procedure is very single, there must be a mechanism don't let the weight fall ( that's logical ) only go up and the discharge procedure is the same as I've explained, discharging first C1 and measure the height and compare it with the discharge of C1 into C2 and then the discharges of C1 and C2 and see the final height was increased
My comment for the engineer was because he thinks the equivalent capacity of all the system is : C1 + C2 ( not in series, in parallel )
For the best performance in the testings the more high capacity and the more high voltage is welcomed
If the "default" testing is not made, the only proof is your imagination
Bye
I suggest a DC water pump.
A replacement windshield washer pump.
Back in the 70s we used one to pump bleach
under the tires for amazing (stupid) burnouts
on our hot rod chevy...
Anyhow see how much water you can pump
using both ways. Pumped water is work done.
You can measure by sight or weight.
DrSpark
as to the temperature rise in your thermos you can use a small plastic tube which goes to the bottom of the thermos fluid the smaller the tube the more accurate it will be as the temperature reses in the thermos it will move the fluid and can be calibrated to your meter but it will move much faster so scale it at start and get a rise of say one degree and mark it again it can now be devided and added to so you can get more accurate measures i did this when working on a heater and it works really great alcohol makes a great reacting fluid as well for this type of setup as it is quick to vaporize and responds well to heat.