Overunity.com Archives

  Have a look at this


http://www.youtube.com/user/EnergyTechnologyNow


The old channel was removed:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDUgjy0-Oo8&feature=channel
And
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unmFozGyxW4&feature=channel
schematic video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnc78HVSi1M&feature=channel_page

cat

Hi Powercat

I just watched both videos but don't understand the circuit completely, any chance of a schematic with components and specs?

It looks interesting but I can't follow his circuit with his calculations.

Regards,
Paul

HI Paul
got this searching u tube,in the last Hour

lots of videos from this guy on u tube   

He is a bit scattergun in his explanation [hmmm]

Sory no more info at this time.and it's 1AM bedtime soon

cat

@ Powercat

Thanks, I must have been getting tired too at the time, I found the schematic in the video "How I made my TR Pulse Motor 001" at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnc78HVSi1M&feature=channel_page

I now understand it better :) 

Regards,
Paul

Thank's paul
schematic video is now in my first post

cat

just some scam attempt again ...

Hi all,

He miscalculated the 600% efficiency, I have just commented it at youtube under his video.

Instead of 603% it is 387%...    this would still be a fantastic result but....

My opinion is that he should not use a digital multimeter for current measurements in case of pulse motors, it can be very misleading.

rgds, Gyula

Quote from: powercat on April 13, 2009, 06:40:33 PM
  Have a look at this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDUgjy0-Oo8&feature=channel
And
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unmFozGyxW4&feature=channel
schematic video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnc78HVSi1M&feature=channel_page

cat

Hi Gyula
600%  seemed  amazing.
This guy seems to be in a rush, he has many video  but not so many viewers
I think he would benefit from being on this forum
Thanks
cat

Here is a link to Tommey Reed's latest videos, 17 in the last week
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=TommeyReed&view=videos
cat

Quote from: gyulasun on April 14, 2009, 05:12:02 PM
Hi all,

He miscalculated the 600% efficiency, I have just commented it at youtube under his video.

Instead of 603% it is 387%...    this would still be a fantastic result but....

My opinion is that he should not use a digital multimeter for current measurements in case of pulse motors, it can be very misleading.

rgds, Gyula

He may want to try installing a cap across the batteries and the bridge output and then measure with the meter for current usage and voltage (power).  The cap will help "average out" the quick current spikes from the batteries so the meter can read it correctly.

@ all
New vid from Tommey Reed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOoaGqVJ4Mc&feature=channel

this guy is going like an express train, three videos today so far
he's got rid of the motor and has now gone solid-state
I hope he gets invited onto the forum soon, as I think he is going over a lot of ground that has been covered here before

cat
Edit
six videos now
Latest
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FONR8ZjDa70&feature=channel_page
this is a link to all his latest videos
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=TommeyReed&view=videos

I hope he stays the heck away from this forum and continues on his own, if he's serious about what he's doing.

All he's gonna get here is a distraction and derailment that will end up in him leaving pissed off and disappointed in everything he hoped to achieve.

Many pages on this forums with past examples of it happening...

@ all

from You Tube
This video has been removed by the user

25 ALL GONE

cat

did anyone backed up these videos?
post here.

im new to this thread

@ All

I created a PDF document named Tommey Reed's Pulse Motor at http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=get266

It's not exactly made the same as the one he was using in his latest videos but it should give somewhat of an idea of the concept.

Regards,
Paul

@amigo
he has now left u tube  maybe someone pissed him off, that's life
if he had joined this forum he would have got a lot of help
there are improvements to the forumy, moderators on new topics   to stop  abuse

@FreeEnergy
good to see you here
sorry I did not back up videos
I'll remember to do this next time I start a new topic     though they were over 25 videos

@Goat
  well done with the PDF
  in his last video he was using a pulse coil

@all
Tommey Reed  has be in the energy game for a time  with his rotary piston engine
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Tommey_Reed_External_Combustion_Engine

why has he removed all its videos from YouTube ??? ::)
cat

Bet ya 100$ its a scam ...

Probably desperate for attention ,

Perhaps he realized he was wrong in his calculations, or got upset by someone calling him a fraud.

Either way, should not have pulled the plug on his work up on Youtube. If he made errors in calculations, correcting them would've been a right course of action. If someone called him a fraud, he should've simply ignore it and carry on. Everyone's entitled to their opinion...

Does anyone have any of the videos? Please PM me.

Quote from: powercat on April 16, 2009, 10:47:28 AM
@FreeEnergy
good to see you here
sorry I did not back up videos
I'll remember to do this next time I start a new topic     though they were over 25 videos

good to see you too. next time don't forget to save the videos.

peace

How I made my TR Pulse Motor 001.mp4

http://www.zshare.net/download/58779608d3d9ec96/

double post - delete

OK he's back and he's on Yhoo video

http://video.yahoo.com/people/5889505

cat

This one was the last one I saw before he took them down
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/4878399/13002877

this one is new and shows his DC power station
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/4878251/13002401

and finally this one
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/4876058/12998172

only thrree available at Yahoo video   videos were posted over 30 hours ago
I am now in the process of backing them up   at the moment my download speed is very low
so I hope I'm not the only one doing this

cat

Tommey's back on YouTube. New name/EnergyTechnologyNow
http://www.youtube.com/user/EnergyTechnologyNow

I just checked the last video and his calculations of Watts are way off (might be somewhat dyslexic) as he mentioned the following:

For the input of 1.5 V x .155 A = He says  205 Watts but it should be 0.2325 Watts and for the output of 12.75 V x .045 A =  He says 573 Watts but it should be 0.57375 Watts.

There's also the fact that all this is being measured as straight DC but it's pulsating DC so the figures could be way off depending on the meters being used, it's odd that in one of his 25 video's he was using an Oscilloscope but not when reading the input/output of this setup (too bad because it probably would've helped).

At any rate, it's an interesting setup but I can see that the TR1 schematic that I posted isn't what he is using because of the PWM but it's a start :)

Regards,
Paul

latest video from tommey  498% pulse coil
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxSkjXqgLgA&feature=channel
cat

@ powercat

Thanks for posting the last video :)

Until there's a schematic we have the following items (Please correct where needed):

1. He now has the setup with the pulse coil instead of the magnet motor.
2. Pulse coil is spooled bifilar with an extra single coil on top, no turn count provided.
3. Pulse coil is spooled open coil without a ferrite core.
3. PWM and 2N3055 is in the circuit.
4. Capacitor is in circuit.
5. Diodes and FWBR are in circuit as per TR001 schematic.
6. Motor is in output circuit.
7. LED with 100 K Ohms resistor on FWBR are in output circuit.

I admire Tommey Reed's continuing efforts at collecting and using BEMF in the circuit and would like to replicate it at a later time, any appropriate comments regarding this circuit is welcome.

Regards,
Paul

@ Goat

QuoteI admire Tommey Reed's continuing efforts at collecting and using BEMF in the circuit and would like to replicate it at a later time, any appropriate comments regarding this circuit is welcome

.
Yes   appropriate comments regarding this circuit are welcome

I need to watch the video more times [easier now that it's backed up]
there is still a big question over his measurements. As it was in these types of setups here before

all the best
cat

@ powercat

As far as power measurements I agree with you in that they need to be carried out more diligently but in the absence of such can we replicate this circuit for ourselves to test if we can come up with a schematic and component details?

We need more specifics in order to replicate and measure the results.

Can we get this information?  It remains a group effort.

As I mentioned, I would like to replicate but....any help is appreciated at this point!

Next step would be self loop and/or more power from output.

Regards,
Paul

@all
unfortunately I'm not in a position to replicate this circuit, a close friend of mine is[ when he believed in it]
I have worked with him before on hydrogen cells.
I do feel we need more members to join this thread that have worked with these kind of setups in the past
and hopefully one day the man himself Tommey Reed

I'm here to help as much as i can
cat

@ powercat

Thanks for exposing this circuit, it's up to Tommey and all of us to carry it further, I would only be too happy to have an OU circuit so why not:) 

If BEMF can be converted then all the better for us all !!!

Regards,
Paul

@powercat

Thank you for the invitation!

Jesus

@all

The simplest circuit to understand first is the one with only one coil and a reed switch.

Jesus

@all

The second simplest circuit to understand is the bifilar coil with a transistor.

Jesus

HI nievesoliveras
good to see you here
I invitted others who have worked on pulse coils. Sorry if I misseed anyone.

Goat has listed the following items from the video
1. He now has the setup with the pulse coil instead of the magnet motor.
2. Pulse coil is spooled bifilar with an extra single coil on top, no turn count provided.
3. Pulse coil is spooled open coil without a ferrite core.
3. PWM and 2N3055 is in the circuit.
4. Capacitor is in circuit.
5. Diodes and FWBR are in circuit as per TR001 schematic.
6. Motor is in output circuit.
7. LED with 100 K Ohms resistor on FWBR are in output circuit.

these are the two main videos
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxSkjXqgLgA&feature=channel_page
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/4878399/13002877
I have asked Tommey on youtube for a schematic video

The group needs more information on this setup in order to replicate
cat

@powercat

Just in case and to be all on the same channel. There is another circuit to study and is the one using a 555 IC.
The rotor with the magnets is moved by the 555 frequency and the transistor acting as a relay.

Remember that I am not an electronics man. What I am sharing I learned on the go. I could be wrong.
All the circuits are based on the Bedini's knowledge.

Jesus

Quote from: nievesoliveras on April 18, 2009, 08:32:11 AM
@all

The simplest circuit to understand first is the one with only one coil and a reed switch.

Jesus

the 1n4007 make NO sense.
Only losts of 1 volt !
So the 2000mF Condensor can also onmitted
because the "battery" is an big condensor himself
Pese

Quote from: pese on April 18, 2009, 11:02:55 AM
the 1n4007 make NO sense.
Only losts of 1 volt !
So the 2000mF Condensor can also onmitted
because the "battery" is an big condensor himself
Pese

Thank you @pese !

The time I was experimenting with that circuit, that condenser made the rotor to go faster, I dont know why, and the 1N4007 diode was to make sure the battery was charged. It worked very well. But if you say that it is not needed I will repost a new version without those two parts.

Jesus

Edit********

Here are the promised changes.

Jesus

Just viewed the 2 following videos

Pulse Coil, Energy Technology Now 001:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3WxO4CL6bE&feature=channel_page

25w light bulb test on pulse coil technology 001:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UZFHlfU9Xg&feature=channel_page

This time its a another coil setup than the last one we posted about, as he goes through the setup TR mentioned he would make it open source and post his schematics on his website.

Edit:  Added pic of coil.  Setup is different, he is using the PWM plus a FET driver, diodes are still used to divert to cap.

Regards,
Paul

Quote from: nievesoliveras on April 18, 2009, 03:56:19 PM
Thank you @pese !

The time I was experimenting with that circuit, that condenser made the rotor to go faster, I dont know why, and the 1N4007 diode was to make sure the battery was charged. It worked very well. But if you say that it is not needed I will repost a new version without those two parts.

Jesus

Edit********

Here are the promised changes.

Jesus

Hi Jesus
the 2 diodes diodes in the bridge are also "directed" in the same way (as the 4007)
so the 3. diode will not help, can onmitted - and so reduce, some losses.
Gustav Pese

Quote from: Goat on April 18, 2009, 06:23:49 PM
Just viewed the 2 following videos

Pulse Coil, Energy Technology Now 001:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3WxO4CL6bE&feature=channel_page

25w light bulb test on pulse coil technology 001:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UZFHlfU9Xg&feature=channel_page

This time its a another coil setup than the last one we posted about, as he goes through the setup TR mentioned he would make it open source and post his schematics on his website.

Edit:  Added pic of coil.  Setup is different, he is using the PWM plus a FET driver, diodes are still used to divert to cap.

Regards,
Paul

Forgot to add the PWM and FET driver picture in the previous post  :P

Tommy seems like a very personable fellow on his video's...I extended an invitation for him to join us here on ou.com.

With luck he may join us.

Regards...

@all
Motor load test, big transformer 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KICRqPkeTM4&feature=channel_page
looks like Tommey's back up to normal speed 3  videos so far today
;D
cat
Thank's Cap-z-ro I hope he doesn't get lost in the forum maze

Seems Tommy can find his way around a circuit pretty good...I'm he will be able to find a thread named after him. :)

Regards...

2 new schematic videos
How the Pulse Generator works 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wN8qnyBV-9g&feature=channel_page

Basic pulse generator, made simple 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDhs99NO0YY&feature=channel_page

;D
cat
All 11 videos so far are here
http://www.youtube.com/user/EnergyTechnologyNow

Quote from: pese on April 18, 2009, 06:50:21 PM
Hi Jesus
the 2 diodes diodes in the bridge are also "directed" in the same way (as the 4007)
so the 3. diode will not help, can onmitted - and so reduce, some losses.
Gustav Pese

Thank you @pese !

The problem with this specific one is that, that is a 4 diodes integrated on one rectifier. It was a single piece rectifier.
Could you make a graphic schematic to show me what changes you want?

Jesus

Tommey Reed's
                 Pulse coil power station 001
                         THE BIG ONE
                     :o COMING SOON :o

  PREVIEW
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqRuKReMT0M&feature=channel_page
cat

@all
OK Tommey's  totally convinced that he's got overunity.
Unfortunately he is not on the forum to discuss his work.
He does answer questions on YouTube

Here is his latest video [convinced that he's got overunity]
Free energy now!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtutnm7N33Y&feature=channel_page

cat

Tommy isn't just another pretty face...he really has a grasp on life too.

Regards...

At a cursory glance, as one would say, aren't calculations for pulsed power a bit different than the normal power.

What I mean is that hooking up the meter to the input and read it, then say "There, it uses x Amps at y Volts, thus we consume z Watts" might not apply in this case.

I have not looked deeper into it, but I would think that power usage would be a complex calculation of a sum of all pulses over a selected period of time.

As normal meters are not fast or capable enough to do this, a logging equipment would need to be set up that can record the pulses and sum them up in some pre-determined fashion.

What's everyone's take on this?

Quote from: amigo on April 19, 2009, 11:16:02 AM
At a cursory glance, as one would say, aren't calculations for pulsed power a bit different than the normal power.

What I mean is that hooking up the meter to the input and read it, then say "There, it uses x Amps at y Volts, thus we consume z Watts" might not apply in this case.

I have not looked deeper into it, but I would think that power usage would be a complex calculation of a sum of all pulses over a selected period of time.

As normal meters are not fast or capable enough to do this, a logging equipment would need to be set up that can record the pulses and sum them up in some pre-determined fashion.

What's everyone's take on this?

Hi,

I agree, using digital or even analog multimeters for measuring currents and voltages in case of pulse motors or pulse circuits can be misleading indeed,  I already wrote this in the first page of this thread, in Reply #6.

It is ok that he uses electrolytic capacitor at the output in his pulse motor or in his pulse circuits shown in the last few days but the charging and discharging current shapes are surely far from a normal sinusoid waveforms where the multimeters are normally dependable.  He should use several stages of low-pass filters to "clean" the waveform or make a good DC-DC converter that receives the output from his device and makes a stabilized DC output from it and this DC output should be used at the place of his input batteries.  Member 'poynt' here already uploaded a schematic on a possible output-input looping with an indicator LED to show any self-running state.

rgds,  Gyula

More new ones
Low load test on the pulse generator 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26t7dvzAyBc&feature=channel_page

More on the Pulse coil generator station
Building the capacitor bank! 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oyt_QJrAnN8&feature=channel_page

Thank's amigo
a lot of us here are thinking the same thing as you
this point was mentioned to him a few days ago on YouTube ???

@all
I have never seen anyone do so much in such a short time and so many videos
what a dedicated man Tommy is

cat

Quote from: amigo on April 19, 2009, 11:16:02 AM
At a cursory glance, as one would say, aren't calculations for pulsed power a bit different than the normal power.

What I mean is that hooking up the meter to the input and read it, then say "There, it uses x Amps at y Volts, thus we consume z Watts" might not apply in this case.

I have not looked deeper into it, but I would think that power usage would be a complex calculation of a sum of all pulses over a selected period of time.

As normal meters are not fast or capable enough to do this, a logging equipment would need to be set up that can record the pulses and sum them up in some pre-determined fashion.

What's everyone's take on this?

Yes, he must use LC lowpassfilters to measure DC values instead of pulses if he uses digital meters.
I requested this on his youtube comments.

But I have also seen with my big Newman coil, that when I use a graetz bridge accross it,
I get a very fast chargeup of a capacitor from the BackEMF, so Tommy could be right,
that it goes overunity.
Too bad I just don´t have time and the space in this moment to test it further myself.

Regards, Stefan.

Quote from: hartiberlin on April 19, 2009, 06:03:38 PM
Yes, he must use LC lowpassfilters to measure DC values instead of pulses if he uses digital meters.
I requested this on his youtube comments.

But I have also seen with my big Newman coil, that when I use a graetz bridge accross it,
I get a very fast chargeup of a capacitor from the BackEMF, so Tommy could be right,
that it goes overunity.
Too bad I just don´t have time and the space in this moment to test it further myself.

Regards, Stefan.

Stefan,

Where does the extra energy come from?  Because the flyback pulse's energy (the BackEMF in this case is incorrectly used term by many people)  totally comes from the input current to the coil.  All the magnetic energy that builds up in the coil by the input current will manifest in the collapsed field after the moment of switch-off.  Why can we expect more regained energy here?   
I agree that the amplitude of the flyback pulse can grow to as high as several hundred volts (-L*dI/dt),  it is a question of the rapidness of the switch and the current change. 

I wish any higher extra energy could be regained from the flyback pulse, higher than the input power,  hopefully Tommy proves me wrong by making a DC-DC converter to loop back his pulsed circuit forming a self runner.

Regads,  Gyula

Quote from: gyulasun on April 19, 2009, 06:35:17 PM
Stefan,

Where does the extra energy come from?  Because the flyback pulse's energy (the BackEMF in this case is incorrectly used term by many people)  totally comes from the input current to the coil.  All the magnetic energy that builds up in the coil by the input current will manifest in the collapsed field after the moment of switch-off.  Why can we expect more regained energy here?   
I agree that the amplitude of the flyback pulse can grow to as high as several hundred volts (-L*dI/dt),  it is a question of the rapidness of the switch and the current change. 

I wish any higher extra energy could be regained from the flyback pulse, higher than the input power,  hopefully Tommy proves me wrong by making a DC-DC converter to loop back his pulsed circuit forming a self runner.

Regads,  Gyula

Interesting question.  Could a coil that is pulsed with a DC current forming an electromagnetic field in the core material of the coil be forming a larger magnet in sympathy to the flux flow from electromagnet on coil 1? 

When the field from the long piece of core material collapses, if another coil is on the same core that was in the original circuit that was pulsed, could the pulse back become larger due to the response of the core material forming a sympathetic magnetic field and then that field collapsing on the coils? 

Another way to put it; can there be a gain from a pulsed coil and an additional coil that is not in the first circuit, if the magnetic core is larger than the first coil and holds the additional magnetic field and collapses the magnetic field on both coils for output?

Note diagram below.

             
########      ######################################
==================================================
===================Magnetic core material============
########      ######################################
Coil 1                                            Coil 2
Pulsed

BEMF pulse collected from both coils, but only coil 1 is pulsed.

It appears as though this is just a transformer and as I understand it, there is no gain, just a step up of voltage and a drop in current output in the coil with more turns...  But it may be operating different than a simple transformer, since the pulse starts and stops and then collects the BEMF pulse from both coils.  A core material that can hold a lot of flux before saturation, would enhance performance I would think.

Hi powercat and everyone,

thanks for the invitation cat ;)... I read the topic from the beginning as I found Tommey's videos a little confusing ???...from what I can see and understand at this time he is basically collecting the collapsing field in a cap from a coil that is being sharply turned on and off (basically next to no pulse duration) by DC from a battery using a MOSFET as switch. He mention Resonance in a few videos but somehow I don't get the feeling his coil goes into Resonance from the little I understand about Resonance. As mention in a few posts already we also need to know that using a DVM or AVM to measure Pulsed DC (hi speed on off) from a battery or even worse, from the coil side will not give an true reading.

I really admire Tommey Reed's dedication, sharing, enthusiasm and his understanding of the problems in our World. However I believe he maybe a little too much ahead on building a large prototype model based on meter measurements. If someone has a communication with him I would suggest a few very simple tests. One is to use 2 identical 12 volt automotive bulbs, one is connected is Series on one of the  battery leads and the other is connected in parallel to his collection capacitor. If the bulb is brighter at the capacitor then the battery then he may have something. He would now need to make the next test to determine for sure he has overunity. Use 2 identical capacitors of 30,000uf minimum, charge one capacitor with the battery and use it as feed instead of the battery and connect the other capacitor (drained) as collector cap but no load on it. Start his circuit and monitor the voltage of the collection cap. If the voltage exceeded the input cap voltage them he has Overunity.

Hope this helps.

Luc



   

Quote from: gyulasun on April 19, 2009, 02:51:49 PM

Hi,

I agree, using digital or even analog multimeters for measuring currents and voltages in case of pulse motors or pulse circuits can be misleading indeed,  I already wrote this in the first page of this thread, in Reply #6.

It is ok that he uses electrolytic capacitor at the output in his pulse motor or in his pulse circuits shown in the last few days but the charging and discharging current shapes are surely far from a normal sinusoid waveforms where the multimeters are normally dependable.  He should use several stages of low-pass filters to "clean" the waveform or make a good DC-DC converter that receives the output from his device and makes a stabilized DC output from it and this DC output should be used at the place of his input batteries.  Member 'poynt' here already uploaded a schematic on a possible output-input looping with an indicator LED to show any self-running state.

rgds,  Gyula

Duh on me then, and I apologize for missing that post. :)

If the waveforms are truly complex, as they appear to be, then wouldn't a Fourier transformation be required to break the waveform up and collect all its elements?

It seems to me that would be the way to sum everything up ensuring nothing is missed out.

Regarding use of DC-DC converters or low-pass filters, wouldn't they introduce additional system losses that would have to be accounted for as well?

I'm sort of thinking in a different direction. Rather than using a meter between the power source (battery) and the circuit, I would replace the power source and not have any meters interfering with the circuit. The power source replacement would then be some "finite" energy source, perhaps a capacitor who's characteristics are well defined and known.

This capacitor would be charged with a finite amount of energy that could be quantified mathematically and physically before the experiment, then discharged into the circuit through an independent timing controller, for a determined duration of time.

Based on the pre-determined duration of time and the difference of the amount of energy discharged from the capacitor and the starting amount of charge, we could determine the amount of work performed by the capacitor and thus the power consumed by the input circuit.

Does this make sense, or am I just blabbering (late night) non-sense? :)

@ Amigo

Re: "This capacitor would be charged with a finite amount of energy that could be quantified mathematically and physically before the experiment, then discharged into the circuit through an independent timing controller, for a determined duration of time."

I think if you look(ed) at the 25W bulb video he is doing what you describe but it's through the battery as a "capacitor would be charged with a finite amount of energy".  So different rules apply in the maths but measuring the input from the battery isn't as tricky as the output because it's only feeding the driving circuit.

Let's say you run the 25W bulb experiment but with a properly measured Watt rating on the output compared to the input then you could tell.  So I think the problem is more on the output measurement side.

Just my 2 cents  ;)

Regards,
Paul 

latest from Tommey
Power test with filters on the pulse generator
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izkQs9_Qj90&feature=channel_page
          :)
    :)  cat :)
          :)

@amigo

Well,  I agree with you in case the energy source output power spectrum is very wideband, thus the harmonics also carry significant power, then low-pass filtering them surely kills our efforts towards any extra output gain.  This is especially so in case of the Stiffler oscillators. 

However, if someone wants to collect the energy of a flyback pulse which is created across a coil when you switch off the current flowing in it, then the main energy content of the collapsed field manifests in the huge voltage pulse, I believe, here the harmonics energy contents are quickly diminishing.  I think the reason for this is that the stray capacitance of the coil and that of the circuit the coil is embedded, forms a resonant circuit (selectivity) with the coil and most of the collapsed magnetic fields energy will be stored in this circuit and starts dissipating like in any lossy circuit if not taken care of otherwise like feeding this pulse into a storage capacitor via a diode.

Using a DC-DC converter that receives its input from such storage capacitors will not introduce significant loss because the energy already collected could be utilized with a >90% efficiency,  such converters are capable of working at that efficiency.
This is how I meant. 

Re on low pass filter: in case of pulsed circuits the input battery ought to feed the circuit in question via a low pass filter and current draw ought to be measured between the battery and the low pass filter, to get a meaningful input power measurements by multimeters.  At the output of a pulsed circuit, low-pass filter should be used with care of course, not to attenuate still collectable harmonic energy.

Notice: I understand there can be pulsed circuits, oscillators etc where the use of a low-pass filter should be designed into the circuit in advance, to make that particular circuit work correctly. It can happen that the working conditions of circuit simply changes when a low-pass filter is inserted into its supply wires.

What you propose, using a controlled amount of input power source makes sense. But it may involve further active circuits to use,  and a passive low-pass filter may be preferred, depending on the complexity.

The main problem is rather with measuring the output power of such pulsed or oscillator circuits, indeed as Goat just wrote above.  One has to consider the output power spectrum of the circuit she or he built and act accordingly, even selectively collect the main harmonic energies etc. Not a simple task for an hobby tinkerer.


rgds,  Gyula

If he has nearly 400% gain from his circuit, forget the meter readings or solar panels and simply loop back a portion of the output to the input of his circuit and see if it continues to run.  That will tell you if it is over unity.  A capacitor should hold enough charge from the output to continue to run his device for the input power if it is truly going to work.

Quote from: Liberty on April 19, 2009, 07:28:16 PM
Interesting question.  Could a coil that is pulsed with a DC current forming an electromagnetic field in the core material of the coil be forming a larger magnet in sympathy to the flux flow from electromagnet on coil 1? 

When the field from the long piece of core material collapses, if another coil is on the same core that was in the original circuit that was pulsed, could the pulse back become larger due to the response of the core material forming a sympathetic magnetic field and then that field collapsing on the coils? 

Another way to put it; can there be a gain from a pulsed coil and an additional coil that is not in the first circuit, if the magnetic core is larger than the first coil and holds the additional magnetic field and collapses the magnetic field on both coils for output?

Hi Liberty, I would answer no for all 3 questions...

An interesting variant in this setup you show below is the Kunel patent.  (see here in English: http://rechercheblog.de/wp-content/downloads/KunelPatent.pdf
Kunel claims extra output power (higher out than in), by saying the permanent magnet flux is added to the flux what the input power creates. 
And this claim is investigated in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfaMCOMuWl8  and it has two more parts.  Conclusion: no extra output...

Quote
Note diagram below.

             
########      ######################################
==================================================
===================Magnetic core material============
########      ######################################
Coil 1                                            Coil 2
Pulsed

BEMF pulse collected from both coils, but only coil 1 is pulsed.

It appears as though this is just a transformer and as I understand it, there is no gain, just a step up of voltage and a drop in current output in the coil with more turns...  But it may be operating different than a simple transformer, since the pulse starts and stops and then collects the BEMF pulse from both coils.  A core material that can hold a lot of flux before saturation, would enhance performance I would think.

Yes, this setup would work as a step up transformer and a very good quality core material would involve very low core loss and higher self-inductance coils with less number of turns (hence copper loss would also be less).  That is all I am afraid...
(Notice: to really work correctly in practice with good transformer efficiency (90-95% efficiency) you would have to use an U shape core of also good core quality to close the presently open magnetic path of the rod. So closed magnetic flux path should be formed from the cores like C+I shape or E+I with no airgap.)

Somehow Tommy should be persuaded to use some loop back circuit once he really has over 300% extra output...
Even a lossy Zener diode feedback could be tried...

rgds,  Gyula

My idea of the capacitor with the finite charge at the input was to serve the purpose of measuring the energy used up by the entire circuit to operate so that these 400% and other figures are not based on simple meter readings ratios.

I am not sure now that we really need to worry about any output harmonics or oscillating currents etc, if a cap is at the output, it will again present a finite charge. Same goes with the need to filter anything at that stage either as the capacitor will store whatever dielectric charge it's imparted onto.

Technically, the ratio of energy dissipated from the input capacitor and the energy stored in the output capacitor should give us an indication whether the circuit is producing excess of energy or not.

Please correct me if I'm wrong in my thinking.

&amigo

I think you are right.  However if a pulsed or oscillator circuit has output power very reach in harmonics you would need to use a wideband rectifier to be able charge a capacitor with all the output power the output signal contains.
(Here connects Dr Stiffler's use of 1N4148 or similar type diode in his SECs, it is a very wide band diode with good efficiency up to  some hundred MHz frequencies.)

I understood your finite charge capacitor usage at the input.

rgds,  Gyula

2 more  new TR
Capacitor bank update, pulse generator.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhbwIPqJe3w&feature=channel_page
&
Capacitor bank
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AnUbHshFVM&feature=channel_page

cat

Hi Tommey Reed,
you need to measure just only the INPUT CURRENT via a LC low pass filter, so you can
measure the current directly behind the battery before the LC lowpassfilter.
This way you almost measure DC input current
and the voltage at the battery is steady then.
Then let it run for 10 seconds and measure the voltage at the load cap.
Then compare the energies.
This is the only way to measure it right.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.

Hi all
2 New from Tommey
Pulse Motor load test data.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZ1Ky7yoHaE&feature=channel_page
&
Pulse generator with 2n3055 power transister 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_CnY5Km0Bw&feature=channel_page

To much work on this week,i will catch up on the weekend
Can someone do back up of vids

all the best
cat

Looking at the last two videos, I am not sure where does he see the gains he mentioned in the past videos.

Tommey is drawing 410mA from the battery source at 12.6V making it consume 5.166W.

The measured voltage at the cap shows 29.2V and he mentioned 100mA or so on the motor. Are we supposed to use those figures because that only gives us 3W?

So, is there a loss of >2W on that filter resistor due to the heat, as well as the circuit itself?

Sorry only 10 minutes on line today, no time to look at any of this week's new videos
but 3 today from Tommey
Pulse Generator amp load test
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2tAuwsK8sk&feature=channel_page
Pulse Generator load test 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbMeY6Q3Rm8&feature=channel_page
Pulse Generator load test 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtYOIYlRf7E&feature=channel_page

cat

Quote from: powercat on April 23, 2009, 02:14:35 PM

Pulse Generator load test 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtYOIYlRf7E&feature=channel_page

I'm sorry to say but Tommey's calculations on "Pulse Generator load test 3" video are not correct.

The 300ma input should be calculated at battery voltage and not at the output pulse of the PWM which cannot be measured using a DVM. Only an Oscilloscope can measure the PWM pulse voltage correctly.

Luc

Huh. Need blueprints need closed loop so ppl could verify those measurements and surface possible mistakes.  Its hard to buy this only because so many similar projects before went to measuring mistakes. I guess only time will answer this one.

Keep it up Tommey

Quote from: gotoluc on April 23, 2009, 03:48:26 PM
I'm sorry to say but Tommey's calculations on "Pulse Generator load test 3" video are not correct.

The 300ma input should be calculated at battery voltage and not at the output pulse of the PWM which cannot be measured using a DVM. Only an Oscilloscope can measure the PWM pulse voltage correctly.

Luc

Hi Luc / all

Calculations ? i was hoping Stefan's efforts might of got him here,ill also try on Saturday/ sunday

OK 3 more from the man himself

Pulse Generator load test 4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGzOeFP3eQ&feature=channel_page

Pulse generator back emf test.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmEFXv-l6TQ&feature=channel_page

Pulse Generator, 2hp dc motor test 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqbnCHvaze0&feature=channel_page

cat

STOP PRESS
                     ;D THE BIG ONE IS HERE ;D
                               Tommey Reed's
                , :o 10kw PULSE POWER STATION :o

    Pulse Generator, 10kw generator test. This is for real!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XuYGEvCa4M&feature=channel_page
&
Pulse Generator, dc generator load test 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKuZfj5p7Ak&feature=channel_page

cat

Here is a usefull article about a similar claim recently. I have posted it as it has a very usefull discussion re how to measure and accurately calculate power in and out.
Without accurate measurement that can be validated and calculated independently then we have nothing here as well other than some miscalculations
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Review:Thomas_Valone_on_Sumaruck%27s_March_30%2C_2009_Video
Kind Regards
Mark

Hi BackEMF power is pretty powerful around 640 to 920 Watts in
his 2 latest videos.
The question really is, what goes into his input ?

As he is filming it so fast, it does not get clear.

He is having 48 Volts chopped only 30 % ontime= 48/3 = 16 Volts and in the first video 31 amps in,
so it is just 496 Watts in and 640 Watts out ?

I really would like to see a loop back from the generator´s rectified output to the
PWM input, if he could get it to selfrun or at least run a 1000 Watts incandescent bulb load from the generator
instead just running a radio or his grinding machine.

Regards, Stefan.

Was it ever mentioned how many volts went into the cap bank...or what the battery bank levels were doing before, during, and after ?

Regards...

Quote from: Cap-Z-ro on April 24, 2009, 06:52:27 PM
Was it ever mentioned how many volts went into the cap bank...or what the battery bank levels were doing before, during, and after ?

Regards...

His big cap bank in the wood case had about 40 Volts in the first video charged up from the BackEMF
while the 2 HP motor was running.

The input voltage is 48 Volts being chopped at a few Khz with a PWM,
so the PWM duty cycle must be used to calculate the voltage input.

Here is now his 3rd video online:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8lT4tqQwhA

Regards, Stefan.

Well in the 3rd video it seems he has got 40 Volts DC on the cap bank at 30 amps going into the
big 13 HP DC motor, that is a 1200 Watts output.

The Input is at 48 Volts DC / 30 % dutycycle = 16 Volts x 17 amps= 272 Watts input power.

Pretty amazing.
He should be able to selfrun it.

Regards, Stefan.

Thanks Stefan, the video established the cap voltage but the battery levels still remain an unknown statistic...and as you said I would like to see Tommy loop it.

Regards...

Quote from: hartiberlin on April 24, 2009, 07:32:40 PM
Well in the 3rd video it seems he has got 40 Volts DC on the cap bank at 30 amps going into the
big 13 HP DC motor, that is a 1200 Watts output.

The Input is at 48 Volts DC / 30 % dutycycle = 16 Volts x 17 amps= 272 Watts input power.

Pretty amazing.
He should be able to selfrun it.

Regards, Stefan.

Hi Stefan and all,

I would definitely agree that this last video is Tommey's best demonstration video. I would agree that the numbers are now showing Over Unity :o

My congratulations to Tommey Reed for pursuing no mater what people said.

Looking forward to his next video.

Luc

Hey gotoluc or someone, would you please do some of us a favor and quick draw schematics of this motor circuit. I dont know if you all see things right away in that video but I cannot pick everything up in that wire "rich" enviroment :)) I am asking only because you seem to think he gets overunity so its kind of important. Thanks

Check out Tom's Ratchet Engine!  Very Cool!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfPwWpQ3_sM&feature=channel_page

Tesla

Quote from: minde4000 on April 24, 2009, 08:31:04 PM
Hey gotoluc or someone, would you please do some of us a favor and quick draw schematics of this motor circuit. I dont know if you all see things right away in that video but I cannot pick everything up in that wire "rich" enviroment :)) I am asking only because you seem to think he gets overunity so its kind of important. Thanks

Hi minde4000,

I do agree that it would be important to make a schematic, however that's not my strong side :P  I'm more like Tommey hands on building and testing. I'm sure someone better skilled at this will be by soon to help out.

What I'm prepared to do is go meet Tommey on behalf of us here at Overunity.com but it would have to be affordable for me to do so. I don't know what part of the states he is in so I sent him a message and asked if I could come by to see him and his back EMF generator. Let's see if he's open to it.

Luc

Thats nice of you gotoluc. Cant wait to see how this one works out. I just dont want his account to be affected in any way before we know exectly how it works. Tnx

Here's a new video showing his MOSFET Driver circuit

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wocuKldVGw&feature=channel_page

Luc

This is a video he made 5 days ago of his basic circuit and has said that there is not much difference to his large format generator.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDhs99NO0YY&feature=channel_page

I have no idea why he's getting the results on his the large format generator because I played with back EMF for many months with identical circuits and never found it to be over unity :-\

So I'm really surprised of his results

Luc

Hi all
Tommey's really flying tonight

Pulse Generator basic pwm         [he's got a scope in this one]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wocuKldVGw&feature=channel_page

the cat is back  after a very busy working week,now I will get the chance to catch up
first I must catch up on some sleep  but all the recent videos are making me buzzzzzz

cat

Unless he can close the loop then all we have here is unknowns or a classic case of miscalculations.
mark

Oh well according to him he is going to be more technical and walk us thru his circuit on his next video. Back EMF is usually HV but super low amps. As you said drive this size motor on back EMF is amazing.

New one's

Pulse Generator, 6 parts needed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlYKg42_oks&feature=channel_page

Pulse Generator, parts in one pc board.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvEIdLEdQZA&feature=channel_page

cat

Group,

Attached is a proposed circuit for testing a looped configuration of TR's setup.
If the coil gives out more (power + back emf voltage) than was put into it,
then the battery will charge. If not, then the battery will discharge.

[EDIT-1]  First version did not run very well so I have changed the trigger coil setup.
[EDIT-2]  The attached version runs very well.
[EDIT-3]  Tested the unit with an external function generator from 0 - 500KHz. (All waveforms, all duty cycle.)
              No charging of battery on any frequency or duty cycle.

The connected lead acid battery is NOT charging up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Regards,
Groundloop.

Hi Groundloop
good to see you here ;)

NEW
Pulse Generator, voltage test
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4KxF4kQRco&feature=channel_page

cat

Well this new video is now demonstrating a very possible amp meter problem since at a higher scale his meter is reading serious under unity and when he reduces his pulse width a little to use his meters lower scale it show over unity :-\

I was suspecting something like this. He should of used the same higher scale when he turned down the pulse width since it would of still showed a true results then using a lower scale at its maximum.

He has not replied to the request I made yesterday of coming to see his unit.

Luc

Come to think of it, he cannot use a DC amp meter to measure the power coming out of his batteries as the power is being turn on and off at 10KHz (I think he said) and a DC meter can only measure a constant flow (not turned off and on)

His meter is probably not defective as he thinks, he is just not using it in the correct way.

I now retract my belief that his unit is over unity.

Luc

Quote from: Groundloop on April 25, 2009, 09:47:39 AM
Group,

Attached is a proposed circuit for testing a looped configuration of TR's setup.
If the coil gives out more (power + back emf voltage) than was put into it,
then the battery will charge. If not, then the battery will discharge.

[EDIT-1]  First version did not run very well so I have changed the trigger coil setup.
[EDIT-2]  The attached version runs very well.

The connected lead acid battery is NOT charging up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Regards,
Groundloop.

Great effective and simple circuit Groundloop ;)

Thanks for taking the time to build and share your findings. Like if you did not know the outcome ;D

Your help is always appreciated... I wouldn't mind your opinion on his last video since I wouldn't want to give out incorrect information.

Thanks for helping as usual.

Luc

Luc,

Thanks Luc, when I connect my battery to the circuit then the voltage drops 0,5 volt.
The circuit is using very little current from the battery (less than 1 mA) but I can see
from a o-scope shot (measured direct over the battery terminals) that the circuit
uses more power than it gives back to the battery. (O-scope shot attached.)

I'm not able to get any useful information out of the videos. He should put the camera
onto a stand and use better lightning. He should also label his instruments. That is
my humble opinion.

Groundloop.

More new
Pulse Generator, small dc motor at high voltage 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7bKCwhaVTY&feature=channel_page

cat

Why does he keep talking about BEMF, like in this video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlYKg42_oks

I though he was collecting inductive collapses NOT the BEMF?!

My understanding is that BEMF is opposing the voltage that's creating the EMF in the coil simultaneously while the current is switched ON (like inertia relating to the movement of some mass in space).

He says at 4:25 that when it collapses (the field) "...instead of going back into the battery, we now redirect it upward."

Redirect upward how? The diode there will also prohibit the flow, as it points downwards?!

I assume he uses the Conventional flow of current (positive to negative) and not the Electron flow (negative to positive), as indicated by the arrows on his drawing.

Here is another new one
Pulse Generator, running power tools 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_40VRPEINT8&feature=channel_page

Maybe he's going to do live streaming next ;D

cat

Quote from: powercat on April 25, 2009, 02:29:07 PM
Here is another new one
Pulse Generator, running power tools 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_40VRPEINT8&feature=channel_page

Maybe he's going to do live streaming next ;D

cat

Thanks Cat for updating his new videos. I have been following Tom's stuff on youTube and this guy is not only sincere but is hands on and no dummy, even though he's not 'university' educated. The numbers on the battery outputs & PWM inputs to the coil outputs driving the capacitor & motor seemed amazing. Even though the measurements of pulsed currents may not be accurately determined, even if you take 50% off for 'measurement' mistakes, this stuff is real!

A simple way to determine how much excess energy is delivered is to ask him to connect a series of 100W light bulbs to the generator and see where it stops lighting up? At the generator output voltage, the total current can be easily measured. No complicated measurements needed. Agree?

cheers
chrisC

He should stop using those meters and just connect few bulbs at the output and note the time they last for. Before that he should measure the voltage at the battery (isolated).

Next he should charge the battery up to the same voltage and simply connect those bulbs directly to the battery (with nothing else connected) and note the time again.

This is really simple. :)

Quote from: amigo on April 25, 2009, 02:08:10 PM
Why does he keep talking about BEMF, like in this video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlYKg42_oks

I though he was collecting inductive collapses NOT the BEMF?!

My understanding is that BEMF is opposing the voltage that's creating the EMF in the coil simultaneously while the current is switched ON (like inertia relating to the movement of some mass in space).

He says at 4:25 that when it collapses (the field) "...instead of going back into the battery, we now redirect it upward."

Redirect upward how? The diode there will also prohibit the flow, as it points downwards?!

I assume he uses the Conventional flow of current (positive to negative) and not the Electron flow (negative to positive), as indicated by the arrows on his drawing.

@amigo

I agree with you, Tommy (and unfortunately many other experimenters, even members here) use incorrect terminology when referring to the voltage pulses created during the collapse of the magnetic field in a coil.
The term Back EMF should be used with electric motors where the rotor winding moves in the stator field while also receiving the input power, and the induced voltage works against the input voltage.  The example you mention for back EMf is also ok with me.

Unfortunately this bad terminology usage would be the least to mention but the bigger problem is his pulsed current measurements problems.  I am afraid he fools himself fully into believe his circuits relally show extra output...

rgds,  Gyula

Quote from: chrisC on April 25, 2009, 02:58:31 PM
Thanks Cat for updating his new videos. I have been following Tom's stuff on youTube and this guy is not only sincere but is hands on and no dummy, even though he's not 'university' educated. The numbers on the battery outputs & PWM inputs to the coil outputs driving the capacitor & motor seemed amazing. Even though the measurements of pulsed currents may not be accurately determined, even if you take 50% off for 'measurement' mistakes, this stuff is real!

A simple way to determine how much excess energy is delivered is to ask him to connect a series of 100W light bulbs to the generator and see where it stops lighting up? At the generator output voltage, the total current can be easily measured. No complicated measurements needed. Agree?

cheers
chrisC

Hi chrisC
currently Tommey is only answering questions on YouTube,he has already been asked to test different ways of measuring and hopefully in time we will get a more accurate answer

@all
Latest one
Pulse Generator, bigger load test.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKMStFmK_Rg&feature=channel_page

cat

@all

I think that he gets his battery charged because he uses an outside of the circuit pulse width modulator. We are trying to use a transistor to pulse the circuit, that uses the same battery to run and to charge.

I read somewhwere that to get the battery charging the way we are trying to do it, we need to charge a capacitor to twice the battery voltage somehow and then release through a diode to the battery.

That charged capacitor must be charged by the same circuit and fire the voltage shot through the diode when the transistor is on the off stage. On that way it does not interfere with the voltage directed to the battery.

Sincerely, I dont know how to do it.

Jesus

And more
Pulse Generator, 96v load test 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJf5qWqpJIA&feature=channel_page

cat

@ all
FROM TOMMEY ON YOUTUBE

Is this OverUnity yet?
Pulse Generator invented by: Tommey Reed
I will answer any question now.
(772) 812-2661

cat

Quote from: gyulasun on April 25, 2009, 03:27:15 PM

The term Back EMF should be used with electric motors where the rotor winding moves in the stator field while also receiving the input power, and the induced voltage works against the input voltage. 

No, this would be called CounterEMF.

BackEMF is normally used as the term when you switch off the current in a coil and it kicks
back with a high voltage pulse to get rid of the stored magnetic energy.

Regards, Stefan.

Quote from: powercat on April 25, 2009, 05:31:49 PM
@ all
FROM TOMMEY ON YOUTUBE

Is this OverUnity yet?
Pulse Generator invented by: Tommey Reed
I will answer any question now.
(772) 812-2661

cat

Hi Cat:
Are you answering questions on behalf of Tommy?
May I call you since I have a couple of questions?

cheers
chrisC

Quote from: chrisC on April 25, 2009, 05:39:16 PM
Hi Cat:
Are you answering questions on behalf of Tommy?
May I call you since I have a couple of questions?

cheers
chrisC

No I'm not answering questions on behalf of Tommey, if you've seen the video you may have seen the link he posted asking for questions now. I hope now someone will ask  him onto the forum.
I am not in the US and my Skype connection is too slow on the weekend

cat

Quote from: powercat on April 25, 2009, 05:52:48 PM
No I'm not answering questions on behalf of Tommey, if you've seen the video you may have seen the link he posted asking for questions now. I hope now someone will ask  him onto the forum.
I am not in the US and my Skype connection is too slow on the weekend

cat

Thanks Cat for clarifying. This stuff is very exciting. I've watched enough YouTube videos to see that Tommy's stuff is the best so far. What remains is to have those input and output measurements verified scientifically or simply build a feedback loop to charge the batteries for continuous operations. Tommy should win the OU prize!

cheers
chrisC

Note that Tommey do not complaint nor disprouve no one!!!!!!!
This guy is a REAL EXPERIMENTER thats it!!!
Sometimes reading over the treads on OVERUNITY you see so much guys
discouraging or complaining about EVERYTHING.....
Maybe Tommey nead better reading just to prouve WITH NO DOUTH to everyone..
If you pay attention carefully to his systhem you can see MORE than it shows..
And over all this guy is doing stuff for himself.....
If i had 1 dollard to invest,you bet that i gonna invest on him!!!!!!!!

@all
new one's
Pulse Generator, new reading from battery amps 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hITZgvg5_Mo&feature=channel_page
&
Pulse Generator, replacing parts again 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEizzBD8LX4&feature=channel_page

cat
Tommey has to do repairs hopefully hes back later

Quote from: hartiberlin on April 25, 2009, 05:38:02 PM
No, this would be called CounterEMF.

BackEMF is normally used as the term when you switch off the current in a coil and it kicks
back with a high voltage pulse to get rid of the stored magnetic energy.

Regards, Stefan.

Hi Stefan,

Well, you can find many times the term back emf and counter emf is often mixed up and mainly used for referring to the voltage pulse you described above. I prefer mentioning flyback pulse which is created when current is switched off in a coil.

I think the best to differentiate between these terms is to consider the circumstances just in question, namely
current changes in a coil and there is no any other magnetic field from an outside source to interfere - here consider Lenz law,  and this same situation when there is another magnetic field influencing the coil - here consider Faraday law of induction and Lenz law.

rgds,  Gyula

Tommey is back
Pulse Generator, update on mosfets and more ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sQv1At3vhI&feature=channel_page
&
Pulse Generator, update of power board
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuxdAY3xUY8&feature=channel_page

cat

Quote from: powercat on April 26, 2009, 04:27:23 AM
Tommey is back
Pulse Generator, update on mosfets and more ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sQv1At3vhI&feature=channel_page
&
Pulse Generator, update of power board
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuxdAY3xUY8&feature=channel_page

cat

Thanks Cat. What is really nice is that he said he'll build the feedback to charge the batteries once he gets his boards & mosfets fixed! That's really exciting. Looking forward to this very much.

cheers
chrisC

Quote from: hartiberlin on April 25, 2009, 05:38:02 PM
No, this would be called CounterEMF.

BackEMF is normally used as the term when you switch off the current in a coil and it kicks
back with a high voltage pulse to get rid of the stored magnetic energy....

...or as a mechanism to interact with the "sea of energy" and draw those electrically
charged particles into the circuit. (viz Lee & Yang, quantum foam and so on).
i.e. a primary source of the free energy.

New vid  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIGLHfBzyEE&feature=channel_page

Thank's nyctuber

2 new

Pulse Generator, New setup test on the power of BEMF 001      [nyctuber posted]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIGLHfBzyEE&feature=channel_page
&
Pulse Generator, update 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ST4KJdsGAqs&feature=channel_page

cat

Quote from: Paul-R on April 26, 2009, 10:03:35 AM
...or as a mechanism to interact with the "sea of energy" and draw those electrically
charged particles into the circuit. (viz Lee & Yang, quantum foam and so on).
i.e. a primary source of the free energy.

Over Unity is NEW Physic, therefore new terminology has to be invented in order to describe something that never exist in old Physics.
I believe there are many ways of "Energy Mining", using electric Pulse is one possibility, and it's just a matter of time before we discover how to extract free energy from space.

Dark Energy and Dark matter consist of over 95% of the universe, it's everywhere!  I am sure Dr.Yang will agree, 'cause he is certainly full of it, married a 28-year-old girl at age of 82, that's about 5 years ago.  Now he looks even younger!

Love is Energy!

Quote from: bearicey on April 26, 2009, 11:55:43 AM
Over Unity is NEW Physic, therefore new terminology has to be invented in order to describe something that never exist in old Physics.
I believe there are many ways of "Energy Mining", using electric Pulse is one possibility, and it's just a matter of time before we discover how to extract free energy from space.

Dark Energy and Dark matter consist of over 95% of the universe, it's everywhere!  I am sure Dr.Yang will agree, 'cause he is certainly full of it, married a 28-year-old girl at age of 82, that's about 5 years ago.  Now he looks even younger!

Love is Energy!

82 + $  = 28 + (Love?)
The rest is baloney.

cheers
chrisC

Tommy Reed is just another wannabee like Mylow who is attempting to defraud people again .

The problem with Tommy's back emf system is he is using a DC amp meter to measure DC that is being chopped at around 10KHz which is not DC anymore, so the meter will not give a correct reading. I'm sure his meters can give an accurate reading but only with DC on resistive loads. He cannot even use his meter to accurately measure the current his DC motor as the field coils are being switched on and off.

It is very simple to fix this problem. If he would just use 2 identical light bulbs as resistive loads like I explained to him in a personal message I sent him.

It is very simple, connect one bulb in series on one lead of his feed battery and the other bulb as load to his cap bank. Adjust the PWM so the cap bank bulb voltage reaches the same voltage as his feed battery. He would now have an indisputable visual reading. If more power is going into the circuit (under unity) the bulb on the battery side will be brighter then the bulb on the cap bank or the other way around if he has over unity.

It take 2 minutes to do this test.

He has not replied to my request to go see his device.

Luc

Hi Luc
It's beginning to look like Tommey is being selective with the questions that he is answering on YouTube,
he did however post his telephone number on YouTube so people could ask them questions directly.
Hmmm  one man one telephone hundreds of questions ???

cat

Quote from: powercat on April 26, 2009, 01:41:22 PM
Hi Luc
It's beginning to look like Tommey is being selective with the questions that he is answering on YouTube,
he did however post his telephone number on YouTube so people could ask them questions directly.
Hmmm  one man one telephone hundreds of questions ???

cat

I don't understand why he wants to put himself through all that (people calling) when the above super simple test will solve his meter reading problems and show real results ::)

I must say that he puts on a good show ;D

Luc

Yes he puts on a good show
here he goes again

Pulse Generator, update 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCha7AXp9Ww&feature=channel_page
&
Pulse Generator, update 4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-s2uAWG600k&feature=channel_page

cat

I agree with gotoluc I did post on yuotube from diff user abouty measuring pusled DC with constant DC measuring device. I dont have clamp dc meter but if you connect battery to big cap then to dc motor and measure current flow before cap and after. Wonder if they would match on a meter  beacause of the different ripple form when obviously consuming almost the same amount of power. Also loads should be more of less constant resistance like stefan mentioned like toaster or heater but not unloaded motor wich takes 1/10 of its rated power on unloaded spin. So I would say he should employ different measuring techniques or close-loop it wich is "according" to his input/output numbers must be possible.

Quote from: dankie on April 26, 2009, 01:04:06 PM
Tommy Reed is just another wannabee like Mylow who is attempting to defraud people again .

@dankie

A little knowledge isn't helpful to most people. Try something else.

cheers
chrisC

I've already backed up the videos in anticipation of an MIB visit. lol

He posted another one btw

Hi nyctuber
Thank you forr backing up the videos I have only backed up some of the videos, my Internet speed and hard drive space is limited.

he has 44 videos and counting
MIB will only be interested if Tommey can prove by accurate measurements any overunity

NEW
Pulse Generator, Test run of output
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdCGSxkVhxA&feature=channel_page

cat

Quote from: gotoluc on April 26, 2009, 01:14:42 PM
he is using a DC amp meter to measure DC that is being chopped at around 10KHz which is not DC anymore, so the meter will not give a correct reading. I'm sure his meters can give an accurate reading but only with DC on resistive loads. He cannot even use his meter to accurately measure the current his DC motor as the field coils are being switched on and off.

@gotoluc

I must agree except on one thing. I know you've made great strides in these endeavours but please know that DC is any current that stays on one side of zero. It doesn't matter what changes are going on as long as it stays on one side of zero. If it repeatedly crosses zero then it is AC. Either may have components of the other. 'Zero' is another whole argument which is pointless here.

So don't confuse pulsating DC with AC. This misunderstanding has bitten more than one of us in the butt  ;) - just like the use of garden variety DMM's to measure amps or voltage at frequencies above a few hundred Hz.

I am not sure why Tommey does not hook up couple of bulbs, there's gotta be Home Depot in his area. :)

I think the issue here is regarding impedances, as light bulbs would provide high impedance. The items he used to test so far have all had low impedances...

Quote from: powercat on April 25, 2009, 07:59:48 PM
@all
new one's
Pulse Generator, new reading from battery amps 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hITZgvg5_Mo&feature=channel_page
&
Pulse Generator, replacing parts again 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEizzBD8LX4&feature=channel_page

cat
Tommey has to do repairs hopefully hes back later

While viewing the above video, it appears that the first power readings are most likely valid.  Battery input voltage is 94 volts.  Current draw is 18.43 amps.  P=IxE would give about 1732 watts input power.  The output was measured before any changes were made at 40 volts @ 33 amps.  This is 1320 watts output.  Or 76.21% efficient, according to the video data.

45

Pulse Generator test run 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXXaX5GFBLA&feature=channel_page

cat

@powercat,

In the newest posted run (above) :

Input 69,4 Volt 23 Ampere = 1596,2 Watt
Out   38,1 Volt 31 Ampere = 1181,1 Watt
73,99 % efficient.

Regards,
Groundloop.

46

Pulse Generator, test run 3   ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuuat_3zY6Q&feature=channel_page

cat

Quote from: Groundloop on April 26, 2009, 04:40:53 PM
@powercat,

In the newest posted run (above) :

Input 69,4 Volt 23 Ampere = 1596,2 Watt
Out   38,1 Volt 31 Ampere = 1181,1 Watt
73,99 % efficient.

Regards,
Groundloop.

Hi Groundloop

Yes this looks impressive
Are you still of the opinion that  his method of measuring are inaccurate

cat

@powercat,

In the newest posted run (test run 3 above) :

Input 61,4 Volt 17 Ampere = 1043,8 Watt
Out   29,7 Volt 24 Ampere =  712,8 Watt
68,28 % efficient.

I do not think that his clipon meter is 100% correct. But if we use his numbers then we get a system that
has more loss than a ready made (store bought) inverter.

Regards,
Groundloop.

47

Pulse Generator, test 4 with 96v batteries
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLOMUXEIiQg&feature=channel_page

cat

@powercat,

In the newest posted run (test run 4 above) :

Input 93,3 Volt 10,5 Ampere = 979,65 Watt
Out   30,6 Volt 24 Ampere = 734,40 Watt
74,96 % efficient.

A little better efficiency when using higher input voltages.

Regards,
Groundloop.

Quote from: Groundloop on April 26, 2009, 05:08:24 PM
@powercat,

In the newest posted run (test run 3 above) :

Input 61,4 Volt 17 Ampere = 1043,8 Watt
Out   29,7 Volt 24 Ampere =  712,8 Watt
68,28 % efficient.

I do not think that his clipon meter is 100% correct. But if we use his numbers then we get a system that
has more loss than a ready made (store bought) inverter.

Regards,
Groundloop.

@Groundloop.

sorry I thought you stated 168% efficiency
be looking at  too many figures on videos
Tommey has stated that he also wants to take the back EMF from the motor at a later date.
If only he was here to discuss this properly

cat

@powercat,

Reusing the motors wasted energy will help.
He also should look into the "rotorverter" capacitor tuning system for motors.

All in all, I think he is doing good research, and that is the important part.

Regards,
Groundloop.

Quote from: BEP on April 26, 2009, 03:38:23 PM
@gotoluc

....

So don't confuse pulsating DC with AC. This misunderstanding has bitten more than one of us in the butt  ;) - just like the use of garden variety DMM's to measure amps or voltage at frequencies above a few hundred Hz.

@BEP
Good point. Pulsating DC is still DC. Besides comparing visual brightness is not a good way to decide which side has more, less or equal currents!

cheers
chrisC

Hi Groundloop.
you are wrong,
You forgot to calculate the duty cycle into it.

In the last test at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLOMUXEIiQg

he had a test at around Minute 3:00

where he measured:

ouput:
51 Volts
29.5 amps

and at the input:
92.4 Volts and 21 Amps.
Now he had the duty cycle about 50 % on/off
so the voltage must be divided by 2.

So he still had about COP= 1.5, so 50 % more out than in.

Regards, Stefan.

P.S. I agree that he has to measure the amps with a different measurement method
also involving low pass filters.
His digital camp ampmeter probably does not show the real values.
He needs to get shunts and also show scope shots.

Also his filming is much too fast. He should probably better use Google video,
where he can make longer videos and use a tripod and document the settings a bit longer
and show the screen readings also a bit longer and with more detail.
But at least he is building up a great system to research it !

New vid, it's getting interesting. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LPGrg__26w&feature=channel_page

48  [was already posted by nyctuber]

Pulse generator, test run 4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LPGrg__26w&feature=channel_page

cat

Quote from: hartiberlin on April 26, 2009, 07:18:55 PM
Hi Groundloop.
you are wrong,
You forgot to calculate the duty cycle into it.

In the last test at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLOMUXEIiQg

he had a test at around Minute 3:00

where he measured:

ouput:
51 Volts
29.5 amps

and at the input:
92.4 Volts and 21 Amps.
Now he had the duty cycle about 50 % on/off
so the voltage must be divided by 2.

Don't forget dividing drive motor input amps, also  ;)

Quote from: hartiberlin on April 26, 2009, 07:18:55 PM
Hi Groundloop.
you are wrong,
You forgot to calculate the duty cycle into it.

In the last test at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLOMUXEIiQg

he had a test at around Minute 3:00

where he measured:

ouput:
51 Volts
29.5 amps

and at the input:
92.4 Volts and 21 Amps.
Now he had the duty cycle about 50 % on/off
so the voltage must be divided by 2.

So he still had about COP= 1.5, so 50 % more out than in.

Regards, Stefan.

P.S. I agree that he has to measure the amps with a different measurement method
also involving low pass filters.
His digital camp ampmeter probably does not show the real values.
He needs to get shunts and also show scope shots.

Also his filming is much too fast. He should probably better use Google video,
where he can make longer videos and use a tripod and document the settings a bit longer
and show the screen readings also a bit longer and with more detail.
But at least he is building up a great system to research it !

As I understand the amp meter reading in direct current, I believe it should already take into account the duty cycle and gives you an average current draw regardless of duty cycle.  The voltage remains the same in the calculation.  I believe it would give an average current draw with enough capacitance at the battery to compensate for any duty cycle issues and therefore you should not divide by two in the voltage calculation to be accurate.  Power calculation is a product of both voltage and current.  P=IxE.

As the duty cycle increases the current draw will also show an increase and will be reflected on the meter reading in overall current draw.  It appears not OU. 

I agree with Harti that not jumping around and making a lot of changes while taking a reading is necessary to get any real idea of what is actually going on.  The quick changes without complete voltage and current readings with each setup tend to 'muddy the waters'.

He posted his location and it seems he lives 2 hours away from me. If he is gonna stick with his story for much longer I could take my scope and other meters I have and pay a visit at tommy's studios :) If this is gonna look promising for much longer...

Quote from: minde4000 on April 26, 2009, 08:18:46 PM
He posted his location and it seems he lives 2 hours away from me. If he is gonna stick with his story for much longer I could take my scope and other meters I have and pay a visit at tommy's studios :) If this is gonna look promising for much longer...

Yes, and bring some 750-1,000W light bulbs, as Tommey refuses to run a high impedance load on his setup ... :)

I hope it does not turn up another MYLOW...

Shit, after that fiasco we could have a saying: "He pulled a MYLOW on us." The guy would end up being famous, just for a different reason, lol.

Quote from: amigo on April 26, 2009, 08:21:35 PM
Yes, and bring some 750-1,000W light bulbs, as Tommey refuses to run a high impedance load on his setup ... :)

I hope it does not turn up another MYLOW...

Shit, after that fiasco we could have a saying: "He pulled a MYLOW on us." The guy would end up being famous, just for a different reason, lol.

The MIB's will give themselves a hernia seizing all his stuff, let alone bringing it back!

hey kewl. i have almost the same thing.... little less bloated

Yes, a little less jumping around would be good. I wasn't sure where what reading was being taken most of the time.

So he is taking readings from the battery side of the PWM? And no shunt for amps?

Ok. I'm not excited now   :(

I read a few first pages and came to the end of this thread. Saw some of his videos.

I have been doing this type motor/motor stuff for years now and I don't really buy any of the grabbing of the BEMF from a standard DC motor/generator. It is impossible since the rotor commutator does not have an extra brush. Also, he said there is no permanent magnets so this motor has to have an excitation field and there is no mention of this consumption in the video. Also with such short pulses turning a generator that is dishing out all that wattage, Something is fishy.

What really bugs me is why is that wooden box there at the right side of the right motor. It would be conveniently placed if the right motor had a front and rear shaft extension, one shaft going into that box where he could easily have another motor in there turning the generator hence two motors turning the generator. There is a knocking sound that denotes coupling misalignment or it could come from inside that box.

All those 12vdc car batteries hold a hell of alot of voltage and amperage and you would be surpised how long it takes for it to do down. lol

Now if he would be so kind as to push that wooden box more to the right so we can see the end of the generator, this would help me come to a more agreeable stance.

Actually, I have most everything in hand to try this except for the time. lol

I am not saying this is not real or jumping to conclusions that is the style of many on this forum. I am asking some respectful questions and making some observations. If these observations can be answered, fine, if not, well.

Wattsup, he did show assembly of the caps in the wood box. Guess that doesn't mean a whole lot but still the video is there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhbwIPqJe3w&feature=channel_page

Quote from: wattsup on April 26, 2009, 10:01:38 PM
I read a few first pages and came to the end of this thread. Saw some of his videos.

I have been doing this type motor/motor stuff for years now and I don't really buy any of the grabbing of the BEMF from a standard DC motor/generator. It is impossible since .....

Well, did you see that video when the mosfets blew because of the amperage? That stuff is real and those big caps will KILL instantly! Maybe with all the stuff you have, I think you should just replicate the back emf logic with those 4007 diodes, single primary coil, and those large filtering caps and the PWM. Even without driving a large motor you can see if just'capturing' the back emf from the coil is real or not? He's not even talking about capturing back emf from the enclosed motor. Perhaps if this is real, it can even help you understand the TPU?

cheers
chrisC

@nyctuber

Thanks for that. With so many videos and lack of time, I appreciate your quick response. I will look into it further.

Quote from: wattsup on April 26, 2009, 11:04:28 PM
@nyctuber

Thanks for that. With so many videos and lack of time, I appreciate your quick response. I will look into it further.

n/p

New video up, guess he's burning the midnight overunity oil  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cvq35tKcAOs&feature=channel_page

Quote from: nyctuber on April 26, 2009, 11:26:47 PM
n/p

New video up, guess he's burning the midnight overunity oil  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cvq35tKcAOs&feature=channel_page

PWM  40% ~ 50%  @10khz
=======================================
Input   ~  85V   x     3.7 A    x  Duty cycle (40~50%)
Output ~  51V   x      4.9 A
=======================================

Tommey only multiply the Voltage with the percentage of PWM duty cycle on the input side.

Domestic AC runs at 50~60hz, a PWM runs hundreds of times faster at 3~5khz @DC, will this still work for most meters ?

Stefan,

Quote: "You forgot to calculate the duty cycle into it."

If you want to calculate the duty cycle on the input then you must also calculate the duty cycle on the output.
So both numbers (input and output) must be divided by 50%. The calculated efficiency number will stay the same.

In one of his videos he describe his method of operation. A coil has four diodes connected and a mosfet switch.
The mosfet switch is controlled by a PWM oscillator. He uses a large capacitor(s) at the input and also a large
capacitor bank at the output.  At the output he connects various loads. He claims that the power collected
from the collapsing field in the coil (channeled to the output via diodes) is greater than the applied power input
to the circuit. To prove his claim he is using digital volt meters and a digital clip on Ampere meter. I have stated
in one of my posts that I doubt the Ampere meter reading to be 100% correct. It all depends on what type of
clip on Ampere meter he is using. If it is measuring AC then the thing he is measuring is the DC ripple on the
wire and not the real DC current flow. I do not know the frequency of his oscillator but if it is higher than 100Hz
then most clip on Ampere meters will not show the correct current.

That said, I still think that Mr. Tommey Reed is doing a very good research.

Regards,
Groundloop.

@all

This is more then plausible , It look like Tesla works tho.

Energy from the vacum , pulse a coil , you will see!

Copper doesn't really like electricity, pushing current will create a push back effect when disconnecting the current , the push back is of greater force then the push. I don't care how you call it.

Test it for yours self ! I did !

With a coil and a 9 v battery , it will light a 120v neon easy, i used a coil from a hair clipper , he used a transformer coil.
With a 9v battery i got peaks of over 1800 v . I tested with the same coil with a cap and a 1.5 volt aa cell , and got over 40v in the cap in one pulse.

People , help your self , please try , the grow !

I pulsed it manually .



 

49
Pulse Generator, 1500 watt load     [was already posted by nyctuber]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cvq35tKcAOs&feature=channel_page

Quote from Tommey on this vid

I found that when you have a battery pack at a total voltage, only allow the pwm to reach half of the total voltage in the battery pack.
This will show OVERUNITY, lower amps in and higher amps out, also with 30%-35% on time.
50% on time of the pwm will show higher voltage then the total half of the battery pack, but will take more amps input with less amps output.

Quote from Tommey on vid 48

Pulse Generator , inventor Tommey Reed
(772) 812-2661
Jensen Beach, Fl.


cat

Quote from: Mk1 on April 27, 2009, 04:48:44 AM
@all

This is more then plausible , It look like Tesla works tho.

Energy from the vacum , pulse a coil , you will see!

Copper doesn't really like electricity, pushing current will create a push back effect when disconnecting the current , the push back is of greater force then the push. I don't care how you call it.

Test it for yours self ! I did !

With a coil and a 9 v battery , it will light a 120v neon easy, i used a coil from a hair clipper , he used a transformer coil.
With a 9v battery i got peaks of over 1800 v . I tested with the same coil with a cap and a 1.5 volt aa cell , and got over 40v in the cap in one pulse.

People , help your self , please try , the grow !

I pulsed it manually .
 

Hi, Mk1

How did you "pulsed it manually " ?

What's the frequency you get ?

Maybe you should show us more details, so we can all try it out!

Thanks!

Quote from: bearicey on April 27, 2009, 08:50:34 AM
Hi, Mk1

How did you "pulsed it manually " ?

What's the frequency you get ?

Maybe you should show us more details, so we can all try it out!

Thanks!

All he did was was, hook a meter/scope up to a coil, then touched
it with the 9V battery and pulled it off and observed the BIG voltage spike.

Brad

Quote from: Groundloop on April 27, 2009, 01:36:15 AM

If you want to calculate the duty cycle on the input then you must also calculate the duty cycle on the output.
So both numbers (input and output) must be divided by 50%. The calculated efficiency number will stay the same.

Tommey's reply on Youtube.

Question:
On the output side there is only DC and no pluse at all ?


EnergyTechnologyNow
Answer:

The pulse is there, but the caps are allowing it to stay at a constant voltage.
This is why the voltage goes over 96v, if you look at the video's you will see higher voltage then the battery bank.
Thanks for the question....

Quote from: bhaas on April 27, 2009, 08:58:55 AM

All he did was was, hook a meter/scope up to a coil, then touched
it with the 9V battery and pulled it off and observed the BIG voltage spike.

Brad

Do you think the meter reading will be accurate with just one pulse?

Quote from: bearicey on April 27, 2009, 09:07:19 AM
Do you think the meter reading will be accurate with just one pulse?

Probably not 100%. You could also dump the voltage into
a capacitor and take a reading off of that to.

As far as it being a 100% is kinda "subjective"
Is anything dealing with electricity 100% ???

Brad

Quote from: bhaas on April 27, 2009, 09:12:56 AM

Is anything dealing with electricity 100% ???

Brad

Hi, Brad

Looks like Tommey is 100% sure that he is getting OU, but everyone else isn't.

YES, dealing with electricity, 99.999% is still in the realm of old Physics , not OU -a.k.a The New Physics.

The question I would have is when he does the voltage and amperage readings, does this also include the power to run the PWM or any other circuits involved. There are so many wires, it kind of gets confusing to follow.

His Pulse Generator circuit shows a wire going through the transformer coil. How is that done??????? Is it a trifilar winding or what. Hmmmm.

I was just playing with a coil out of a shaded pole motor I have
at work. Took the metal out of it, got a 9V battery and I'm getting
1800V spikes on my meter as I'm dumping it into 2 150V caps
in paralell (that's what I have here at work) then I'm dumping the
caps into a 120V flouresent bulb. I get a quick nice bright flash out
of it.

I'm pulsing it by hand. If I had a soldering iron I'd get a transistor
to do it for me.

Quote from: wattsup on April 27, 2009, 10:21:14 AM
The question I would have is when he does the voltage and amperage readings, does this also include the power to run the PWM or any other circuits involved. There are so many wires, it kind of gets confusing to follow.

His Pulse Generator circuit shows a wire going through the transformer coil. How is that done??????? Is it a trifilar winding or what. Hmmmm.

Seperate battery for the PWM

@all

I not sure , inventing something that old.I would claim Tesla patented it first.

But Tommey nice work any how. Great minds think alike! I will give you that.

Quote from: bearicey on April 27, 2009, 09:07:19 AM
Do you think the meter reading will be accurate with just one pulse?

Well it first it look like bad reading, until you put a load on it.

Quote from: bhaas on April 27, 2009, 10:46:34 AM
I was just playing with a coil out of a shaded pole motor I have
at work. Took the metal out of it, got a 9V battery and I'm getting
1800V spikes on my meter as I'm dumping it into 2 150V caps
in paralell (that's what I have here at work) then I'm dumping the
caps into a 120V flouresent bulb. I get a quick nice bright flash out
of it.

I'm pulsing it by hand. If I had a soldering iron I'd get a transistor
to do it for me.

Well, you're confirming what Tommey said. The back emf is REAL and when captured and filtered by a big cap and driven with a 30% duty cycle at 10Khz does produce OU.
Now you need either a PWM/driver or a transistor driver to drive the periodic voltage to the coil and check it out yourself and don't forget to post your results. Thanks

cheers
ChrisC

50

Pulse Generator, The basics of how it works 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBQCTxcb4ww&feature=channel_page

cat

Quote from: Groundloop on April 27, 2009, 01:36:15 AM
Stefan,

Quote: "You forgot to calculate the duty cycle into it."

If you want to calculate the duty cycle on the input then you must also calculate the duty cycle on the output.
So both numbers (input and output) must be divided by 50%. The calculated efficiency number will stay the same.

That is not true, Groundloop,
it seems you have missed the principle behind it.

Please study it further.

The cap bank in the wood box gets the rectified BEMF pulses and converts them to DC.
This is the sole output and it is put into the motor.

Regards, Stefan.

Stefan,

He has a big capacitor bank in parallel with the batteries. He also have a big capacitor bank
at the output of his coil switch.

Quote: "it seems you have missed the principle behind it."

No I have not.

Attached is a drawing of TR's circuit. The power input is from his battery bank. The single
input capacitor in the drawing represent the input capacitor bank. The single mosfet represent his four paralleled mosfet transistors. The single output capacitor in the drawing represent the output capacitor bank. This drawing was displayed in one of his YouTube videos. Are you saying that this drawing is not correct?

Groundloop.

51

Pulse Generator, basic understanding of EMF
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaij2Xe6Sm0&feature=channel_page

cat

52

Pulse Generator, the basic load test
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y09nRSQnpfg&feature=channel_page

cat

@Groundloop

If that is his Pulse Generator circuit, it does not seem to be correct because the transformer had two coils and a wire going through it.

**************

I am really confused because some are talking about his motor/generator tests while others are talking about his Pulse Generator. Kind of hard to follow. lol

Regarding the motor/generator, if the drive motor is commutator/brush type and DC then he cannot capture BEMF as I had explained before, otherwise it is very simple to see this on a scope shot. Same goes for the generator. lol

Now if they were AC motors with slip rings, then OK. I have blown a 1200 watt DC to AC inverter once when the AC plugged motor was inadvertently unplugged while the motor was running. BANG. What a noise.

I have also blown once a 100 amp shut off switch by running a 250vdc 20amp DC motor. We applied voltage but forgot to also apply the excitation voltage. The motor stuck and as we switched it off, BANG, the switch blew up and almost tore off a friends hand.

BEMF is serious shit, but you won't get it without a third brush on the commutator and no motor makers produce this stock off the shelf.

Blowing mosfets. No big deal. I have made a sport of it. Just drive them too hard and whammo, they will fry.

I think @TR has something but I am confused as to what to make of it at this stage.

Quote from: wattsup on April 27, 2009, 07:21:03 PM
@Groundloop

If that is his Pulse Generator circuit, it does not seem to be correct because the transformer had two coils and a wire going through it.

**************

I am really confused because some are talking about his motor/generator tests while others are talking about his Pulse Generator. Kind of hard to follow. lol

Regarding the motor/generator, if the drive motor is commutator/brush type and DC then he cannot capture BEMF as I had explained before, otherwise it is very simple to see this on a scope shot. Same goes for the generator. lol

Now if they were AC motors with slip rings, then OK. I have blown a 1200 watt DC to AC inverter once when the AC plugged motor was inadvertently unplugged while the motor was running. BANG. What a noise.

I have also blown once a 100 amp shut off switch by running a 250vdc 20amp DC motor. We applied voltage but forgot to also apply the excitation voltage. The motor stuck and as we switched it off, BANG, the switch blew up and almost tore off a friends hand.

BEMF is serious shit, but you won't get it without a third brush on the commutator and no motor makers produce this stock off the shelf.

Blowing mosfets. No big deal. I have made a sport of it. Just drive them too hard and whammo, they will fry.

I think @TR has something but I am confused as to what to make of it at this stage.

@Wattsup
You're confusing yourself. Forget about the motor. Just concentrate on the 4 diodes, single coil (he's just using the transformer with ONE primary coil. the secondary i OPEN and NOT used) and he's catching the back emf when the PWM pulses the coil. His last 3 videos show exactly what is happening.

cheers
chrisC

@wattsup,

My drawing is a direct copy from his videos.

@chrisC,

You are correct.

Regards,
Groundloop.

Quote from: Groundloop on April 27, 2009, 07:47:34 PM
@wattsup,

My drawing is a direct copy from his videos.

@chrisC,

You are correct.

Regards,
Groundloop.

Thanks Groundloop. And I think Tommey is correct. Here's my understanding from the latest 2 videos.

The battery & PWM draws 116ma and I assume a duty cycle of 50% at 12V. This is an average power of 0.116x12x0.5=0.7W.
The unloaded capacitor voltage spiked at 115V but settled at 24V useful voltage and runs the motor at 68ma (assuming it's all DC) giving a power at 1.63W . That's proof of O.U!

Correct me if I am wrong.

cheers
chrisC

53

Pulse generator, 30% load on bach EMF coil.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzS7MN_u-54&feature=channel_page

Quote from Tommey
At 30% of pwm pulse at 10khz the output of back EMF is greater then pwm set to a 50% pulse.
At higher amps at 30%, the increase of back emf of current.


cat

@chrisC,

Based on the measurement in his videos, yes, you are correct.

I have modified my test circuit with a hexfet (IRF840) instead of a regular transistor (2N3055).
It seems that I can not loop the output directly back to the input because the internal resistance
of the lead acid battery is so low that it is a short circuit for the captured back emf.

So if we want to do a full looped back test circuit then we will need a impedance match at the output
and to the input.

Regards,
Groundloop.

@all

My question is:

Is he using an in circuit PWM ? Or He is using an outside PWM ?
If the PWM is from the outside then there is not OU.

Jesus

Quote from: Groundloop on April 27, 2009, 08:35:19 PM
@chrisC,

Based on the measurement in his videos, yes, you are correct.

I have modified my test circuit with a hexfet (IRF840) instead of a regular transistor (2N3055).
It seems that I can not loop the output directly back to the input because the internal resistance
of the lead acid battery is so low that it is a short circuit for the captured back emf.

So if we want to do a full looped back test circuit then we will need a impedance match at the output
and to the input.

Regards,
Groundloop.

@Groundloop

Thanks. As Tommy pointed out, at 30% duty cycle, the OU efficiency is even better!
Hence, giving back the % that will allow the loop to recharge the batteries will indeed make it perpetual and still do more than useful work!

I assume we can capacitively couple back some of the back emf charge. It can be done since Tommey now has proved his point.

cheers
chrisC

Quote from: nievesoliveras on April 27, 2009, 08:40:16 PM
@all

My question is:

Is he using an in circuit PWM ? Or He is using an outside PWM ?
If the PWM is from the outside then there is not OU.

Jesus

The PWM is run from the same 12V in the system. That's where the 168 ma is measured. What is the point otherwise?

cheers
chrisC

Quote from: chrisC on April 27, 2009, 08:44:39 PM
The PWM is run from the same 12V in the system. That's where the 168 ma is measured. What is the point otherwise?

cheers
chrisC

Thank you @chrisc

Does you or anyone has the circuit for the whole thing with the PWM included?

Jesus

Quote from: nievesoliveras on April 27, 2009, 08:48:38 PM
Thank you @chrisc

Does you or anyone has the circuit for the whole thing with the PWM included?

Jesus

Conceptually, it's very simple. 4 fast diodes of the 4007 type, a single primary of a coil transformer, fast drivers for the 3055 power transistor and large caps rated 200V to collect the back emf. The PWM is probably any single chip PWM capable of 10K.

why no one discovered this back emf captured to a capacitor and filtered for useful work beats me?

cheers
chrisC

Quote from: chrisC on April 27, 2009, 08:54:23 PM
Conceptually, it's very simple. 4 fast diodes of the 4007 type, a single primary of a coil transformer, fast drivers for the 3055 power transistor and large caps rated 200V to collect the back emf. The PWM is probably any single chip PWM capable of 10K.

why no one discovered this back emf captured to a capacitor and filtered for useful work beats me?

cheers
chrisC

The thing is that we are looking for the circuit that has a PWM and is working in order to replicate it. The one kindly posted by @groundloop here: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7241.msg174681#msg174681 does not have the PWM circuit or chip number included.

Jesus

Quote from: nievesoliveras on April 27, 2009, 09:00:13 PM
The thing is that we are looking for the circuit that has a PWM and is working in order to replicate it. The one kindly posted by @groundloop here: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7241.msg174681#msg174681 does not have the PWM circuit or chip number included.

Jesus

With efficiency of at least 400% at 30% duty cycle will absorb any kind of PWM chip you're likely to find. You can even use a 555 timer and some external components and that will still be OK.

cheers
chrisC

Quote from: chrisC on April 27, 2009, 09:03:32 PM
With efficiency of at least 400% at 30% duty cycle will absorb any kind of PWM chip you're likely to find. You can even use a 555 timer and some external components and that will still be OK.

cheers
chrisC

Thank you @chrisc !

I am begining to think that it seems that nobody has replicated it yet and have gotten the mentioned OU.

With OU I mean that the circuit gets its battery charged from itself. I would be happy with the battery just not discharging.

Jesus

Quote from: nievesoliveras on April 27, 2009, 09:00:13 PM
The thing is that we are looking for the circuit that has a PWM and is working in order to replicate it. The one kindly posted by @groundloop here: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7241.msg174681#msg174681 does not have the PWM circuit or chip number included.

Jesus

@nievesoliveras  ;)
Tommey's Pulse Generator basic pwm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wocuKldVGw&feature=channel_page

cat

Quote from: powercat on April 27, 2009, 09:12:06 PM
@nievesoliveras  ;)
Pulse Generator basic pwm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wocuKldVGw&feature=channel_page

cat

Thank you @powercat !

I will wait a little bit for confirmation from other members that the circuit works and I will send for the needed parts from my next part time job money.

Jesus

The optimal pulse width is 38.2% (Fibo) for this setup. 

This is why Tommy is seeing 30% better then 50% but he don't know the math behind it.

The system gain is (1.618 * Q of the coil)- System losses.

This is standard book values no magic etheric space dust here. All was shown by JML labs experiments, ARK Research and Bordland labs for longitudinal gain more then 10 years ago and elsewhere its all well published.

So back EMF or forward gain is a stochastic energy gain 1.618 over isotropic minus losses its OU,  if he can make losses small enough. Load must match perfect resonance to o/p. If you are charging batteries then battery acts as large capacitor. Will change system from OU to non OU states as it charges and discharges and creates resonance changes that must be addressed.

OU is real not dreams you need to know how to find it and use it. Above equations work for Newman, Bedini, coil bangers, and many other coil spiking systems and motors they all work the same on basic book values RF.  and 99.99% of people have no idea what it is even when they build it.

If you want more single stage OU power gain then Q is the easiest thing that can be addressed. Bigger coils, lower losses etc and more advanced use negative entropy looping and multi phase feedback aka TPU etc. So for three phase system its (1.73 * 1.618 * Q) Notice how much gain we have now. This is why RotoVerter system is so efficient. A 7.5 Horse Power 100lb motor will turn at 2800 rpm on just 10 to 15 watts.

Looping is an entire new problem due to impeadance matching networks are usually lossy and kill the last bit of OU.  That is why easier to show i/p power to separate o/p. Not as simple as putting a wire from out to in.

Quote from: bolt on April 27, 2009, 11:18:37 PM
....

Looping is an entire new problem due to impeadance matching networks are usually lossy and kill the last bit of OU.  That is why easier to show i/p power to separate o/p. Not as simple as putting a wire from out to in.

Hi Bolt:
Thanks for the timely information. Any idea or reference on how best to close the loop seeing the apparent efficiency is high enough to allow further losses in order to successfully close the loop?

cheers
chrisC

To loop means as a Bearden expression "don't kill the dipole". In practice it usually means hi Q resonance output stage almost always hi impeadance needs transforming to low impeadance variable hi current battery load where battery at RF concept has many problems. Its a capacitor but its also reactive to high frequency plus has low DC internal resistance! Variables change as battery charges becomes a varactor. At best requires precision transformer ratios to match OU o/p to battery then looping requires low impedance to system impeadance matching. This sometimes requires converting DC back to AC through inverters.

Its a tough cookie but don't get strung up about looping. OU end to end is of far more benefit where solar, wind or low energy grid can be transformed to a  hi energy low loss system.

Remember Tesla principles everything works in resonance and OU is only transformation of energy from one state to another.

What if the output goes to a toroidal transformer primary that has two secondaries, send one back and use the other.

@Groundloop

In this case, the best impedance matcher would be a DC/DC converter.

Earl

Groundloop said:
I have modified my test circuit with a hexfet (IRF840) instead of a regular transistor (2N3055).
It seems that I can not loop the output directly back to the input because the internal resistance of the lead acid battery is so low that it is a short circuit for the captured back emf.

So if we want to do a full looped back test circuit then we will need a impedance match at the output and to the input.

Quote from: Groundloop on April 27, 2009, 06:46:45 PM
Stefan,

He has a big capacitor bank in parallel with the batteries. He also have a big capacitor bank
at the output of his coil switch.

Quote: "it seems you have missed the principle behind it."

No I have not.

Attached is a drawing of TR's circuit. The power input is from his battery bank. The single
input capacitor in the drawing represent the input capacitor bank. The single mosfet represent his four paralleled mosfet transistors. The single output capacitor in the drawing represent the output capacitor bank. This drawing was displayed in one of his YouTube videos. Are you saying that this drawing is not correct?

Groundloop.

Groundloop,
I am sorry,
yes, you are right.
I mixed up something.

Yes, the current and not the voltage is the value, that is chopped,
and being averaged in his design.
But that is already measured by his ampmeter.
So yes, you were right. I am really sorry, that I mixed this up.

Tommey really needs to do current measurements on a shunt
or via lowpassfilter at the battery source, otherwise his meters
will not really show what is going on.

Regards, Stefan.

@all

Please. When you make a quote it is better understood if you surround the sentence like this:

Jesus

@all
communication with Tommey

1 he only answer some questions on YouTube
2 he has stated that he is not interested in joining this  Forum
3 did anyone try ringing him on the number posted on YouTube and here ?

We can only hope that he has come up with a new way of feeding back to source,
as this problem has been highlighted here and in the past many times

cat

@Bolt,

What will give me the highest Q factor for as coil. Is it a thick wire big air core coil or
a more compact Ferrite core coil?

@Earl,

If we skip the output capacitor bank then there is a possibility to use pulsed DC to a Ferrite impedance
matched transformer. (The output capacitor bank will then be after a diode bridge on the transformer.)
Still thinking about this.................

Stefan,

I agree. He could also put a low resistance precision shunt in series with the battery positive and just measure
the voltage over that shunt. A good old moving Iron ampere meter will also give a fairly accurate reading.

@Powercat,

If this circuit is o/u (and it seems that it is) then we can connect several identical circuits is series because
the input of the circuit is relative high impedance. At the last circuit we dump into capacitor bank and drive
a combination electric motor / generator. Another method is to tap just enough power at the output capacitor bank
so that we do not load the circuit too much. This can be done by transistor switching at the output.

I do not think it is a big problem that TR is not talking to us. He has posted all information needed in his videos and
it is easy to make good drawings based on the information in the videos. My personal goal is to try to make a looped
one battery only switch. No measurements is necessary in such a solution. If the battery charge up then bring out
the champagne.

Regards,
Groundloop.

Quote from: Groundloop on April 28, 2009, 09:19:01 AM

@Powercat,

If this circuit is o/u (and it seems that it is) then we can connect several identical circuits is series because
the input of the circuit is relative high impedance. At the last circuit we dump into capacitor bank and drive
a combination electric motor / generator. Another method is to tap just enough power at the output capacitor bank
so that we do not load the circuit too much. This can be done by transistor switching at the output.

I do not think it is a big problem that TR is not talking to us. He has posted all information needed in his videos and
it is easy to make good drawings based on the information in the videos. My personal goal is to try to make a looped
one battery only switch. No measurements is necessary in such a solution. If the battery charge up then bring out
the champagne.

Regards,
Groundloop.

@Groundloop

This seems to be a simple solution
On the electric motor / generator this is bad efficiency compared to solid-state but if it works why not.
As I have seen  problems with lead acid batteries in the past with these kind of circuits, is it possible to  use an  other capacitor bank instead.
My knowledge of electronics is limited and I have stated my position at the bottom of page 3 in this thread.
I have seen your great work on this forum before

hopefully champagne
cat

Quote from: Groundloop on April 28, 2009, 09:19:01 AM

....
What will give me the highest Q factor for as coil. Is it a thick wire big air core coil or
a more compact Ferrite core coil?
....

@Groundloop,

The best would be using a pot core to get high Q values for the some kHz range.  Pot cores of 20-30mm diameter and A_L values of some thousand.  And thick wire to get the lowest copper loss possible, considering the winding volume of the pot core.  I do not think an air core coil can beat a pot core in Q values at this (audio) frequency range.   EPCOS (ex Siemens) or Philips or Neosid may be available in your country.

rgds,  Gyula

His latest video at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzS7MN_u-54

shows exactly that this system with the small motors are NOT overunity.

Otherwise you would have at the motor side
always a higher current at the same 12.5 Volts supply and output Voltages.
But it is not.

Or you would have a higher Voltage at the same amperage. But you also don´t have that.

So it is clear now, that this system at least with these small motors is unfortunately not overunity.

Regards, Stefan.

Quote from: hartiberlin on April 28, 2009, 07:27:23 AM
Groundloop,

Tommey really needs to do current measurements on a shunt
or via lowpassfilter at the battery source, otherwise his meters
will not really show what is going on.

Regards, Stefan.

@all,Something gone bad when you talk about mesurements!!!!
I go back and look at the mesurements that Mr.Peter Lindemen did on his rotary attraction motor and for me,it seams that Tommey
take his mesurements the same way...
Even if it`s chopped ,the AMPS will remain good with a good amp meter.
The more you chopped the amps,the lower gonna be the reading right?????
If a guy like Peter Lindemen take his reading like this it must be ok..

Quote from: powercat on April 28, 2009, 08:01:28 AM
@all
communication with Tommey

1 he only answer some questions on YouTube
2 he has stated that he is not interested in joining this  Forum
3 did anyone try ringing him on the number posted on YouTube and here ?

We can only hope that he has come up with a new way of feeding back to source,
as this problem has been highlighted here and in the past many times

cat

Hi Cat:

Tommey and I had telephone conversations the past day. He is indeed one of a kind. Not schooled the usual college way but surely a rare gem in his ability to comprehend, invent and deliver solutions. He has worked on many different projects, some of them way over my head!

He's not really interested in OU forum because it takes too much time and too many people don't know what they are talking about. He also indicated he does not want people to 'visit' him because he's got much to do and of course, he doesn't know the people who wants to 'check' him out.

I'm trying to convince him to 'close' the loop and he is considering doing that. he also has other mind blowing projects he wants to show at some stage but I am not at liberty to talk about it. Other than that he truly is a very sociable, unassuming nice guy and very bright too!

cheers
chrisC

Quote from: hartiberlin on April 28, 2009, 11:25:55 AM
His latest video at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzS7MN_u-54

shows exactly that this system with the small motors are NOT overunity.

Otherwise you would have at the motor side
always a higher current at the same 12.5 Volts supply and output Voltages.
But it is not.

Or you would have a higher Voltage at the same amperage. But you also don´t have that.

So it is clear now, that this system at least with these small motors is unfortunately not overunity.

Regards, Stefan.

Hi Stefan:

Not sure if you're interpreting the video correctly? Or maybe I did not quite understand. In the previous video before this one that you've referenced, my previous post is as follows:

The battery & PWM draws 116ma and I assume a duty cycle of 50% at 12V. This is an average power of 0.116x12x0.5=0.7W.
The unloaded capacitor voltage spiked at 115V but settled at 24V useful voltage and runs the motor at 68ma (assuming it's all DC) giving a power at 1.63W . That's proof of O.U!

Now, this is at 50% duty cycle, at 30%, the results are even better! The average current measured at the battery & PWM side is quite accurately measured. The load side is stabilized by large capacitor(s) and delivers what that motor needed at 12.5V. Even if the real current measured is off by 20%, it still delivers much more power?

cheers
chrisC

Hi chrisC
Great news, well done and thanks forr sharing
letts hope Tommey and others can close the loop

cat

Quote from: hartiberlin on April 28, 2009, 11:25:55 AM
His latest video at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzS7MN_u-54

shows exactly that this system with the small motors are NOT overunity.

Otherwise you would have at the motor side
always a higher current at the same 12.5 Volts supply and output Voltages.
But it is not.

Or you would have a higher Voltage at the same amperage. But you also don´t have that.

So it is clear now, that this system at least with these small motors is unfortunately not overunity.

Regards, Stefan.

Hi Stefan
Tommey has so many videos and measurements it's as clear as mud to me
but in his second too last I felt the grooup was convinced of OU

vid 52 Pulse Generator, the basic load test
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y09nRSQnpfg&feature=channel_page

cat

NOPE his system already has a pre-smoothing cap bank from the battery. This averages out the demand from the system so all those pulses are now averaged out as DC well close enough for good measurements.

SOyou example 0.116x12x0.5=0.7W. is actually 0.116 * 12.8 volts his battery is not 12v dead. = 1.4848 watts i/p

"Now, this is at 50% duty cycle, at 30%, the results are even better! The average current measured at the battery & PWM side is quite accurately measured. The load side is stabilized by large capacitor(s) and delivers what that motor needed at 12.5V. Even if the real current measured is off by 20%, it still delivers much more power?"

WRONG i/p power is still smoothed showing demand via caps therefore whatever his  clamp meter shows is the correct reading on battery cable. There is no further requirement to take into account PW. If the efficiency changes as a result of PW change that's something different.

"The unloaded capacitor voltage spiked at 115V but settled at 24V useful voltage and runs the motor at 68ma (assuming it's all DC) giving a power at 1.63W . That's proof of O.U!"

Well with a demand of 1.63 watts and 1.4848 watts i/p its OU with 146 milliwatts spare. Certainly wont win any prizes with this and too close to call parity with measurement errors.  ALL back EMF system is OU by design 1.618 * Q but his system losses and bad matching losing OU.   Never get it looped either need a system with at least  COP>3 to loop.

Basically all he has made is a buck boost converter depending on load and supply demands. If i see  10 watts in and 30 watts out then he is on to something interesting.

I explained earlier post optimal PW is 38.2% fibo. This is why Tommy see 30% better then 50% but he dont know the math or reason.

Quote from: bolt on April 28, 2009, 01:11:38 PM
NOPE his system already has a pre-smoothing cap bank from the battery. This averages out the demand from the system so all those pulses are now averaged out as DC well close enough for good measurements.

SOyou example 0.116x12x0.5=0.7W. is actually 0.116 * 12.8 volts his battery is not 12v dead. = 1.4848 watts i/p

"Now, this is at 50% duty cycle, at 30%, the results are even better! The average current measured at the battery & PWM side is quite accurately measured. The load side is stabilized by large capacitor(s) and delivers what that motor needed at 12.5V. Even if the real current measured is off by 20%, it still delivers much more power?"

WRONG i/p power is still smoothed showing demand via caps therefore whatever his  clamp meter shows is the correct reading. There is no further requirement to take into account PW. If the efficiency changes as a result that's something different.

@Bolt

Thank you for the clarification. I guess if those measuring instruments already computed and averaged out the currents then the results are not O.U. I am still learning about measuring instruments and techniques.

cheers
chrisC

@all
In Tommey's latest video he has gone small-scale
is this making a difference to the OU measurements :P

cat

Thats a northstar 10kw 3600 rpm 2 pole generator head. I wonder if he is using 110 outlets or 220 outlets. If he could reach loaded 110 operating ac and could use 40 amp battery charger to loop it back. Maybe I am missing something.

Makes it harder now as in the realms of kitchen table builder where OU becomes smaller and smaller value. This is where bedini builders slip into non OU or barely OU and measurement errors are easy to debunk. Now with just 50 milliwatts spare OU builders see special battery conditioning and other excuses.

The pulsing of the Bedini coil is exactly the same so if you make a huge one very well built with 10 coils then OU becomes clearer as system losses get smaller versus OU gains.

So is this going to settle down to duty cycle factor mistakenly used twice in efficiency math?

Quote from: minde4000 on April 28, 2009, 02:33:17 PM
So is this going to settle down to duty cycle factor mistakenly used twice in efficiency math?

Yes, I also mixed that up until Groundloop brought it up,so my former efficiency calculations were wrong.

The input current is already the AVERAGED CURRENT due to the duty cycle averaged into it !

So you really have to take the normal input voltage and multiply it with this averaged input
current of the meter to get the input power.

You can not calculate again the duty cycle into the input voltage, that would give wrong results !

I made this error myself at the beginning, so these OU statements were wrong.

I wonder, how his digital clampmeter measures the duty cycled input current pulses.

Can it really show an averaged input current via the right internal integration
or will it get jammed by the pulses ?

So for sure a
1. graphical measurement ofthe input current with shunts and scope shots
or
2. a lowpassfilter DC like input current measurement directly
at the battery before the lowpassfilter

would give much more accurate input current readings.

I really don´t trust his digital clampmeter being able to show the real
averaged input current , which is needed to calculate the correct
input power.

Regards, Stefan.

Quote from: hartiberlin on April 28, 2009, 03:23:12 PM
Yes, I also mixed that up until Groundloop brought it up,so my former efficiency calculations were wrong.

The input current is already the AVERAGED CURRENT due to the duty cycle averaged into it !

So you really have to take the normal input voltage and multiply it with this averaged input
current of the meter to get the input power.

You can not calculate again the duty cycle into the input voltage, that would give wrong results !

I made this error myself at the beginning, so these OU statements were wrong.

I wonder, how his digital clampmeter measures the duty cycled input current pulses.

Can it really show an averaged input current via the right internal integration
or will it get jammed by the pulses ?

So for sure a
1. graphical measurement ofthe input current with shunts and scope shots
or
2. a lowpassfilter DC like input current measurement directly
at the battery before the lowpassfilter

would give much more accurate input current readings.

I really don´t trust his digital clampmeter being able to show the real
averaged input current , which is needed to calculate the correct
input power.

Regards, Stefan.

I think Tommy should just measure the input current with an old fashioned analog needle meter and that will show the current quite accurately. The output (motor) current is  capacitive DC current and those meters are probably OK. I sent Bolt's remarks to Tom. He has yet to respond.

cheers
chrisC

Here in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y09nRSQnpfg

he has a COP of about 1.3

Output:
24Volts x 0.068 Amps= 1.632 Watts

Input:
12 Volts x 0.105 Amps= 1.26Watts

COP= 1.3

Here we have about 30 % overunity.

P.S. To calculate the duty cycle into the battery voltage is wrong, cause the measured input current has already the duty cycle averaged in.

Quote from: bolt on April 27, 2009, 11:18:37 PM
The optimal pulse width is 38.2% (Fibo) for this setup. 

This is why Tommy is seeing 30% better then 50% but he don't know the math behind it.

The system gain is (1.618 * Q of the coil)- System losses.

Hi Bolt,
can you please explain this some more ?

What do you mean by

"The system gain is (1.618 * Q of the coil)"  ?

Many thanks.

54

Pulse Generator, PWM output and how much power 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPnAH6Q4HcI&feature=channel_page
Quote from Tommey
Ohm's law says:
The coil is about 1 ohm resistance
If the coil is 1 0hm's and you pull .100ma then:
E=I*R 1* .100= 100 mv or I=E/R = 100ma
The power is P=E*I


cat
Rushing can lead to a delay,  but can a delay lead to OU

New vid

Hilarious video  ;D He deserves respect for his time and efforts. Pretty simple setup now. Another thing when you pulse something big like this low resistance coil he has in a video wouldnt such non-resistive/reactive load being pulsed with high frequency (12dc only) voltage drop voltage potential due to losses every pulse to much lower levels like 1dc or below like he is getting? Mosfet pulses source voltage wich is 12dc not 1dc into the coil so its 12dc x XX amps not otherwise. Is his math wrong or mine?  ;D

Quote from: minde4000 on April 28, 2009, 06:28:28 PM
Hilarious video  ;D He deserves respect for his time and efforts. Pretty simple setup now. Another thing when you pulse something big like this low resistance coil he has in a video wouldnt such non-resistive/reactive load being pulsed with high frequency (12dc only) voltage drop voltage potential due to losses every pulse to much lower levels like 1dc or below like he is getting? Mosfet pulses source voltage wich is 12dc not 1dc into the coil so its 12dc x XX amps not otherwise. Is his math wrong or mine?  ;D

Seems like he has a point when he equaled the currents in both input and output, the small motor does not run. So, some part of the equation has got to give(?).

Bolt, what is your take on this?

cheers
chrisC

Quote on UT from Tommey on latest vid
I found with a amp load that the coil draws about 19.3 amps with 12.5 v.
That says R=IR
R=.65 ohm's for the coil resistance...
.228 ma - .135ma filter and pwm load =
93 ma.
The total voltage going in to the coil is:
E=IR or .093*.65= 61mv.
This is why the motor did not run from the mosfet drain.

cat

55
Pulse Generator, Finding the ohm's in a coil 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EuAvC_-eKA&feature=channel_page

cat

Quote from: hartiberlin on April 28, 2009, 04:05:27 PM
Hi Bolt,
can you please explain this some more ?

What do you mean by

"The system gain is (1.618 * Q of the coil)"  ?

Many thanks.

I did explain this a few post back i post it here again.

The optimal pulse width is 38.2% (Fibo) for this setup. This is where the optimal energy component is in time domain for i/p power versus time. If you go smaller PW then time destroys gains. Too big to 50%+ then power is wasted.

This is why Tommy is seeing 30% better then 50% but he don't know the math behind it.

The system gain is (1.618 * Q of the coil)- System losses.

This is standard book values no magic etheric space dust here. All was shown by JML labs experiments, ARK Research and Bordland labs for longitudinal gain more then 10 years ago and elsewhere its all well published.

So back EMF or forward gain is a stochastic energy gain 1.618 over isotropic minus system losses its OU,  if he can make losses small enough. Load must match perfect resonance to o/p. If you are charging batteries then battery acts as large capacitor. Will change system from OU to non OU states as it charges and discharges and creates resonance changes that must be addressed.

OU is real not dreams you need to know how to find it and use it. Above equations work for Newman, Bedini, coil bangers, and many other coil spiking systems and motors they all work the same on basic book values RF.  and 99.99% of people have no idea what it is even when they build it.

If you want more single stage OU power gain then Q is the easiest thing that can be addressed. Bigger coils, lower losses etc and more advanced use negative entropy looping and multi phase feedback aka TPU etc. So for three phase system its (1.73 * 1.618 * Q) Notice how much gain we have now. This is why RotoVerter system is so efficient. A 7.5 Horse Power 100lb motor will turn at 2800 rpm on just 10 to 15 watts.

Looping is an entire new problem due to impeadance matching networks are usually lossy and kill the last bit of OU.  That is why easier to show i/p power to separate o/p. Not as simple as putting a wire from out to in.

There are other ways which have an inherent much higher intrinsic gain then stochastic gain. Capacitors also have exact same gain same values 1.618. This is how the multi cap switching battery charge discharge system works. I think bedini and Ron Cole did this stuff.

One of these is Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Amplifiers where electron spin energy is MUCH  greater. Also look at magnetic modulation. This is what magnacoaster is doing with his coils.  You can pump iron too into into nuclear resonance. It requires a Tesla mag field though to start  iron and precursor frequencies the iron changes isotopic states!! This creates huge amount of power. Very close links here to TPU. Remember OU is transformation of energy. You change something magnetic to electrical, change isotopic states, crack water by sound or pulsing, change electron spin angles, and thousand other ways there is OU. Look for non reciprocation systems. This is where energy transform is one way only. If you create condition using X power non reciprocal the energy transform event is usually magnitudes higher.

As SM said hi power magnets have nice qualities and requires many bench hours and open mind to unlock huge amounts of power. If Richard Willis found it then ANYONE can find it. Seems no one in that much of a rush though when so many systems are about and very few will try.

Rotoverter is over 10 years old. How about buy yourself 7.5 HP 3 phase motor and it will run on 15 watts. This is OU POWER MACHINE off the shelf for 150 bucks or free from the trash center and its not a kitchen table toy made from a 9 volt battery and a bicycle wheel. Details were fully published on this site about 6 months ago on how to loop it but the guy got a few MIB's in  black SUV's come pay him a visit.

Time is running out. Tick toc tic toc... First wave of lab flu is out 12th hour is here.

I think Tommy getting himself tied up in Knots over these figures. Lets put it really simple.

I have an old TV set with a tube etc. Inside there are all kinds of pulses and drives going on but i want to know how much power my TV is using.  What do i do?

A.     Go through all the circuits and calculate my coils and tube heaters,  PW spacing, EHT transformer and electron flow etc around my circuits.

B.    Get a meter and measure what been drawn at my power socket to the TV.

What do you want to talk about?

Hello Tommey
Good to see you here

We want to talk about OU and if you have achieved it or not
there are others here who have a better understanding  than me of pulse coil setups
you'll be hearing from them shortly

cat

Ok, I'll wait......

Regarding his latest videos:
Hi Tommey,
the current in your coil is defined as:
Icoil= 19.3 amps x ( 1-e^t/ -L / 0.65Ohm)
where
Icoil= current in coil at current time
t= time in seconds
L= inductance in Henry

So the end current after a few seconds will be 19.3 amps,
but if you pulse it only ON for a few mikroseconds, you really have to calculate with the above formula.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RL_circuit


scroll down,where it says:
Impulse Response

Quote from: bolt on April 28, 2009, 07:13:00 PM


The system gain is (1.618 * Q of the coil)- System losses.

This is standard book values no magic etheric space dust here.

Can you please show the formula behind it ?
Please show a wikipedia quote or simular.


Why has it gain at all ?

Do you mean ENERGY GAIN
or
just Voltage gain ?

Tommey
I must say I'm very impressed of the rate you work at and  that you believe in free energy for all

cat

Hi everyone,

here is a video I made of a replication of Tommey Reed's circuit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4fYvSRxHd0

No Over Unity for me.

I challenge Tommey to do the capacitor test as I have done.


Luc

Quote from: hartiberlin on April 28, 2009, 09:11:54 PM
Regarding his latest videos:
Hi Tommey,
the current in your coil is defined as:
Icoil= 19.3 amps x ( 1-e^t/ -L / 0.65Ohm)
where
Icoil= current in coil at current time
t= time in seconds
L= inductance in Henry

So the end current after a few seconds will be 19.3 amps,
but if you pulse it only ON for a few mikroseconds, you really have to calculate with the above formula.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RL_circuit


scroll down,where it says:
Impulse Response

It is better shown over here:

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spule_(Elektrotechnik)

Scroll down on the page where it says:

"Zu- und Abschaltvorgänge bei Gleichspannung"

The red curve at the graph is the current inside the coil
and the green curve is the input pulse voltage.

The blue curve is the voltage at the internal resistanceof the coil.

Regards, Stefan.

Quote from: powercat on April 28, 2009, 09:18:45 PM
Tommey
I must say I'm very impressed of the rate you work at and  that you believe in free energy for all

cat

He won't be working at that rate for long if he starts hanging around this forum...Internet in general sucks way too much time away.

Tommey, if that's really you, stay away from this and all other forums - follow your own direction and keep looking forward.

Is your coil, is it .61 ohm 16gage wire?
This is a basic coil out of a microwave oven at 120v ac.

I guess it is Tommey... :)

Well anyway, I hope you are not dipping your transformer in water. Instead, find some mineral oil and use it, as it is non-conductive.

Many people dip their whole computer motherboards into mineral oil for extreme overclocking and it works pretty well, plus oil will self heal too.

"Transverter systems may be the Volskwagen of OU systems for the money-"handicapped" research guy!"


http://peswiki.com/index.php/OS:Transverter

Quote from: gotoluc on April 28, 2009, 09:21:28 PM
Hi everyone,

here is a video I made of a replication of Tommey Reed's circuit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4fYvSRxHd0

No Over Unity for me.

I challenge Tommey to do the capacitor test as I have done.


Luc

Hi Luc
great video and great timing, hopefully Tommey will take up your challenge
looks like he was questioning the type of coil your using

Quote from Tommey
Is your coil, is it .61 ohm 16gage wire?
This is a basic coil out of a microwave oven at 120v ac

cat

I think Mr.Reed is exactly right, a replication is just that---- a replication of the experiment. To use completely different components,voltages or values of components is "NOT" a replication in any sense of the word. As well Mr.Reed utilizes an air core coil, which I noticed is the primary from a microwave transformer, the qualities of this coil are far removed from the iron core others have used. This is the biggest problem I see here in the forum, people throw some random components together and call it a replication, which it is most certainly not, then state their replication has failed. I would submit "they" have failed due to a lack of understanding, like the old saying goes---- "don't blame the messenger". In any case Mr.Reed's circuit is based on technology Nicola Tesla perfected over 100 years ago, this is nothing new in any way, it has just been ignored by the masses for a very long time.
Regards
AC

Hi everyone,

For those who did not read Stefan's questions he posted on my YouTube video they are in bold below with my replies.

Hi Luc,
did you try to get the driver frequency tuned to the resonance frequency of the coil ?
Is it really this low at 1.23 Khz ?

Is this the resonance frequency ?
Maybe you can tune to a better harmonic frequency of the resonance frequency ?
Maybe you can retry your tests without the iron core and tune to the frequency of your driver to the resonance frequency of the coil ?
Maybe the iron core is too lossy.

My reply:
Hi Stefan,
thanks for looking and posting your positive comment.

I did do many sweeps of up to 200Khz (555 frequency limit) on all kinds of coils, air core coils and with cores. Out of the 10 or so coils tested this is the one that gave most voltage output at this low frequency with minimum amp input.

I would need AC to achieve Resonance. Never been able to do it with just chopped DC. I was also trying to keep it to what Tommey Reed has been doing.

Stefan:
Hmm,
you should be able to get resonance also with chopped DC.
The coil does not care about a DC level being superimposed, at least if you use a coil WITHOUT an iron core..

What best frequency do you get, if you unplug the iron core from this coil you have shown ?

My reply:
I've never been able to do it, so pleas show me a video of someone that shows resonance using chopped DC. When my coils go into resonance using just 10 volt AC the coils output is well over 150 volts rms

I pulled out the core from the coil and it now performs best around 12Khz.

Quote from: powercat on April 29, 2009, 09:33:02 AM
Hi Luc
great video and great timing, hopefully Tommey will take up your challenge
looks like he was questioning the type of coil your using

Quote from Tommey
Is your coil, is it .61 ohm 16gage wire?
This is a basic coil out of a microwave oven at 120v ac

cat

Hi cat,

I did see that post but did not realize it was a question for me.

The coil I used in the video is not from a Microwave Oven Transformer. As I replied to Stefan on YouTube I did many tests using many coils including an AIR CORE MOT primary and also a steel core MOT primary. Out of all the more then 10 coils I tested I chose the one in the video as it performed the best results.

I hope that can answer some questions.

Luc

@gotoluc

As usual a good video and well explained, but we must convened that @allcanadian is right on two counts. First, replications should adhere to strict reproduction but what are the chances of making exactly the same coil, but don't worry, it never hurts to try other things as we all do it. Second, this is Tesla all the way, but I think even @allcanadian would agree that @TR is using some pretty cool variations.

I have been able to get good resonance with DC pulsing but rarely in the 200k range. Usually always in the 1-2mhz range.

But I have one question. Given stuff I have tried out on The Tesla Project thread, it would seem that the current reversal effect that @TR has shown would still happen without those four diodes and maybe not consume .6 volts each.

I will try @TR's circuit this weekend.

Quote from: allcanadian on April 29, 2009, 11:33:40 AM
I think Mr.Reed is exactly right, a replication is just that---- a replication of the experiment. To use completely different components,voltages or values of components is "NOT" a replication in any sense of the word. As well Mr.Reed utilizes an air core coil, which I noticed is the primary from a microwave transformer, the qualities of this coil are far removed from the iron core others have used. This is the biggest problem I see here in the forum, people throw some random components together and call it a replication, which it is most certainly not, then state their replication has failed. I would submit "they" have failed due to a lack of understanding, like the old saying goes---- "don't blame the messenger". In any case Mr.Reed's circuit is based on technology Nicola Tesla perfected over 100 years ago, this is nothing new in any way, it has just been ignored by the masses for a very long time.
Regards
AC

Hi allcanadian,

I did test Tommey Reed's circuit with an air core MOT primary!... you should know better than that by now :-\  I used one a year ago to test your Tesla circuits you share: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0etbntkxbs

I spent several hours testing many coil configurations, frequencies, voltages, pulse widths and so one and in the end chose the coil, frequency, voltage and pulse width that gave the best result to do the video.

I have been testing and studying back EMF collection for over a year now and have never found it to contain more energy then the energy put in. However, when a coil is in resonance there seem to be more energy than back EMF but I have not yet found the best way to extract the energy.

Luc

Quote from: wattsup on April 29, 2009, 11:16:03 PM
@gotoluc

As usual a good video and well explained, but we must convened that @allcanadian is right on two counts. First, replications should adhere to strict reproduction but what are the chances of making exactly the same coil, but don't worry, it never hurts to try other things as we all do it. Second, this is Tesla all the way, but I think even @allcanadian would agree that @TR is using some pretty cool variations.

I have been able to get good resonance with DC pulsing but rarely in the 200k range. Usually always in the 1-2mhz range.

But I have one question. Given stuff I have tried out on The Tesla Project thread, it would seem that the current reversal effect that @TR has shown would still happen without those four diodes and maybe not consume .6 volts each.

I will try @TR's circuit this weekend.

@wattsup
btw, TR mentioned to me on the phone the other day that his flat coil came off a old microwave and it's copper. The new one s found on modern (made in China) microwaves are aluminum and not so good. Maybe you should find the right ones if you want to be as close as possible. Just a thought.

cheers
chrisC

I'd suggest dropping '600% efficient' from the topic title. After the Mylow thing, it would probably be wise to wonder why Tommy did not show a closed loop OU (recharging the batteries with back EMF) system from day one. I think the answer is fairly obvious.

Quote from: nyctuber on April 29, 2009, 11:41:45 PM
I'd suggest dropping '600% efficient' from the topic title. After the Mylow thing, it would probably be wise to wonder why Tommy did not show a closed loop OU (recharging the batteries with back EMF) system from day one. I think the answer is fairly obvious.

See his last but one video. He's starting to close the loop!

cheers
chrisC

Hello Gotoluc
---"I did test Tommey Reed's circuit with an air core MOT primary!... you should know better than that by now"

I should know better by now,LOL, your work and research has been flawless from what I have seen. Personally, I have never had much success in replicating others work, I think it is easier to understand the fundamental principals involved and follow my own intuition on how to progress. I made a statement last year in another forum which has stuck with me, "The day I quit following others and started coming to my own conclusions based on the work of others, is the day I started to succeed". I am sure everyone here will find their own success in their own time.
Regards
AC

Hi all

56

Pulse Generator, How to use back emf in DC motors
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLbjHA7YHy4

57
DC Generator, Load test 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3LktMlCAjo&feature=channel_page

58
Basic pulse motor design
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=br5ltO8XsQU&feature=channel_page

59
Update on the pulse motor
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0e47cyIblg&feature=channel_page

60
Tom's project 213  [off topic]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cTs5XXAI4A&feature=channel_page


looks like Stefan's decorators have been in 8)
cat

Quote from: powercat on April 30, 2009, 04:34:40 AM
Hi all

56

Pulse Generator, How to use back emf in DC motors
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLbjHA7YHy4

57
DC Generator, Load test 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3LktMlCAjo&feature=channel_page

58
Basic pulse motor design
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=br5ltO8XsQU&feature=channel_page

59
Update on the pulse motor
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0e47cyIblg&feature=channel_page

60
Tom's project 213  [off topic]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cTs5XXAI4A&feature=channel_page


looks like Stefan's decorators have been in 8)
cat

Thanks Cat. Do look at MyLow's latest rotor disk. Awesome....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4uVuK2Ec6Y&feature=channel_page

chrisC

Hi chrisC
I thought this announcement was much more promising
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4047.msg174197#msg174197

Quote
Based on the results of our last video - I would like to present a public OVER-UNITY DEMONSTRATION at the lab at Ottawa University on May 3rd, 2009 (May Day) at 11 am.

New Multi Coil Stator Ring
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPMbWzNuMOg&feature=channel_page

sorry for being off topic
cat
Tommey you might like this setup

Quote from: powercat on April 30, 2009, 11:45:18 AM
Hi chrisC
I thought this announcement was much more promising
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4047.msg174197#msg174197

Quote
Based on the results of our last video - I would like to present a public OVER-UNITY DEMONSTRATION at the lab at Ottawa University on May 3rd, 2009 (May Day) at 11 am.

New Multi Coil Stator Ring
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPMbWzNuMOg&feature=channel_page

sorry for being off topic
cat
Tommey you might like this setup

Not saying it's legit, can't tell much from the video, but..

According to sterling's account of thngs, Mylow was told by the 'MIB's that there would be a 'major announcement out of a University' regarding Mylow's technology (or somethign similar) in the near future, supposedly as a way for the 'bad guys' to retain control of it.

Quote from: allcanadian on April 30, 2009, 12:53:56 AM
I made a statement last year in another forum which has stuck with me, "The day I quit following others and started coming to my own conclusions based on the work of others, is the day I started to succeed"

Yes AC, I do remember reading that statement and a very good one it is ;)

Luc

Quote from: gotoluc on April 30, 2009, 08:27:08 PM
Yes AC, I do remember reading that statement and a very good one it is ;)

Luc

i have been forming my own conclusions,
regarding everything,
for most of my life.

i cannot agree more,
that it is the road to success.


most of the population generates:
failure,
paranoia,
doubt,
fear,
denialism,
die-hard ignorance,
blatant intolerance of other peoples meaning,
and worse.


if you want to succeed,
than you must often AVOID doing what the mainstream does.

because if the mainstream methods worked,
the mainstream would not have so many screwed up problems.


forget the mainstream.
value your own thoughts !

No more vids, Tommey? Keep going!

Six new vids

http://www.youtube.com/user/EnergyTechnologyNow

61
Pulse Generator, how to use back EMF
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exLzZ-gGFcw&feature=channel_page

62
Pulse motor driver 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6zdiaJUlHg&feature=channel_page

63
Pulse motor driver 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3rcM3PEKx4&feature=channel_page

64
pulse motor driver 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOdnOni01Is&feature=channel_page

65
Pulse motor driver 4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hABqnjGThRs&feature=channel_page

66
Pulse motor driver 5
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGT5CPlTDbM&feature=channel_page

cat

Quote from: nyctuber on April 29, 2009, 11:41:45 PM
I'd suggest dropping '600% efficient' from the topic title. After the Mylow thing, it would probably be wise to wonder why Tommy did not show a closed loop OU (recharging the batteries with back EMF) system from day one. I think the answer is fairly obvious.

Hi nyctuber
I feel this is Tommey's thread and if he wants to change the title hopefully he'll let us know
Tommey does discuss closing the loop in his last video number 66

Thank you for notifying people of new videos  I am not always available to do this

cat

Quote from: powercat on May 01, 2009, 03:58:23 PM
Hi nyctuber
I feel this is Tommey's thread and if he wants to change the title hopefully he'll let us know
Tommey does discuss closing the loop in his last video number 66

Thank you for notifying people of new videos  I am not always available to do this

cat

I think Tommey is covering all the bases regarding back EMF. If he closes the loop it would be spectacular but it's still good stuff.

Quote from: powercat on May 01, 2009, 03:58:23 PM
...
I feel this is Tommey's thread and if he wants to change the title hopefully he'll let us know
Tommey does discuss closing the loop in his last video number 66
...

@powercat

The 600% efficiency came out for Tommey as a calculation mistake, I commented this here in Reply #6, first page of this thread, and I also wrote to him on his old video channel and he agreed he had made a miscalculation,  it was 387% in that partical measurement.   So this is where he took the 600% but did not correct it.  Maybe you can edit the title of your thread?

Of course the 387% would still be a wonderful result, and I am afraid the most convincing proof for any extra output over an input would be using a DC-DC converter to loop back the output to the input.  (Off the shelf  DC-DC converters are available with many input -output voltage/current ranges, with at least a decent 70-80% efficiency or higher.)

rgds,  Gyula

Hi Gyula
it seems I can only change the subject of each post now
not the title of the whole  thread this is a job for Stefan

I have noticed that Tommey has been recently logging onto the forum
But he has not posted for a while.
so there's a good chance that he's seeing all the suggestions being posted.

we are all keen to see Tommy achieved OU and loop back to source
his work rate is amazing

Thanks
cat

New vid up

And a website: http://energytechnologynow.org/ (maybe a repost, dunno)

67
Pulse motor driver 6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPCj2tazhtE&feature=channel_page

cat ;)

68
Pulse motor test run 7
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UicEDgZlzLY&feature=channel_page

cat

Hi Cat,
I am working on the second stage to loop the pulse generator.
This will prove OverUnity.
The BEMF cant be loop, because of the caps need to have 12v constant charge, when the cap drops below 12v the pwm have problems sending the right amount of voltage to the coil.
Almost have to be regulated to work overunity, As for input of 12v power having a constant output, It does show overunity.

Tom

Hi Tom
did you see the suggestion made by gyulasun
Quote
the most convincing proof for any extra output over an input would be using a DC-DC converter to loop back the output to the input.  (Off the shelf  DC-DC converters are available with many input -output voltage/current ranges, with at least a decent 70-80% efficiency or higher.)
End Quote
I'm sure other suggestions will come in time

looping is big problem, and one of the best I have seen is the two battery system[Bedini]
sorry but with my limited experience I can only suggest things I've seen here before

cat

Tom
Do you have any measurements that you could post on your current setup showing OU

Thanks if you can
cat

Hi Cat, I have not posted any more readings.

I am working on a complex circut board to the pulse generator. This will control the pulse motor to be on self running or overunity mode.
This has to be made to control the input and time the output to feed to the battery circut at a state of off time before battery is force in to on time.
Using two batteries is not what I want, Overunity should be complete loop not so called run one battery down and try to charge the other one.

Tom

Tom
  that is wonderful news
and I'm sure we are all wishing you the best

there are many here that would like to help you, if you want their help

and many here will like to replicate your work,
so maybe it's only the beginning of this thread.
I feel that it's your thread Tom and if you have any suggestions please say

all the best
cat

Quote from: Tommey Reed on May 01, 2009, 08:38:10 PM
Hi Cat, I have not posted any more readings.

I am working on a complex circut board to the pulse generator. This will control the pulse motor to be on self running or overunity mode.
This has to be made to control the input and time the output to feed to the battery circut at a state of off time before battery is force in to on time.
Using two batteries is not what I want, Overunity should be complete loop not so called run one battery down and try to charge the other one.

Tom

Hi Tommey,

I really admire your dedication and sharing.

I want to wish you success in closing the loop.

If researchers would work at the rate you are we would of solved free alternative energy solutions a long time ago.

May the force be with you.

Luc

Quote from: Tommey Reed on May 01, 2009, 08:38:10 PM
Hi Cat, I have not posted any more readings.

I am working on a complex circut board to the pulse generator. This will control the pulse motor to be on self running or overunity mode.

Tom

Do you have basic drawings of your motor? (i.e. not a
video).
Paul.

69
Pulse Generator, power board design 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WF1S9t3zifQ&feature=channel_page

cat

70 :)
Pulse Generator, speed controller board 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkULF2LM8Bo&feature=channel_page

cat

71
Pulse Generator Motor, Recover lost energy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmJ7oCP3RN4&feature=channel_page

cat
Tommey has removed this video ???

Hi Tom
have you looked at the circuits in capacitor Cordless Screwdrivers
http://www.gmcompany.com/download/pbf/FQC54V___PFC46V_Full_Product_Reviews.pdf

only a thought
cat

Quote from: Paul-R on May 02, 2009, 10:03:51 AM
Do you have basic drawings of your motor? (i.e. not a
video).
Paul.

Hi Paul

Not sure if this would help you but I posted schematics of the earlier model back at....

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=get266

Edit:  Shoots, sorry, I just tried the link and it didn't go to the document.  Must be since the web site change over....

Stephan....Hellllp....LOL

Regards,
Paul

Hi All;

Seems my above URL file is now at

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=view;down=267

Regards,
Paul

He took off all his videos and starts asking for money for the plans

http://energytechnologynow.org/page7

So, does that mean he got to close the loop, and the motor to run indefinately with the battery removed from the circuit?
Or does it mean he's gotten as close as he was going to get, and now selling of the plans is the last step?
Not exactly open source although he'll not charge by the KWh at least.

I hope a replicator soon manages to match Tommey's results, and manage to get a truly freely working motor, doing actual work.
I've read on a similar free energy project, with supposedly full production in Eastern Europe of big heavy duty stand-alone power generators, sold to various countries. No updates on that website in recent years (typical), and I lost the link. Maybe one of you know what I mean.

How do I remove membership to overunity?

@@Tommey Reed

what happened to    free energy for all  ??? ???

  what happened to   I'm not in it for the money ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???

what happened to    all the videos ??? ???

where is your proof of OU and a closed loop ??? ???

  :o I don't believe it :o
I should know better by now      we have all seen it before on this forum


cat >:( :(

Yeah I don't quite get it either ???

From the link "FREE PLANS - Build Your Own" at http://energytechnologynow.org/page2

"Well, they were  free, but some people started stealing (yep, man, can you believe that !!?)"

How is anyone stealing if they were posted in a public venue for everyone to see?  Was someone claiming them as their own or what?  I distinctly remember hearing the same statements in the videos as Powercat mentioned above.

Wow  :o

Regards,
Paul

@all

This should now be the new title of this thread

Tommey Reed's 600% MONEY GRAB 001

http://energytechnologynow.org/page7

do not buy this product it is unproven

cat

Quote from: Goat on May 02, 2009, 07:43:05 PM
Hi All;

Seems my above URL file is now at

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=view;down=267

Regards,
Paul

That's very useful, Paul; its worth a thousand videos.
Paul.

Bravo, this forum strikes again.

Just as I mentioned to Tommey to stay away from this forum in my post week or so ago, another inventor/discoverer has been successfully alienated by the members and the management here.

Whether Tommey is correct or not is not an issue anymore. It's about the growing infamy of OU forum as a hot spot of arm chair "debunkers" and "experts", in every field of life.

This forum has joined those household fine names such as bautforum.com, quackwatch.com, and others.

Well done everyone!

Stefan, I guess this infamy will bring more revenue to the OU, whatever that might be, as obviously you don't care who's corpse you need to walk over to get to it.

@all

Why dont you try this:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6362.msg175871#msg175871

Help me and I will help you. All the help must be free.

Jesus

He's still making videos, just doesn't want them linked here.

It usually comes down to this:

1) Like clockwork, someone new discovers that using inductive kickback, they can charge a capacitor or drive a load to a higher voltage than the applied input voltage.

2) They have unknowingly discovered the well-known world of switched-mode power supplies and DC-DC converters!

3) The knowledge of proper measurements is lacking along with the appropriate instruments for making these measurements.

4) The 'inventor' shuts down and leaves due to the advice given by those that have previously tried this themselves and confirmed the reality of the situation.

5) Simple concepts are overlooked or just not investigated, and this leads to false notions about what is happening in the circuit and with the measurements.

6) Unfortunately, folks become annoyed and defensive rather than sincerely contemplating the possibility that they are perhaps mistaken.

And so unfortunately the cycle continues...

.99

@all
if anyone has backed up tommey reeds videos can you share them whith everyone .
thanks

I am reloading them on youtube

Quote from: Tommey Reed on May 05, 2009, 12:28:58 PM
I am reloading them on youtube

thanks a lot man
will u b loading all of them.
when can we expect to see them on you tube.

Quote from: poynt99 on May 03, 2009, 06:13:36 PM
It usually comes down to this:

1) Like clockwork, someone new discovers that using inductive kickback, they can charge a capacitor or drive a load to a higher voltage than the applied input voltage.

2) They have unknowingly discovered the well-known world of switched-mode power supplies and DC-DC converters!

3) The knowledge of proper measurements is lacking along with the appropriate instruments for making these measurements.

4) The 'inventor' shuts down and leaves due to the advice given by those that have previously tried this themselves and confirmed the reality of the situation.

5) Simple concepts are overlooked or just not investigated, and this leads to false notions about what is happening in the circuit and with the measurements.

6) Unfortunately, folks become annoyed and defensive rather than sincerely contemplating the possibility that they are perhaps mistaken.

And so unfortunately the cycle continues...

.99

Well, yes, in the last video with some real load like the hotgun dryer,

Tommey is now using the BackEMF to run directly the heatgun.

It seems to have just
only  66 % efficiency
from the test, where he used 50 Volts on the cap bank at the end of the movie.
So no overunity.
Would be interesting to see, how the efficiency will be, if he will drive with the BackEMF the motor/generator combination and hook the heatgun to the generator output.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqtRjudNTSg

Well, some people just point out over here the errors some inventors make
and some of their measurement errors.
This is a free speech forum about these topics
and when inventors make measurement errors,
they have to be pointed out.

So this is also a way to help the inventor to make
his circuits better.

It has nothing to do with pushing the inventors away from this forum.

Inventors should have more self confidence and should defend themself better
when they think they are right and also should admit, that they have done
errors, when somebody else points them out and the inventor will see the error then
by himself.
We all make errors.
So there is no problem to accept this.
But it has to be pointed out and agreed on it, so we
know which measurements are right or wrong.
Otherwise we will never make any progress.

Just think about this.

Regards. Stefan.

Quote from: hartiberlin on May 06, 2009, 05:06:45 PM
Well, yes, in the last video with some real load like the hotgun dryer,

Tommey is now using the BackEMF to run directly the heatgun.

It seems to have just
only  66 % efficiency
from the test, where he used 50 Volts on the cap bank at the end of the movie.
So no overunity.
Would be interesting to see, how the efficiency will be, if he will drive with the BackEMF the motor/generator combination and hook the heatgun to the generator output.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqtRjudNTSg

Well, some people just point out over here the errors some inventors make
and some of their measurement errors.
This is a free speech forum about these topics
and when inventors make measurement errors,
they have to be pointed out.

So this is also a way to help the inventor to make
his circuits better.

It has nothing to do with pushing the inventors away from this forum.

Inventors should have more self confidence and should defend themself better
when they think they are right and also should admit, that they have done
errors, when somebody else points them out and the inventor will see the error then
by himself.
We all make errors.
So there is no problem to accept this.
But it has to be pointed out and agreed on it, so we
know which measurements are right or wrong.
Otherwise we will never make any progress.

Just think about this.

Regards. Stefan.

@Stefan:

I think what he was showing in that video you referenced is that at 50% duty cycle of the PWM, the efficiency drops to 66%.

But if the duty cycle was 33%, at 50V at the capacitor, (ie half of the battery voltage), he maintains it's still way OU. Or did I misunderstand?

One of Tommey's problems id he has too many videos. IMO, he just need to do a couple of videos, one just showing the back emf coil & circuit (which he has done) with measurements and then another video just driving the hairdryer with the back emf & capacitor bank & DC batteries, all connected with meters where he does not switch between them. Then we can all see which meter is showing what results!

cheers
chrisC

Hi ChrisC,
In the first 4 minutes of this video,
the efficiency is about 73 % only.

The test at around minute 5 is around 68 %.

At minute 8 he is  only at about 60 % efficiency when he cranked the BACKEMF to 121.5 Volts DC.


( all assumed that the supply battery voltage under load was 96 Volts, he did not show this unfortunately,
if it dropped the efficiency is a bit better)

Quote from: hartiberlin on May 06, 2009, 06:28:56 PM
Hi ChrisC,
In the first 4 minutes of this video,
the efficiency is about 73 % only.

The test at around minute 5 is around 68 %.

At minute 8 he is  only at about 60 % efficiency when he cranked the BACKEMF to 121.5 Volts DC.


( all assumed that the supply battery voltage under load was 96 Volts, he did not show this unfortunately,
if it dropped the efficiency is a bit better)

Stefan:

I watched it again and here's what I think he's saying.

At around 6.30 into the video he's giving us a current measurement of 4.48A consumed at the back emf output (hair dryer) and a input current measured at the battery or filtered caps. of 3.57 A - both the voltages are normalized to around 50V (input and output). So, this is O.U

He then added that to drive the back emf harder using > 33% or so duty cycle and hence cranking the voltage higher is possible but will result in lower efficiency because of the > 33% duty cycle of the PWM because the energy is not used by the back emf but gets dumped to ground.

Well, all I can say is to wait for Tom to engineer his loop and to see if the total OU gain is able to complete the loop minus total loss. Only time will tell.

cheers
chrisC

Quote from: chrisC on May 06, 2009, 06:59:22 PM
Stefan:

I watched it again and here's what I think he's saying.

At around 6.30 into the video he's giving us a current measurement of 4.48A consumed at the back emf output (hair dryer) and a input current measured at the battery or filtered caps. of 3.57 A - both the voltages are normalized to around 50V (input and output). So, this is O.U

Where did he say, he is using only 50 Volts of battery voltage ?
To my understanding he wanted to have half of the battery voltage at the output,
so I guess he still used his full 96 Volts from all the batteries in Series.

Too bad, it seems he has again deleted all his videos.
So we can no longer have a closer look at them.
Regards, Stefan.

New vid

Quote from: nyctuber on May 08, 2009, 02:50:19 PM
New vid

Thanks nyctuber. Now, this simple video is really helpful. Previously, he's uploaded too many and too disjointed.
I'm going to build one of these when I get this other burden off my back!

cheers
chrisC

Did someone delete the video or something ?

Regards...

Quote from: Cap-Z-ro on May 08, 2009, 03:41:16 PM
Did someone delete the video or something ?

Regards...

No, it's still there:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HW6rsye2xrc&feature=channel_page

chrisC

Thanks chris,

I still do not see the original link for some reason though ?

Regards...

I have remove all videos and account on youtube, because of energytechnologynow.org trying to make money on my technology.
They have try to charge money for my free information that I have put on You Tube.
This is not about making money on my technology as I have said in the past, and yet I keep seeing $$ on the web site I wanted.
Because I don't own the name of the site, I will have to come up with my own web site name.

I have open a new account as MrOverUnity on you tube and to start over with my technology.
Thank you all for your comments.

Tommey Reed

Hi Tommey,

Wow. I thought that was "Your" site?????

So is Allen your partner? Or is he just making this up
to sell your stuff?

Brad

At first I thought so, and then he wanted to sell my free projects.
He wanted 30% of sells that at first was ok, and then seeing the price go skyhigh.
I remove all of that stuff, making me look like its a scam for money.
I have stated from the begining free on youtube, and yet Allen or brent made me a liar.
I have been working on fixing the misinformation about my technology.

Tom.

Hi Tommey thank you and sorry

Thank you for clarifying the situation you are in

sorry for my previous posts they were based on information available to me at the time.
As too much time has elapsed since I posted them, I am unable to delete them
sorry

cat

Too much drama in FE. Now that, that's over with.

And you deserve to make some money off of your hard work
and I have no prob with that whatsoever. Experimenting gets expensive and I know this.

I was interested in purchasing a rotating assy you made that you taped the magnets on and put the coils under.

If you interested in selling one of those I'd love to buy one.

Thanks

I am sorry, I needed to deal with this scam ASP.
It is about free technology I am willing to give out.
Even if some don't believe in the Pulse Generator, they will know it cost them nothing.

Tom

Better yet, I will give you the design an how I built it, most parts are at home depot.

Very simple....
Tom

For some reason MrOverUnity on you tube did not work, but OverUnityNow1 did.

So that will be my new site.

Tom

 ;D Tom

Will you be posting links to your videos here

do you have a problem with anyone else posted links to your videos here

Thank's
cat

Do you have a link to it? I searched it
and it doesn't come up.

I know how to build the rotating assy. I was just hoping to skip that step and get right to the circuit experimenting part. I don't have a lathe so I'll be using a screwgun.

So a set of plans would be great as to the bearings you used and shaft and how you made it so it wouldn't slide back and forth :) Thanks

Brad

I found it. Searchin Youtube just don't work for shit.

Here's the link for everyone.

http://www.youtube.com/user/OverUnityNow1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5o7ARCGeLps

This is it.....

Yes Cat, anyone can use my videos.
Its free..............
Tom.

Well done Tommey
If everybody had there heart in the right place,like you, we are bound to get there!!!
peter

It's amazing how this scenario plays out time and time again, especially when several members here have been present for many of the past similar scenarios involving claimed overunity from "BEMF".

Was nothing learned from these past lessons? Be assured that this circuit is no different, and so will be the results if and when they are ever measured or tested properly.

@all: Do some research on this site and see for yourself the number of times this has been attempted and the final outcome of each. Learn from the past, teach those that folly, and move forward.

Regards,
.99

Hi .99
I agree with you,I was just commenting on Tommey's approach.
I don't think BEMF alone will get us anywhere,but with something else, maybe.
peter

Quote from: poynt99 on May 10, 2009, 12:22:19 PM
It's amazing how this scenario plays out time and time again, especially when several members here have been present for many of the past similar scenarios involving claimed overunity from "BEMF".

Was nothing learned from these past lessons? Be assured that this circuit is no different, and so will be the results if and when they are ever measured or tested properly.

@all: Do some research on this site and see for yourself the number of times this has been attempted and the final outcome of each. Learn from the past, teach those that folly, and move forward.

Regards,
.99

@ poynt99

Although I somewhat agree with what you're saying I don't think it's safe to say that it can never be realized, we just haven't seen it succeed by replication yet.

Take for instance, the WO1999038247 patent for HARNESSING A BACK EMF, as patents go you are usually left with more questions than answers as far as components used. 

Even if the patent is granted such as this one, and even if it states that "The net effect is that the workload exceeds the depletion rate of the source" there is no way to validate this because of all the missing information.  I'm still wondering why the patent offices grant inventors patent rights when it should be replicated and validated by the scientific community first!!!???  I find patents to be more like a pie in the sky idea rather than physical proof (sort of like intellectual property rights) otherwise this world would be full of OU devices don't you think?

I also think that part of the problem is that there isn't any data provided that follows a definite measurement protocol which is probably only available to Labs or Universities that have proper measuring equipment and knowledgeable personnel to carry out these tests.  Another problem is in replications where it's hard to get the exact same test components and materials as well as proper measuring equipment being that most people are probably not equipped with such things. 

Anyways sorry for the rant, I guess I'm lamenting on my own shortcomings and wished there was a better way to find the truth to all these but in the end most of the great inventions do come from people who get a Eureka moment whether skilled in the art or not.

As such I wish Tommey the very best in his endeavors and hope he comes up with something that others may have missed.

Regards,
Paul

2 videos from Tommey / OverUnityNow1
In these videos Tommey talks in detail about his measurements

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1h7JeGvE6sE&feature=channel_page

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVRKMIZIICA&feature=channel_page

cat

Quote from: Goat on May 10, 2009, 03:02:07 PM
@ poynt99

Although I somewhat agree with what you're saying I don't think it's safe to say that it can never be realized, we just haven't seen it succeed by replication yet.

Take for instance, the WO1999038247 patent for HARNESSING A BACK EMF, as patents go you are usually left with more questions than answers as far as components used. 

Even if the patent is granted such as this one, and even if it states that "The net effect is that the workload exceeds the depletion rate of the source" there is no way to validate this because of all the missing information.  I'm still wondering why the patent offices grant inventors patent rights when it should be replicated and validated by the scientific community first!!!???  I find patents to be more like a pie in the sky idea rather than physical proof (sort of like intellectual property rights) otherwise this world would be full of OU devices don't you think?

I also think that part of the problem is that there isn't any data provided that follows a definite measurement protocol which is probably only available to Labs or Universities that have proper measuring equipment and knowledgeable personnel to carry out these tests.  Another problem is in replications where it's hard to get the exact same test components and materials as well as proper measuring equipment being that most people are probably not equipped with such things. 

Anyways sorry for the rant, I guess I'm lamenting on my own shortcomings and wished there was a better way to find the truth to all these but in the end most of the great inventions do come from people who get a Eureka moment whether skilled in the art or not.

As such I wish Tommey the very best in his endeavors and hope he comes up with something that others may have missed.

Regards,
Paul

Hi paul

Yes, I am sure the Right Brothers were not the first to experiment with wings on their device

cat

Quote from: Goat on May 10, 2009, 03:02:07 PM
@ poynt99

Although I somewhat agree with what you're saying I don't think it's safe to say that it can never be realized, we just haven't seen it succeed by replication yet.

To clarify: It won't ever be realized with the specific circuit/method as shown here and in the countless other similar circuits before it. Maybe some other way, such as in the TPU, but not this way. This is good old inductive kickback, and when one understands how it works and what it does, one moves on to other more exotic endeavors... or not.

Quote
I also think that part of the problem is that there isn't any data provided that follows a definite measurement protocol which is probably only available to Labs or Universities that have proper measuring equipment and knowledgeable personnel to carry out these tests.

Regards,
Paul

Proper measurements can be difficult to achieve, but not impossible, even with relatively simple equipment. The first step however in getting accurate data is KNOWING the limitations of cheap meters (they just don't cut it for this kind of research) and KNOWING how to get accurate results etc. The fact that all "discoverers" of BEMF (so far) are oblivious to this exemplifies the fact that this problem will persist.

Yes, protocol SHOULD be established at this forum for such claims. Not having one is the reason this scenario persists, and will continue to do so until the site administrator takes the proper corrective action.

.99

Thanks poynt99 for your response, all your points were well taken.

If you haven't already looked at the WO1999038247 HARNESSING A BACK EMF patent could you please let me know what you think of it, pie in the sky or otherwise.   

I'd be interested in your or anyone's views of it's information and whether or not it makes sense as far as recovering energy to the point of exceeding the input needed as stated in the patent.

Regards,
Paul

Hey Tommey,

great work. On the last video of yours where you show the math, is the input a constant voltage and current or you are still using the PWM? If you are, would not the measurements shown on the meters be showing only the current of the averaged current of the duty cycle of the PWM? (no pun intended here)

Would be possible that the measurement you show on the input to really be much higher because, lets say the duty cycle is 70% (so 30% percent ON and 70% OFF), your meter will average on that 30% ON  and try its best to see it as if it was a 100% ON therefore showing a much higher discrepancy.

Just asking here, not trying to flame neither to discredit your work. I am learning with you!

Fausto.

Yes I will show the higher duty cycle, this will allow the constant voltage to show from the pwm.
This will also show that at a higher duty cycle with amps and voltage will show on the meters too across the coil.

Thanks...
Tom

2 new videos from Tommey / OverUnityNow1

Pulse generator, higher input of the pwm cycle 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3huifgLke1A&feature=channel_page

Pulse Generator, Higher output then input of energy 001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=op4ikOlm3g8&feature=channel_page

Tommey Reed's pulse generator is NOT overunity. He told me himself that it only lengthens the time of battery discharge. He won't release the actual PWM nor the actual circuit because then it will be proven to not work. Sorry folks. I couldn't get him to release the actual plans no matter how hard I tried. He just kept changing the subject and talking about other junk that didn't matter (rachet motor etc.)
  Maybe my posting this fact will make him decide to release his actual PWM and all the parts - without doubt, it is technology, but I don't think he understands how to make it work.

Quote from: brentbps on May 11, 2009, 11:57:25 AM
Tommey Reed's pulse generator is NOT overunity. He told me himself that it only lengthens the time of battery discharge. He won't release the actual PWM nor the actual circuit because then it will be proven to not work. Sorry folks. I couldn't get him to release the actual plans no matter how hard I tried. He just kept changing the subject and talking about other junk that didn't matter (rachet motor etc.)
  Maybe my posting this fact will make him decide to release his actual PWM and all the parts - without doubt, it is technology, but I don't think he understands how to make it work.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REhGoj3lZYs&feature=channel_page

Mr Brent,
Did you tell them that you have been trying to sell my ideas on energytechnologynow.org
It was you using names like Allen on the blog that was trying to sell my ideas for money.
You are the owner of energytechnologynow.org
I do not have any control over your site, but I do have control over my patents!
I have already taken action to remove my technology from your web site.
You are the scam Mr Brent, are you going to tell everyone that you own energytechnologynow.org.
You have been trying to sell other technology that don't belong to you too.
I have said before that this system works as for what my meters are showing overunity, but you have taken it to make money on my technology.
Anyone can see what you are doing on your web site at: energytechnologynow.org.
I knew you have try to scam me from the beginning on Overunity.com
Its you, that open the web page to make big bucks on someone else labor.
Your the real scam, I have said from the beginng its free.
And it still is.......
Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: meaikido@netscape.net
To: brentbps1@yahoo.com
Sent: Sun, 10 May 2009 7:39 am
Subject: Remove all of your work from the web page!


Mr Brent,


I was waiting for you to call back, and yet you did'nt. This is getting out of control, first you ask me why I remove my videos and now your saying that you have the control over the web site with my information and user name from youtube.

I have taken action in your part of trying to make money on my ideas and how you now want 30% of my work, I wont allow you to do this.
You kept saying that you would do this for free, even when I wanted to pay you for your time and now you wanted 30%.

I will find out about your so called payment for Tip Top Web Site tomorrow. They are located in Florida for any legal action needed to remove or redo the web page with no further help from you.

You have tried to add very high price items on the web page when I asked you not too, you have locked me off the web page that I have paid for, and you saying that it came out of your bank account.

I ask you before to sent me your address so I could repay you for your time and the money you spent on filing fees for the site.
If you have this idea that you will control my information and web page, You will find that I will not let this happen.

You have said that you wanted to help and now you want money and control over my information on the web page, I ask you again to rethink your action.

I have sent you a copy of my payment to the web site.

Tommey Reed

This was the email I sent him.

Keep up the great work, Tom. Ignore the leeches.

This is even Brents phone number, 928-420-3878.
OverUnity people I will not lie, this guy have tried to scam me on my technology.
He is now starting to take my technology off his site, now the the truth is out.
I did put his number up for the fact its the same guy.
My number is 772-812-2661 that's the right thing I can do.

Brent is a scam, that's the facts. I have always said that I wanted this to be free.
Brent talk me into trying to make money, but not in the hundreds of dollars, until he wanted 30% then I understood what he was up to.

NOW THAT"S THE REAL TRUTH!

This is the first video I had to do about energytechnologynow.org

Tom....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5o7ARCGeLps

EnergyTechnologyNow.org has been remove now, poeple need to wake up when trying to scam someone.

My own site wil be up and running soon OverUnityNow.com, free information on many of my technology and any one else that wants to post there own designs.

I will add: PWM designs, Pulse generator designs, Mosfet drivers, and much more.

Tommey Reed

Sorry to learn of your experience Tom...there's one spawned every minute you know.

Glad to see things have cleared up...best of luck with your work.

What you are doing is helpful to all who are in it for the right reasons.

Regards...

The free site I gave you, I closed the site because you weren't showing people anything to help them build their own. 

--- On Sun, 5/10/09, meaikido@netscape.net <meaikido@netscape.net> wrote:

From: meaikido@netscape.net <meaikido@netscape.net>
Subject: Fwd: Remove all of your work from the web page!
To: brentbps@yahoo.com
Date: Sunday, May 10, 2009, 11:39 AM





-----Original Message-----
From: meaikido@netscape.net
To: brentbps1@yahoo.com
Sent: Sun, 10 May 2009 7:39 am
Subject: Remove all of your work from the web page!


Mr Brent,


I was waiting for you to call back, and yet you did'nt. This is getting out of control, first you ask me why I remove my videos and now your saying that you have the control over the web site with my information and user name from youtube.

I have taken action in your part of trying to make money on my ideas and how you now want 30% of my work, I wont allow you to do this.
You kept saying that you would do this for free, even when I wanted to pay you for your time and now you wanted 30%.

I will find out about your so called payment for Tip Top Web Site tomorrow. They are located in Florida for any legal action needed to remove or redo the web page with no further help from you.

You have tried to add very high price items on the web page when I asked you not too, you have locked me off the web page that I have paid for, and you saying that it came out of your bank account.

I ask you before to sent me your address so I could repay you for your time and the money you spent on filing fees for the site.
If you have this idea that you will control my information and web page, You will find that I will not let this happen.

You have said that you wanted to help and now you want money and control over my information on the web page, I ask you again to rethink your action.

I have sent you a copy of my payment to the web site.

Tommey Reed 

Brent everyone know you tried to scam me.....
Don't change the subject...

Mr Brent, you like to lie and scam others, you now have a new name (Brentscam), the scammer choice!

Don't send me anymore of your emails, I will post them up!

Excellent actions Tommey!

I personally believe much more in your pistons ideas than in your electrical circuits, but its cool you're giving out the circuits for free anyway.
Hopefully rotary pistons will allow us to use smaller displacement, more efficient engines in aero and transportation applications.

Thank you,

My rotary engine is very good in design and efficiency.
My claims are 85% with the right seals design and heat needed to get the job done.
The ratchet engine is the replacement of the rotary using piston in a push and pull instead of rotating in a circle.
This show even greater efficiency then 85%, being the piston have a greater seal with piston rings.
I have the ratchet test run on youtub using less then 8cu/in of air per rotation of shaft, at 120psi given a torque output of 10ft/lb.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpvW9Ue5MhY&feature=channel_page

Tom....

Hi Tommey,

well, we did not know, that energytechnologynow.org
was not your own site.

I thought it would be your site.

So we are waiting now for an excuse from Brent,
otherwise, if he will not answer over here publically in
a weeks time, I will ban  him from the forum.

I just see, that the site is removed now and looking forward to your
own new site
http://overunitynow.com/

which is already online.

Many thanks for clearing this up.

Regards, Stefan.

Quote from: Tommey Reed on May 11, 2009, 12:19:40 PM
Mr Brent,
Did you tell them that you have been trying to sell my ideas on energytechnologynow.org
It was you using names like Allen on the blog that was trying to sell my ideas for money.
You are the owner of energytechnologynow.org
I do not have any control over your site, but I do have control over my patents!
I have already taken action to remove my technology from your web site.
You are the scam Mr Brent, are you going to tell everyone that you own energytechnologynow.org.
You have been trying to sell other technology that don't belong to you too.
I have said before that this system works as for what my meters are showing overunity, but you have taken it to make money on my technology.
Anyone can see what you are doing on your web site at: energytechnologynow.org.
I knew you have try to scam me from the beginning on Overunity.com
Its you, that open the web page to make big bucks on someone else labor.
Your the real scam, I have said from the beginng its free.
And it still is.......
Tom

Hello All,

I would not have anyone ban, But I did give him a chance to rethink his option.

My web page is up now at overunitynow.com.
This is free technology I offer, even if some of my project may seem its not over unity to others, its free.
I can only test the pulse generator with what I have in meters, but ask your self If I am able to get the wasted energy in the flyback energy effect, this could even be better when running a DC motor in electric cars....
Tom.

Quote from: Tommey Reed on May 12, 2009, 10:02:07 AM

This is free technology I offer, even if some of my project may seem its not over unity to others, its free.

Tom.

Hi, All

Personally I think Tom has achieved OU.  Efficiency over 100% does NOT exist in old Physics, anyone who can do this is breaking new ground for mankind.  But COP=1.1 still has little use for most people.

For instance,  at COP=1.1, it would take 100KW to Get 10KW of usable energy, the other 100KW will go back to make the system perpetual.  With this kind of performance, the system will be hard to justify it's cost on the market, even if it's a DIY project. 

Many people had claimed COP of 5, or 6, but none of them is willing to reveal the secret, because secret means Money. And this is where Tom can really make a difference. 

COP=1.1 is still greater than COP=5, if you are willing to share!

Andy

Thanks you for your comments,

I do say that it show OU, even if you have a pwm on 30% and 70% off. This means 70% of energy not needed, pulsing any voltage is more efficient the direct current voltage.
I am trying to get the facts with the input and output.

I found that a low resistance coil will only take more amps with less volts. This coil show a .66 ohms, at any volts you will see higher amps input.
1 ohms times 1 amp of power, will show 1 volt across the coil
E=IR
I don't understand everything, but is is not that hard to understand basic Ohm's Law.

This coil would not go higher then 2v in some test, that's saying a lot.
Tom

@tommyreed

In the meantime the epoxy aplied to a commutator I am trying to build dries I went to your page and the first circuit was very difficult to read.

I made a composition of the information on that page and I am asking you if the way I did it is okay.

There was a device with the words not legible I assumed that it was the mosfet driver.

Is that correct?

Keep your good work !

Jesus

Yes, mosfet driver is the output to the diodes and coil.

Tom

Quote from: Tommey Reed on May 12, 2009, 03:10:20 PM
Yes, mosfet driver is the output to the diodes and coil.

Tom

Thank you @tommyreed !

Jesus

How the Pulse Generator pwm works isno different then a speed controller.

The speed of a DC motor is directly proportional to the supply voltage, so if we reduce the supply voltage from 12 Volts to 6 Volts, the motor will run at half the speed. How can this be achieved when the battery is fixed at 12 Volts?
The speed controller works by varying the average voltage sent to the motor. It could do this by simply adjusting the voltage sent to the motor, but this is quite inefficient to do. A better way is to switch the motor's supply on and off very quickly. If the switching is fast enough, the motor doesn't notice it, it only notices the average effect.

When you watch a film in the cinema, or the television, what you are actually seeing is a series of fixed pictures, which change rapidly enough that your eyes just see the average effect - movement. Your brain fills in the gaps to give an average effect.

Now imagine a light bulb with a switch. When you close the switch, the bulb goes on and is at full brightness, say 100 Watts. When you open the switch it goes off (0 Watts). Now if you close the switch for a fraction of a second, then open it for the same amount of time, the filament won't have time to cool down and heat up, and you will just get an average glow of 50 Watts. This is how lamp dimmers work, and the same principle is used by speed controllers to drive a motor. When the switch is closed, the motor sees 12 Volts, and when it is open it sees 0 Volts. If the switch is open for the same amount of time as it is closed, the motor will see an average of 6 Volts, and will run more slowly accordingly.

Tom.

@tommyreed

This graphic I composed is what I understand from the information that you provided. I do expect that the members of the forum start replicating your work.

Jesus

This is in fact a standard Boost Converter circuit. The purpose of the Boost Converter
is to transform a lower input voltage to a higher level. This type of technology have
been used in everyday electronics for decades. And no, it's not overunity in anyway.
Furthermore, three of the diodes is not necessary for operation.
I have edited the picture and removed the redundant diodes. See attached picture #1

Just to clear up things I have added a regular Booster Converter topology circuit.
Please see attached picture #2.

Here's a link describing the widely used Boost converter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boost_converter

Iv'e been doing this stuff for so long in my day jobb and I can tell you all it's not OU.
Tommmey have to call in professionals helping him take accurate proper measurements.
You really need some "how to" education/skills when measuring a pulsed power system.
From what I can tell Tommey got neither of this.

Quote from: nievesoliveras on May 13, 2009, 01:48:24 AM
@tommyreed

This graphic I composed is what I understand from the information that you provided. I do expect that the members of the forum start replicating your work.

Jesus

Hi Jesus,

I would like to suggest a modification in the schematics you composed.
Now the TC4429 is fed from the 5V voltage stabilizer.  This means that the 4 MOSFETs receive a maximum of 5V driving pulse as the gate-source control voltage,  and this value is near to the threshold voltage (which is anywhere between 2-4V, see data sheet http://www.fairchildsemi.com/ds/RF/RFP40N10.pdf ). While the MOSFETs are surely open for the 5V, no doubt,  their gate-source ON resistance, r_DSonwill surely be higher than what would be achieveable by running the TC4429 from the 12V voltage stabilizer. 
If you see the r_DSon value from the data sheet, it is specified as 0.04 Ohm at 10V gate-source voltage input, V_GS,  normally such power MOSFETs need at least 8-10V gate source control voltage to obtain the specified ON resistance. 
This modification would make the 5V stabilizer redundant, while the power loss on the 4 parallel MOSFETs will be less, hence switching efficiency can increase.
If you agree with this, than the supply pins of the TC4429 (that are tied to the 5V stabilizer)  would connect to the output of the 12V stabilizer, that is all.

rgds,  Gyula

These diode are needed!, in fact it works great.
I found that if you don't have them, you will blow the mosfets.
I had to replace many before adding those.
Also, forgot to add the capacitor onthe input battery.
I fixed the schematic on the web page: OverUnityNow.com.
One other thing, the flyback effect you talked about did not use mosfet technology or low ohms coils.

Tom....

You can use a 7812 to power both, but caution is needed.
I have used 7812 on both circut, but when using different mosfet, the 4429 works good at 5v.
So its a basic driver for most mosfets.....
Tom

Electrical Specifications TC = 25oC, Unless Otherwise Specified
PARAMETER SYMBOL TEST CONDITIONS MIN TYP MAX UNITS
Drain to Source Breakdown Voltage BVDSS ID = 250mA, VGS = 0V (Figure 9) 100 - - V
Gate Threshold Voltage VGS(TH) VGS = VDS, ID = 250mA (Figure 8) 2 - 4 V
Zero Gate Voltage Drain Current IDSS VDS = 80V,
VGS = 0V
TC = 25oC - - 1 mA
TC = 150oC - - 50 mA
Gate to Source Leakage Current IGSS VGS = ±20V - - ±100 nA
Drain to Source On Resistance rDS(ON) ID = 40A, VGS = 10V (Figure 7) - - 0.040 W
Turn-On Time tON VDD = 50V, ID = 20A,
RL = 2.5W, VGS = 10V, RGS = 4.2 W
(Figure 11)
- - 80 ns
Turn-On Delay Time td(ON) - 17 - ns
Rise Time tr - 30 - ns
Turn-Off Delay Time td(OFF) - 42 - ns
Fall Time tf - 20 - ns
Turn-Off Time tOFF - - 100 ns
Total Gate Charge Qg(TOT) VGS = 0V to 20V VDD = 80V,
ID = 40A,
RL = 2.0W
(Figures 11)
- - 300 nC
Gate Charge at 10V Qg(10) VGS = 0V to 10V - - 150 nC
Threshold Gate Charge Qg(TH) VGS = 0V to 2V - - 7.5 nC
Thermal Resistance Junction to Case RqJC - - 0.94 oC/W
Thermal Resistance Junction to Ambient RqJA TO-247 - - 30 oC/W
TO-220AB and TO-263AB - - 62 oC/W
Source to Drain Diode Specifications
PARAMETER SYMBOL TEST CONDITIONS MIN TYP MAX UNITS
Source to Drain Diode Voltage VSD ISD = 40A - - 1.5 V
Reverse Recovery Time trr ISD = 40A, dISD/dt = 100A/ms - - 200 ns

Quote from: Tommey Reed on May 13, 2009, 06:59:03 AM
You can use a 7812 to power both, but caution is needed.
I have used 7812 on both circut, but when using different mosfet, the 4429 works good at 5v.
So its a basic driver for most mosfets.....
Tom

Hi Tom,

Yes, ok.  Maybe the current peaks exceed the 1 Amper limit of the 7812 when the 4429 has to charge up the 8-10nF gate-source capacitance of the combined MOSFETs and in case of a 7805 this limit is not exceeded?
I think this question should be examined and use a heftier 12V stabilizer.

rgds,  Gyula

Quote from: Tommey Reed on May 13, 2009, 06:51:33 AM
These diode are needed!, in fact it works great.
I found that if you don't have them, you will blow the mosfets.

If you blow your mosfets it's because you are using low voltage transistors and have no
feedback loop regulation of the transformed voltage that limits the PWM pulses when needed.
There are much better mosfets available now. The ones you are using are almost antique.
Using 100V mosfets in a boost converter configuration without regulation is transistor suicide.

Quote from: Tommey Reed on May 13, 2009, 06:51:33 AM
One other thing, the flyback effect you talked about did not use mosfet technology or low ohms coils.

What flyback effect?? Did I talk about that?
If you mean the Boost Converter topology I presented it makes use of whatever components you choose.
But a high efficiency Boost converter contains a low RDson Mosfet, an ultrafast low forward voltage diode,
a low ohmic inductor with a low hysteresis powder core with a distributed airgap, namely MPP cores.
Believe me, the only thing you re-invented is the boost converter, and your'e not using any feedback loop to
control the output voltage and this tends to kill your low voltage mosfets. Do you even own an oscilloscope?
You should really listen to me. I've been developing this type of technology for a living the past 10 years.

Quote from: Ergo on May 13, 2009, 07:15:57 AM
If you blow your mosfets it's because you are using low voltage transistors and have no
feedback loop regulation of the transformed voltage that limits the PWM pulses when needed.
There are much better mosfets available now. The ones you are using are almost antique.
Using 100V mosfets in a boost converter configuration without regulation is transistor suicide.
What flyback effect??
If you mean the Boost Converter topology I presented it makes use of whatever components you choose.
But a high efficiency Boost converter contains a low RDson Mosfet, an ultrafast low forward voltage diode,
a low ohmic inductor with a low hysteresis powder core with a distributed airgap, namely MPP cores.
Believe me, the only thing you re-invented is the boost converter, and your'e not using any feedback loop to
control the output voltage and this tends to kill your low voltage mosfets. Do you even own an oscilloscope?
You should really listen to me. I've been developing this type of technology for a living the past 10 years.

8) 8) 8) 8)

Thank you Ergo. Not likely to listen, ignored all my posts so far too. Well, it'll be yet another that eventually disappears into oblivion, or with any luck, will come back one day and admit that they've discovered there is no extra power.

We've seen it several times before, and it's a pattern that just persists. Something we have to accept is there are a million Tommy Reed's out there re-discovering inductive kickback and SMPS technology, and periodically one finds his way to youtube and this forum making erroneous claims about it.

.99

@ Ergo & Poynt99

You both seem knowledgeable in inductive kickback and SMPS technology, please take some time if you can to look at the WO1999038247 patent for HARNESSING A BACK EMF and give us feedback on whether or not you think it is possible in that configuration or is it just a pie in the sky patent.

Edit:  Link to patent description  http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?wo=1999038247&IA=IE1999000005&DISPLAY=DESC


@ All

Sorry for side tracking this thread a little but I need feedback (no pun intended) ;) I will gladly open a new thread if there is merit to the above stated patent.

Regards,
Paul

Quote from: Goat on May 13, 2009, 08:31:50 AM
@ Ergo & Poynt99

You both seem knowledgeable in inductive kickback and SMPS technology, please take some time if you can to look at the WO1999038247 patent for HARNESSING A BACK EMF and give us feedback on whether or not you think it is possible in that configuration or is it just a pie in the sky patent.

Edit:  Link to patent description  http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?wo=1999038247&IA=IE1999000005&DISPLAY=DESC

I have investigated the patent but I can't see the point!!??
It is a regular dual winded transformer circuit where you redirect BEMF to source.
This is standard procedure in SMPS technology and it shouldn't be patentable.
Anyway, if OU is your goal you shouldn't spend any effort on this patent.
BEMF can never become OU due to hysteresis, eddy currents and resistive losses.
Even if there was no such losses it couldn't become more than 100% efficient.

Conclusion: It's possible to patent just anything and this is probably just a bullshit
patent filed by a person/crew that had no idea of the unimportance of their application.

What gets me is that everyone with a so called education, unlike my self are telling others that BEMF has less energy out then in. Its like our Government being highly educated and doing the same, and yet making big mistakes in this country.
Alway know this, I do my research and spend my money to find answers even getting patents to give it out for free.
God has given us free energy like the sun to use, even to make electricity. But Governments won't let this technology be cheap, because they could not make money on it.
OverUnity is there, we have to search for it, and some times its in front of us and yet we did not see it.
BEMF is wasted energy in today world, I know that I am using BEMF.
When the coil is disconnected from the circut, no power goes to the output because of the blocking doides.
If we are looking for Over Unity, research thing that some my have missed, or block out of text books!
As for my meters and what they show, its OU!
Tom.

Quote from: Ergo on May 13, 2009, 09:06:37 AM

BEMF can never become OU due to hysteresis, eddy currents and resistive losses.

This is disputed.

It was also said we could not fly , from educated people in the past.
Tom....

Quote from: Tommey Reed on May 13, 2009, 09:57:17 AM
It was also said we could not fly , from educated people in the past.
Tom....

...and that if we travelled faster than 30 mph, the wind
pressure would suffocate us.

Quote from: gyulasun on May 13, 2009, 06:43:09 AM
Hi Jesus,

I would like to suggest a modification in the schematics you composed.
Now the TC4429 is fed from the 5V voltage stabilizer.  This means that the 4 MOSFETs receive a maximum of 5V driving pulse as the gate-source control voltage,  and this value is near to the threshold voltage (which is anywhere between 2-4V, see data sheet http://www.fairchildsemi.com/ds/RF/RFP40N10.pdf ). While the MOSFETs are surely open for the 5V, no doubt,  their gate-source ON resistance, r_DSonwill surely be higher than what would be achieveable by running the TC4429 from the 12V voltage stabilizer. 
If you see the r_DSon value from the data sheet, it is specified as 0.04 Ohm at 10V gate-source voltage input, V_GS,  normally such power MOSFETs need at least 8-10V gate source control voltage to obtain the specified ON resistance. 
This modification would make the 5V stabilizer redundant, while the power loss on the 4 parallel MOSFETs will be less, hence switching efficiency can increase.
If you agree with this, than the supply pins of the TC4429 (that are tied to the 5V stabilizer)  would connect to the output of the 12V stabilizer, that is all.

rgds,  Gyula

Thank you @gyula !

Will you be so kind as to make the changes you want on the graphic in order for me to understand what you are explaining so technically.
I will gladly make the changes and learn something on the go.
Remember I have no electronics background.

Jesus

Now just what is your point? People drive motorcycles faster then that, with out a helment in Florida.

Quote from: Tommey Reed on May 13, 2009, 09:34:34 AM
BEMF is wasted energy in today world, I know that I am using BEMF.

This statement clearly shows you haven't got a clue what you are talking about.
BEMF is not wasted at all. It's used in everyday electronics to enhance performance.
BEMF is nothing else but the effect of the hysteresis loop.

1) Switched mode powersupplies would become useless if it handn't been
    for the BEMF which is recycled by the free wheeling diode.

2) Motors would become weak and useless if BEMF hadn't been redirected to source.

3) Regular old iron transformers would become completely useless if it hand'nt been
    for BEMF being redirected to input at each cycle.

Do not make the misstake in believing BEMF has some hidden features you just discovered.
BEMF is just the effect of the hysteresis loop. What you put in, you get back minus the losses.
This have been tested and examined for a thousand of times before you found it.
http://info.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Workshop/advice/coils/power_loss.html#hyst
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/solids/hyst.html
http://www.magnets.bham.ac.uk/magnetic_materials/hysteresis.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteresis

I can understand your denial of these facts. This is your 15 minutes of fame. (Youtube Fame)
If what I'm saying is true, then your discovery is totaly useless and you can't accept that.
But in this case I know for sure I'm right, no matter what you say or believe.
Please learn how to take the right measurements and you'll see that I'm 100% correct.

Quote from: Tommey Reed on May 13, 2009, 10:06:37 AM
Now just what is your point? People drive motorcycles faster then that, with out a helment in Florida.

...the point being that people talk rubbish. Your site at
http://www.overunitynow.com/ is terrific. How about
a page exclusively for your bicycle wheel based invention
with full constructional details and preferably no videos?

You act like this is my first idea, rethink you comment. I do have invention and patents. What gets me people like you have nothing to show but words.
Where is your patents?
I have one and another panding.
The rotary piston engine #6,860,251 and the ratchet engine patent pending.
Just because I'm not educated as you might be, does not give you the right to dog someone you don't know.
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Tommey_Reed_External_Combustion_Engine
I don't want your respect, just rethink your comments.
I can trash talk too, but I'm better then that!
Tom.

I will have all the free schematic up in the future, as long as people don't make money on my invention.
Free is Free, lets keep it that way.
Tom

Quote from: Ergo on May 13, 2009, 10:09:46 AM
Please learn how to take the right measurements and you'll see that I'm 100% correct.

Einstein was never 100% correct, neither are we. 

1931 Einstein visited Hubble at Mount Wilson , and called his "Cosmological Constant" -- "the biggest mistake of my life."

http://www.nasa.gov/missions/deepspace/f_dark-energy.html (http://www.nasa.gov/missions/deepspace/f_dark-energy.html)

Half a century later, in 1998 "Cosmologists believe about 70% of the universe consists of dark energy, 25% is dark matter, and only 4% normal matter (the stuff that stars, planets and people are made of). Hubble observations suggest the dark energy may be Einstein's cosmological constant, an energy percolating out of the vacuum of the space between galaxies."

Dark Energy is not in the text book, and it's not free.  Some people think ZPE is free -- turn the faucet, and Free Energy will flow right out.  Others believe it's not possible to extract Energy from vacuum with only coils.

Energy is there for anyone who is willing to get it, but it will always cost you.  The system will cost money to build, and it will be replaced in a few years, just like your TV.  People can build  their own EV, but at the same cost, Toyota can do a much better job.    The point is -- OU is not about getting energy for free, it's about discovering the truth and creating a better world for our children - a world without nuclear plant and fossil fuel.

Andy

Quote from: nievesoliveras on May 13, 2009, 10:02:53 AM
Thank you @gyula !

Will you be so kind as to make the changes you want on the graphic in order for me to understand what you are explaining so technically.
I will gladly make the changes and learn something on the go.
Remember I have no electronics background.

Jesus

Hi Jesus,

Yes, I have made a change: I deleted the 7805 and made a red dot to the power supply wire of the TC4429: it should be connected to the 12V input battery positive pole directly.  I would not use a 7812 voltage regulator for feeding the TC4429 because the peak driving current requirements of the parallel MOSFETs can easily demand higher than 1 Amper peak currents a 7812 is unable to supply (it is limited above 1A or some versions of it above 1.5A).  If somebody wishes to use a 12V regulator for feeding the TC4429, he should consider a heftier regulator for the job.  To understand this better, here is link to a linear and switch mode voltage regulator handbook, see Figure 10-2B, pdf page 76: http://www.onsemi.com/pub_link/Collateral/HB206-D.PDF
Doing some calculation for the Gate-Source capacitor charge current for ,say, 50ns switching time and 12V V_GS, with the four input C_GS of 13nF, you can get I_G=13nF*(12V/50ns)=3.12A  this should come from a power supply that is able to provide this peak current, hence my suggestion for using directly the input 12V battery. 

Finally, I have to tell you that while this suggestion does improve the switching efficiency of this design by reducing the switching losses of the power MOSFETs to a certain degree,  I cannot support Tom's overunity claim with this circuit, due to the measurements difficulties involved with most pulsed circuits.  I have already written in this thread earlier that the real proof of overunity would be to use a DC-DC converter and loop back its output to replace the input battery after the start-up.

rgds,  Gyula

Quote from: Tommey Reed on May 13, 2009, 10:28:56 AM
You act like this is my first idea, rethink you comment. I do have invention and patents. What gets me people like you have nothing to show but words.
Where is your patents?
I have one and another panding.
The rotary piston engine #6,860,251 and the ratchet engine patent pending.
Just because I'm not educated as you might be, does not give you the right to dog someone you don't know.
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Tommey_Reed_External_Combustion_Engine
I don't want your respect, just rethink your comments.
I can trash talk too, but I'm better then that!
Tom.

You can have as many ideas and patents as you wish. I don't mind. 8)
But I do mind when you claim overunity from a Boost converter circuit. :o ::)
Please listen to others than yourself for once......please!!!

Quote from: gyulasun on May 13, 2009, 11:50:40 AM
Hi Jesus,

Yes, I have made a change: I deleted the 7805 and made a red dot to the power supply wire of the TC4429: it should be connected to the 12V input battery positive pole directly.  I would not use a 7812 voltage regulator for feeding the TC4429 because the peak driving current requirements of the parallel MOSFETs can easily demand higher than 1 Amper peak currents a 7812 is unable to supply (it is limited above 1A or some versions of it above 1.5A).  If somebody wishes to use a 12V regulator for feeding the TC4429, he should consider a heftier regulator for the job.  To understand this better, here is link to a linear and switch mode voltage regulator handbook, see Figure 10-2B, pdf page 76: http://www.onsemi.com/pub_link/Collateral/HB206-D.PDF
Doing some calculation for the Gate-Source capacitor charge current for ,say, 50ns switching time and 12V V_GS, with the four input C_GS of 13nF, you can get I_G=13nF*(12V/50ns)=3.12A  this should come from a power supply that is able to provide this peak current, hence my suggestion for using directly the input 12V battery. 

Finally, I have to tell you that while this suggestion does improve the switching efficiency of this design by reducing the switching losses of the power MOSFETs to a certain degree,  I cannot support Tom's overunity claim with this circuit, due to the measurements difficulties involved with most pulsed circuits.  I have already written in this thread earlier that the real proof of overunity would be to use a DC-DC converter and loop back its output to replace the input battery after the start-up.

rgds,  Gyula

Thank you @gyula !

I will pay a visit to that link and see what I learn.

Jesus

Quote from: Ergo on May 13, 2009, 04:47:43 PM
You can have as many ideas and patents as you wish. I don't mind. 8)
But I do mind when you claim overunity from a Boost converter circuit. :o ::)
Please listen to others than yourself for once......please!!!

You seam pretty cocky men..
As far as i can  read you don`t put up any experiment..
I really like the guys like you who speak VERRY LOUD and never make ANYTHING..
As you are talking here you seam to put STAN MEYERS STEVEN MARK and everybody
in the same ship?????
Make up something and disprouve what TOMMEY did and THEN YOU CAN BE
CREDIBLE....
I have been on other discussion site before and there is always A BIG HEAD to divert
the discussion.....
So,,thats your turn draw your gun!!!!!!

@ergo

QuoteBut I do mind when you claim overunity from a Boost converter circuit. :o ::)
Please listen to others than yourself for once......please!!!

There is an eastern proverb which may apply here----
“All instruction is but a finger pointing to the moon; and those whose gaze is fixed upon the pointer will never see beyond.”

All the experience and education in the world is no cure for a lack of imagination, this is why inventors have always succeeded where everyone else has failed. If you really want Mr.Reed to listen to others then maybe he will listen to an engineer---- Tommy don't listen to a word of what the critics are saying.  :)

Regards
AC

I have added another test that could answer some question of OU, this is using greater load for input/output using 12v 50w bulbs
It does not show OU with a lightbulb test at higher loads, but I still need more data when it is running at 30% or less.
30% of the pwm show greater output, but these meters might be off.


Tom

This is the test:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQQggFG-qM8

Tom

@Tom
That lightbulb test is a pretty good comparative test I have done many times, however it has severe limitations. If the input currents are restricted in any way so is the effect itself which in turn lowers the transfer efficiency drastically. Large capacitors or a capacitor bank on input and output is a much better indicator. This is something few consider, that the act of measurement must always have effects and these effects may render the measurement itself worthless. I have high potential oscillators that will stop dead if your hand comes within two feet of the  operating device---that is the boundary of the electric field produced and in this case it is a dynamic boundary in an open system which cannot be accurately measured because any device changes the oscillator field conditions.
Regards
AC

Quote from: peper10 on May 13, 2009, 05:37:59 PM
You seam pretty cocky men..
As far as i can  read you don`t put up any experiment..
I really like the guys like you who speak VERRY LOUD and never make ANYTHING..

Hey, look who's talking.
A hopeful newbie with no experience or insight whatsoever.

You say I don't do my own eperiments.....are you crazy.
Haven't you read what I have been telling you.
This is MY DAY JOBB. I do it FOR A LIVING.
Don't you tell me I don't know what I'm talking in this case.

Quote from: allcanadian on May 13, 2009, 08:23:23 PM
If you really want Mr.Reed to listen to others then maybe he will listen to an engineer

I am an engineer...and skilled in this field of technology.

Quote from: peper10 on May 13, 2009, 05:37:59 PM
...
Make up something and disprouve what TOMMEY did and THEN YOU CAN BE CREDIBLE....

Wrong way.

"What is asserted without proof can be denied without proof."
Euclid

Quote from: Tommey Reed on May 13, 2009, 09:34:34 AM
What gets me is that everyone with a so called education, unlike my self are telling others that BEMF has less energy out then in. Its like our Government being highly educated and doing the same, and yet making big mistakes in this country.
Alway know this, I do my research and spend my money to find answers even getting patents to give it out for free.
God has given us free energy like the sun to use, even to make electricity. But Governments won't let this technology be cheap, because they could not make money on it.
OverUnity is there, we have to search for it, and some times its in front of us and yet we did not see it.
BEMF is wasted energy in today world, I know that I am using BEMF.
When the coil is disconnected from the circut, no power goes to the output because of the blocking doides.
If we are looking for Over Unity, research thing that some my have missed, or block out of text books!
As for my meters and what they show, its OU!
Tom.

Tom, this is the same thing every other "Tommy Reed" before you has said. I suggest you do a little homework in researching what others have "discovered" about this technology, and the conclusions reached. You might save yourself a lot of time and money. No doubt you are probably learning which is great, but please learn enough to speak with some certainty before you speak with ignorance.

If you do not believe myself or Ergo, listen to what your predecessors have said about this technology being ou or not. They have gone down exactly the same path you are on right now and have come to the final conclusion that there is no ou in inductive kickback, or as most call it, "BEMF".

You get out exactly what Ergo said, "what you put in, minus the losses", nothing more.

Your meters are most likely lying to you as well. Do some research on this. Here is a start: http://enginova.com/true_rms_volts.htm

A question for all the "education bashers" out there: If you required brain surgery to save your life, who would you rather have perform the operation, a trained brain surgeon, or a grade 12 student that has only passed Biology 30 but thinks he knows as much as a trained surgeon?

.99

@poynt99

Very well spoken. Right on....

I did my other test, and yet now other jump on my comments like I told you so, that's fine.
What gets me is people thinking they know so much, sit on there ass like so called " I'm a engineer, I do this every day. Its my jod to bash others."
Mr. Engineer, make cheaper solar panels for the world if your so good at what you do.
I would rather you ask me if I learn something , then bash my experiments like you did.
I learn one thing I made mistake trusting meters and also the educated people, will make mistakes too.
Nobody is perfect, but its people like me that keep looking for answer, unlike engineers acting like a total ASS.

I'm glad you have learned/discovered that BEMF is not overunity in any way.
And I'm sorry for bashing you yet another time but it was written before wathing your new video.
Perhaps you should have spoken directly of your findings instead of mentioning the new video.
Your words of not finding OU when measuring more accurately is 100 times faster to comprehend
than having to watch a several minutes long video of your struggles.

Keep up your learning. Once you know how things hang together you might find a way free from errors.

Tom, can you repost the video from May 1, originally titled ' Pulse Generator, Building the controller for overunity' What you illustrated on the board seemed interesting. Thanks.

My next test is using lower power lightbulbs rated at 6v 150ma (radioshack 272-1115)
The first lightbulb is connected to the battery positive and the mosfet drain going in to the first diode to the coil.
The second lightbulb is connected to the output BEMF capacitor collector positive and nagitive of the cap.
Test shows at the beginning the first bulb at the mosfet drain lights up, after turning up the pwm the second bulb starts to get brighter and given greater light power output.

I'm loading this experiment up on youtube now.
Tom

I will see if I still have that video, too many videos slow down my computer.
Tom

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoLQFeU4rV4&feature=channel_page

This is the second test that shows greater output then input.
With lower power lightbulbs, 6v 150ma.
Tom

My first test show input was greater then the output, but why did the second test at a lower pwm rate and with lower power bulbs show greater output then what was going in?
Light bulb don't lie, one was brighter then the other, and even burning out that bulb.

I don't understand why this one showed different results, then the first test. They are both the same rated bulbs for each test.
The first test has 12v 50w and the second has 6v 150ma, and yet the second test show greater output.


Tom

Quote from: Ergo on May 14, 2009, 02:17:46 AM
Hey, look who's talking.
A hopeful newbie with no experience or insight whatsoever.

You say I don't do my own eperiments.....are you crazy.
Haven't you read what I have been telling you.
This is MY DAY JOBB. I do it FOR A LIVING.
Don't you tell me I don't know what I'm talking in this case.

Dear Mr Ergo!!

No nead to tell that you ansewr me with words don`t disprouve anything that Tommey
did...
And if you are so educated put up an experiment to disprouve TOMMEY....
So if you are a good KNOWER..hi.hi.hi Do you really know if i`m really a newbie???????
I`m not gonna go this way......
By the way if you read interesting WORDS in your CLASSROOM dont mean you are an
graduate astrophisitian......
Please,let the EXPERIMENTER do the experiment and just listen......
There you gonna prouve to everyone that you have EDUCATION (by your parents)..
Thank you..

Quote from: peper10 on May 14, 2009, 07:34:50 AM
Dear Mr Ergo!!

No nead to tell that you ansewr me with words don`t disprouve anything that Tommey
did...
And if you are so educated put up an experiment to disprouve TOMMEY....
So if you are a good KNOWER..hi.hi.hi Do you really know if i`m really a newbie???????
I`m not gonna go this way......
By the way if you read interesting WORDS in your CLASSROOM dont mean you are an
graduate astrophisitian......
Please,let the EXPERIMENTER do the experiment and just listen......
There you gonna prouve to everyone that you have EDUCATION (by your parents)..
Thank you..

I can only answer you the same as exnihiloest....and he was totaly right.

Quote from: exnihiloest on May 14, 2009, 02:54:03 AM
"What is asserted without proof can be denied without proof / Euclid"

There is no need for me to disprove Tommey by any build.
In this matter I know I'm right. There is no question about it.
I have all the knowledge and experience I need to make judgement in this matter.

By the way, who did you choose in the brain surgery matter???
The trained brain surgeon or the grade 12 student?

Quote from: Ergo on May 14, 2009, 08:08:04 AM
I can only answer you the same as exnihiloest....and he was totaly right.

Why don't you try to reproduce TR's last demonstration to prove/disprove it.

Quote from: nyctuber on May 14, 2009, 08:15:43 AM
Why don't you try to reproduce TR's last demonstration to prove/disprove it.

There is no need for me to reproduce any of his demonstrations.
I do this type of development in daily basis and I know by 100% certainty he's wrong.
There is just his own words and no other "proof". His electromagnetic skills lack all basic knowledge.
He's also suffers from self-delusion in questioning his so called results.

Do you all want to know the truth or do you just want hear the things you like to hear?
I love the idea of overunity myself, but I don't like when people are fooled in the wrong direction
and expensive replications by a ignorant person that's pushing his own findings without validation.
I know how you all feel. We all want OU. But it's wrong to push crap knowledge and teach people
the wrong things. In this case particular, as there is no OU coming from BEMF.

Quote from: Ergo on May 14, 2009, 08:26:19 AM
There is no need for me to reproduce any of his demonstrations.
I do this type of development in daily basis and I know by 100% certainty he's wrong.
There is just his own words and no other "proof". His electromagnetic skills lack all basic knowledge.
He's also suffers from self-delusion in questioning his so called results.

Since you are the aggressor, and Tom has asked for nothing by posting his videos, I'd say you owe the forum an explanation of why his last experiment does not show what he thinks it shows.

I'm just asking for him to get some other than himself to perform the measurements.
A skilled and educated person that is.

Quote from: Ergo on May 14, 2009, 08:40:44 AM
I'm just asking for him to get some other than himself to perform the measurements.
A skilled and educated person that is.

A reasonable request.

Quote from: Ergo on May 14, 2009, 08:26:19 AM
I do this type of development in daily basis and I know by 100% certainty he's wrong.

In this case particular, as there is no OU coming from BEMF.

Hi, Ergo

If you had found a way of achieving OU, please enlight us, or just keep quiet! 

Tesla , Bedini and Torres all use coils and BEMF, if you think there is no OU, you should just leave this forum and go somewhere else.

Andy

Quote from: bearicey on May 14, 2009, 09:11:37 AM
Hi, Ergo

If you had found a way of achieving OU, please enlight us, or just keep quiet! 

Tesla , Bedini and Torres all use coils and BEMF, if you think there is no OU, you should just leave this forum and go somewhere else.

Andy

Now look who's being ignorant here. It's certainty not me.
If you can direct me to one single device being overunity without doubt then I will shut up.
The inventers own words does not count. There must independent verification from a thrustworthy source.

For as long as I have been around there have never been any overunity devices. Not a single one.
And all those bedinis and other motors are not overunity. This is just a hope among inventers that wont die.

Don't get me wrong here. I'd like to find overunity but as long as there is nothing else but false statements
from ignorant inventers I can't shut up. It's really good that we all struggle to find the holy grail but we
must be honest and avoid self-delusion in this process. Or we will continue to be ridiculed by everybody.

First of all I disprove gotoluc cap test, by charging on cap with a battery voltage of 12.32 volt.
I allow the precharge cap to charge up the second cap to get a balance voltage of 6.02 volts.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsYFuyOmqrw&feature=channel_page

Tom:)

Quote from: Tommey Reed on May 14, 2009, 07:12:31 AM

The first test has 12v 50w and the second has 6v 150ma, and yet the second test show greater output.

Hi, Tom

6v 150ma = 0.9W , the 12V 50W is just taking too much Voltage.

If the coil has a resistance of 0.6 Ohms, connected in series with this 50W light buble, the buble will take 10V, and leave only 2V for the coil.   

According to Torres of ARK Research,  COP = 1.618  X Q , and he said Resonance is OU.

Finding a high Q coil and Resonance is the key.

Andy

pic. from

www.panaceauniversity.org/Norman%20Wootan%20MRA2.pdf

Quote from: Ergo on May 14, 2009, 09:29:11 AM

The inventers own words does not count. There must independent verification from a thrustworthy source.

but we must be honest and avoid self-delusion in this process. Or we will continue to be ridiculed by everybody.

Ergo,

Thrustworthy source is the problem of OU.   Do you trust your government?

Guess who will be ridiculed by everybody ~ Tesla, Bedini, Torres, Tommey Reed, or Ergo ?

Tesla, Bedini and Torres all got their own inventions and theories.  And Tommey is working on his Coil Pulse motor experiment here, as the title says.

If you have a theory ,or experiment, go post your own title.

Andy

Did anyone see my videos on that capacitor test?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsYFuyOmqrw&feature=channel_page

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmhPdUAhvJc&feature=channel_page

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3BBopgf-p0&feature=channel_page

This disprove Gotoluc test on youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4fYvSRxHd0&feature=channel_page

Tom.

Hi Tom
Great videos  :)
I have sent Gotoluc a PM and hopefully you will have a response from him when he   next logs on

cat

LOL, this thread reminds me of that song-----
"Oh lord it's hard to be humble, when Im perfect in every way-- I can't wait to look in the mirror, I get better looking each day"

I once read a statement that seems to make a great deal of sense. It was called the "Law of right" , The right action will produce the right result. Not to insinuate anything or point fingers at anyone but it seems logical that if you cannot succeed at something you may be doing something wrong. If you keep doing the same things over and over this is not expertise nor the gaining of knowledge, this is repetition and nothing more. I think it is those people willing to learn new things and fully consider the other persons perspective as well as understanding their own, who will find success. As always I reserve the right to be completely wrong.:)
Regards
AC

I'm back Tommey.
This time I have drawn a test setup proposal.
Using your oscilloscope and series shunt resistors will give you accurate readings.
I really hope you follow my test guideline. It will show us all whats going on here.

Quote from: Ergo on May 14, 2009, 05:26:39 PM
I'm back Tommey.
This time I have drawn a test setup proposal.
Using your oscilloscope and series shunt resistors will give you accurate readings.
I really hope you follow my test guideline. It will show us all whats going on here.

If you are so educated,performed it ...
If you are so PROFESSIONAL as you said,you have all the equipement??DIDN`T YOU.
The JOKE is going too far.
If you want to participate in this interesting discovery....Thats fine!!
But don`t make other ridiculous with your presumptions..
You don`t judge someone with the clothes he wear....
I ask you to read this forum for a while,just to see where it goes???
Don`t reply to this message untill you have think about what i said...

I see what your testing will show, but first let me say that one tests that gotoluc did on this pulse generator was good enough with everyone, and it prove that I had a big waste of energy.
Everyone jump with joy when his video came out, I am getting the idea that maybe all this talk is wasting my time.
I had to show that capacitor test did'nt hold water when using them as a calculation of OU, in fact if you charge one up and drain it in to another cap you have wasted energy.
I even tried more test today having lightbulbs as to show how much energy was being used and how much energy was being made.
Everyone said I told you so, no OU.

The second lightbulb test showed the opposit at lower pwm rate and higher frequency, and yet nobody commented on that one.
Even the capacitor tests I did did show greater storage when both capacitor where balanced then what a battery charge capacitor could do.
Nobody would comment, and yet when gotoluc did these test everone had to put there two cents in.
I think its time for other to build this and test it them selfs.
I feel my time has been wasted,and yet none of you have really made this simple circut that I gave to all to find your own answers.

I will see what parts I have left to do the higher amp load test again, my bigger mosfet power board blown last time, I was testing the 120v battery pack running the 10kw generator.

Tom.

I really don't want us to get out of control, But some things I know very little about. Its seem that everyone has a higher degree then I do. As a high school drop out, I had to go and work to help my family out and buy my own things i needed, because we where poor.
But that my past, as for know I do listen and hear what people say.
Its hard to say OVERUNITY, but every test I have done with no back ground in schooling is showing higher output then input at different testing stage.
I have no problem if I'm wrong, but nobody has really prove it yet.
Not to bash gotoluc, but I did show his calculation was off when using capacitor to disprove the output.

Tom...

Hi Tommey,
regarding this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoLQFeU4rV4

Hi Tommey,
what is the coil´s DC  resistance of the transformer ?
in the input site you have a series circuit
of the bulb PLUS resistance of the coil,
so the power is parted between the bulb and the coil.
If you put in 1 Watts to the input bulb and 5 Watts into the coil=6 Watts
of total input power and getting 3 Watts out of the output bulb your circuit is still not overunity.

I don´t want to bring you down, but this is the way I have seen it in my earlier experiments with these types of circuits.
You really have to start using your scope for the measurements..Only it can tell you, what is going on...
Keep at it. You will get it !
Good luck !
Regards, Stefan.

P.S. Have not had time to watch the newer videos,will do soon.

Quote from: Tommey Reed on May 14, 2009, 06:34:16 PM
I really don't want us to get out of control, But some things I know very little about. Its seem that everyone has a higher degree then I do. As a high school drop out, I had to go and work to help my family out and buy my own things i needed, because we where poor.
But that my past, as for know I do listen and hear what people say.
Its hard to say OVERUNITY, but every test I have done with no back ground in schooling is showing higher output then input at different testing stage.
I have no problem if I'm wrong, but nobody has really prove it yet.
Not to bash gotoluc, but I did show his calculation was off when using capacitor to disprove the output.

Tom...

Hi Tom:

Let me assure you NOBODY knows everything except almighty God and the 'wise' are really foolish! (1 Corinthians 1:27).
You've been trying to do good stuff and please do continue. Good people like you are honest and try their best to make the world a better place. You may not know everything but at least you're prepared to learn and you've come a long way from not being schooled like some of these 'degreed' people who can only point fingers! I'm sorry I currently don't have time to follow your project.

cheers
chrisC

Tommy,

You are certainly not wasting your time here...I and many more have been inspired by what you are doing.

I'm not qualified to determine whether your circuit is OU, but I hope you are right...nevertheless you just never know what your work will lead to, rolling around in a fertile mind.

I would stick mainly to instructing though...debating wears on you after a while.


Regards...

Quote from: Tommey Reed on May 14, 2009, 06:34:16 PM
Not to bash gotoluc, but I did show his calculation was off when using capacitor to disprove the output.

Tom...

Hi Tommey,

please do understand that my video was not to discredit your research in any way as I am also a high school dropout at 16 and worked my way through life. I'm now 47 and 2 weeks ago became a grand father to my sons newborn son.
For the past 2 years I have been working full time in research to alternative Free Energy solution with zero income. For the past year I have experimenting with what you are doing now and I still cannot claim Over Unity :-[

My video was to help you and show a different way to calculate energy in and out.
You now understand it but you still need to understand the correct way to calculate capacitor energy. I also thought I had reached Over Unity last year until someone posted that I was not calculating it correctly.

Here is a great online capacitor energy calculator: http://www.electronics2000.co.uk/calc/capacitor-charge-calculator.php

23,000uf at 12.3vdc = 1.74 Joule energy

23,000uf at 6.6vdc = .500 Joule energy X 2 = 1 Joule

To reach Unity you would need both caps to be at 8.70vdc = .870 Joule X 2 = 1.74

I hope this can help you :) I also hope you keep up this great research as we need more of us working together at real testing like you are doing to find the best answers.

Luc

What I do understand is when I showed everyone that when you charge a capacitor with a battery and use that charge cap to charge another cap with the same rating, there is a lost of energy.
When I showed the test with my pulse generator using the capacitor as the battery to charge the other cap, It show more energy then the battery test.
I have come to this point that Its a waste of my time to comment any more...........
I have disprove the capacitor test and now people are saying its not 600% overyunity, and yet buy charging the caps to get higher readings then a basic battery test , this means nothing?
You people wont even aprove 110% effieiency if it was in your face, so Its time to move away from the so called OU group!
I will stop wasting your time, I know I'm not the first to leave.........

I have better things to do then sit on my butt and talk trash........

Here's another one for Tommey and Gotoluc. How to truly measure efficiency.

In Gotoluc's lamp test video he didn't consider the effect of wattage, which is voltage times current.

The output lamp was brighter, yes that's a fact, but current alone does not show true power.
The output was a steady 1.88 Volts at unknown current that lit the lamp.
If we assume there was 100mA of output currents this equals to 0.1A * 1.88V = 0.188 watts.
This is a pretty good estimate considering how weak the lamp was lit.

The input lamp was not lit, BUT there was 12.34V available from the battery. That's a lot more than 1.88V
Due to the lamp not being lit we know the input currents to be less than the output currents.
If we assume there was 20mA of input currents this equals to 0.02A * 12.34V = 0.2468 watts.

The efficiency: 0.188W / 0.2468W = 0.76%. (My estimate actually matches the efficiency of iron very well)

In this simple case it shows you that you can't use series connected lamps as a measurement tool.
When taking measurements you need to take voltage x currents in calculation. That gives you wattage.
The input lamp was not lit, but the total power input was higher due to you having a high input voltage.
Don't forget. Voltage x Current = Watts. This is crucial to understand.
Always take measurements in Wattage or Joules when checking a system. A Joule is one watt-second.
Or else you'll get erroneous results and become fooled or perhaps even ridiculed in the process.

Yes, excellent post Ergo. I did pass on similar information to Gotoluc in a private message about a week ago.

Tommy, again there is a slight lack of knowledge regarding capacitor energy transfer that is leading you to draw the wrong conclusion. This is perhaps a good time to re-post the link to my document showing these type of experiments and what goes on in them. I suggest you read it.

Capacitor Energy Transfer Experiments v1.0:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=view;down=209

.99

Quote from: poynt99 on May 15, 2009, 08:23:41 AM
Yes, excellent post Ergo.

Thank you very much. It's always nice to get positive feedback from a qualified person.

Ok I did all of the calculation with capacitors and other test, trusting meters for the answers.
I will say that I was wrong to think it was OU.
I did learn many things, and the most important one was never jump the gun untill all the facts are in.
My mistakes, and I'm man enough to say that.
Being thats is the out come, I will still search other ways to get OU.
It was a dog fight and nobody got hurt, lets move on and I will see if I can get any more energy out of using new this circut design.
But next time I will have all the facts.
Tom.

Yes, that's the spirit. Good going.
Getting back into the sadel with some fresh knowledge in hand.
Now you have raised the chances of discovering something of importance.

I wish you the best of luck. / Ergo

Quote from: Tommey Reed on May 15, 2009, 01:08:58 PM
Ok I did all of the calculation with capacitors and other test, trusting meters for the answers.
I will say that I was wrong to think it was OU.
I did learn many things, and the most important one was never jump the gun untill all the facts are in.
My mistakes, and I'm man enough to say that.
Being thats is the out come, I will still search other ways to get OU.
It was a dog fight and nobody got hurt, lets move on and I will see if I can get any more energy out of using new this circut design.
But next time I will have all the facts.
Tom.

Wow, such honesty, I respect you for that Tommey.
It shows you are a real man!

Goodonya Tom.

Its refreshing to see a guy big enough to wear his big boy pants.

You got this far on your own...if you hang around here a while, what you absorb could very well lead to a significant breakthrough, with your natural ingenuity.

Regards...

Video from Tommey Reed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVJBSuvSUcU&feature=channel_page

I hope we see you again soon Tom

you sure are made of the right stuff to succeed

all the best to all
cat

Good for you Tom ;)

I admire your determination and willingness to continue the research and share with all. This is the spirit that will lead to change in the world.

By the way, at what voltage did the spark jumped the gap in the water?

Keep up the great work and thanks for sharing.

Luc

Good stuff Tommy. You've set a good example for all the Tommy Reed's that will follow. Hopefully someone will direct them to this and the other similar threads on this forum.

Regards,
.99

Hi Luc,

I use a basic ignition coil and charge two capacitor to about 1,500 volts. This can be very dangerous, that's why I did not put two much information up.

What make this experiment so interesting is distill water works the best, salt water cause to much electrolysis.

I have worked on this for a long time, but its very dangerous to show how its done.

I was able to use the not so OU pulse generator to run the coil and get some of the energy back in the capacitor.

Tom

Good on you indeed Tommey!

Even if this time you didn't quite crack the big nut, you obviously do have the mind set and skills to contribute greatly to what will eventually get us across the threshold.
If I were to assemble a thinking tank for unconventional engineering, I'd want to on my team for sure.

Maybe human inventing has changed over the centuries. Da Vinci, Tesla and Bessler thought things out all by themselves, and didn't get their findings to make it to the next generations. Just decades ago, some brains seemed to have gotten close or even to home base, like Howard Johnson, but failed to get their inventions to survive its inventors.
Today's inventors are getting less far by themselves, but anything we do will inevitably be greatly documented and replicated. Seems that we'll have to join arms (more than one sence of the word) to tackle our dragons.

Does this website ever facilitate member conventions? Getting together with a set of joint goals should really spark the brain to get past the thresholds which under normal circumstances are too large.

Quote from: Tommey Reed on May 16, 2009, 06:48:34 AM
Hi Luc,

I use a basic ignition coil and charge two capacitor to about 1,500 volts. This can be very dangerous, that's why I did not put two much information up.

What make this experiment so interesting is distill water works the best, salt water cause to much electrolysis.

I have worked on this for a long time, but its very dangerous to show how its done.

I was able to use the not so OU pulse generator to run the coil and get some of the energy back in the capacitor.

Tom

Hi Tom
  Luc has a long-running thread on this type of technology
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=5024.0

cat

Quote from: Tommey Reed on May 16, 2009, 06:48:34 AM
Hi Luc,

I use a basic ignition coil and charge two capacitor to about 1,500 volts. This can be very dangerous, that's why I did not put two much information up.

What make this experiment so interesting is distill water works the best, salt water cause to much electrolysis.

I have worked on this for a long time, but its very dangerous to show how its done.

I was able to use the not so OU pulse generator to run the coil and get some of the energy back in the capacitor.

Tom

Thanks for the reply Tommey :)

Less then a year ago a man contacted me after seeing I was working on trying to use water as a fuel. He claimed that his partner and him had a Jet engine working on 100% water. After they asked a bank for funding to further develop the Government came in and forced them to close down.

He told me that 23,000 volts at a certain energy level is needed to sustain the the reaction and that he also used a very small amount of HHO to get the reaction started.

He had to leave his European country to live in another so he would no be harassed.

Anyways, I'll be testing with some of this soon and I'll post a video of the findings.

Luc

I think if you can get enough energy at lower voltage to pulse in to water, this could cause a hydrogen with energy release as a powerful energy . I my self have worked on this for many years, and I would rather experiment on pulsing then to use a electrolysis that take alot of watts to make hho. In fact most people think they make HHO but are really making steam. It take 1000 watts for one hour just to make 8.7 cu/ft at 1 ATM.
One watt of energy will rise one pound of water 1 degree, so most are putting 12v 20 amps or more and making steam....
Tom

Quote from: Tommey Reed on May 16, 2009, 11:40:33 AM
I think if you can get enough energy at lower voltage to pulse in to water, this could cause a hydrogen with energy release as a powerful energy . I my self have worked on this for many years, and I would rather experiment on pulsing then to use a electrolysis that take alot of watts to make hho. In fact most people think they make HHO but are really making steam. It take 1000 watts for one hour just to make 8.7 cu/ft at 1 ATM.
One watt of energy will rise one pound of water 1 degree, so most are putting 12v 20 amps or more and making steam....
Tom

Yes! I definitely agree that many are making steam ;D ... it's this steam that in many cases is giving the better economy and not the HHO. One YouTube user found this after installing a better bubbler dryer system to remove the steam thinking he would have better performance to only find he was back to the same economy (without HHO)  :P

Using 20 amps or more from your engine power to make steam is not what I would call a wise ::) energy saver when you think you could make all the steam you want for free from the exhaust energy you've payed for and just throw out in the environment :-\

User: gmeast (Greg) has proven that a standard gasoline engine can achieve a 40% economy just by sending steam in the intake which is made for free from the wasted exhaust heat energy. However, one would need to adjust fuel mixture and ignition timing to achieve this.

From my experiments on spark and water reaction I have found that as the voltage is raised so is the reaction with water. Here is a video I made a year ago showing that using the same energy, in this case Joule power, you can clearly see a visual difference from just the reaction with room moisture. This is why I'm quite confident that higher voltage at a lower energy will be better than lower voltage at higher energy if we are wanting to make it energy wise. Have a look and give it some thought. You can skip the diodes stuff at the beginning since the voltage test only start at 2 minutes in.

Link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvJVbA8Upvs&feature=channel_page

Luc

I agree with the higher voltage, but the time to built up at higher discharge will take longer then at lower volts. Trying to spark at a higher frequency will also need more power input. Say if you had to run a engine at 800 rpm's 13.3 times a second would be needed.

Tom.

I have my patented tested combustion chamber that use any fuels, I use it for hydrogen combustion tester. I would need about 30 second time charge from the electrolysis to fire, but this would take 12v 10amps of power.

I think a type of energy like a atom smasher at low power could split the water into hydrogen and oxygen and even cause a combution to happen at the same time.
I also think, if you could inclose this type of energy in a coil that this explosion will transfer this energy in to electrical energy.
Like a dirty EMP bomb, that use explosion in a wired field to convert in to EMP pulse.
Just a thought....
Tom

2 from Tommey
videos has been removed by the user

cat