Muller Dynamo

[CLaNZeR]

Hello CLaNZeR
are you still there do you have a processor to control the system. I would like to talk to about the timing of the pulse and duration.
I have recored some very interesting figures. I have already seen an ou output just from the recovery system.
I know you have the electronics back ground   

Hi Toranarod

On this replication I am using the same circuit as Romero

But you are correct that on the Steorn Automated PM rig I am using a encoder disk and Pic Circut I designed to log data, but no reason it cannot be used for pulsing.

I have used a Pic Chip before on many Rigs in the past and a sensor that trigger the pulse.
The Pulse Width is then determined and adjusted by the Pic Chip.
Had some very interesting results also with this method, but never made them public as it was being used on one of the original E-Orbo Rigs I built over 2 years ago now.

So with you on using Embedded controllers for varying the pulse width and duty time. But will stick to the original circuit for this one (For Now!!)

Cheers

Sean.

[Aphasiac]

I will not go back from 10 pages and remove anything only from now on...

Feel free to complain to Stefan if you think I am not doing a good moderation.

Fausto.

You're doing great. Thank you!

[albert]

My own bedini replication has a recovery coil showing the same effects as in the video from Clanzer. The rotor speeds up when the coil is shorted and depending on the impedance of the load slows down or not.
As you could see in the video the small lamp just barely lights up. On the same coil you could probably run a hundred leds because its a high impedance load.
Once the generator is up and running it must be impedance matched to the driver system if this is to be running as self runner. This way nothing gets lost or slows the rotor.

[tanakat]

Yep one switch per coil on the bottom plate and on the top plate there is one for each of the driving coils.

They are there to simply allow me to switch polarity on each coil pair and also if I want to switch the setup from attraction to repulsion I can flick a couple of switches instead of re-wiring it.

Cheers

Sean.

Awesome job, as always

[gyulasun]

OH NO - regarding the Schottky diodes!  I've read every page since page 1.  There was mention by a couple members that Schottky diodes would likely produce a lower voltage drop.  I guess I missed or forgot? Romero saying they didn't work well.  Or maybe this was higher power Schottky bridges? (which seem rare).  Anyway I was planning on using a bunch of small Schottky diodes to make bridges and even parallel a bunch to get a higher current rating.  I was thinking 16 or 20 per coil.  This would actually cost less than buying higher current Schottky diodes.  Can you think of a reason why the Schottky's would not work as well? 
   
  I think it may be good to build this device in a modular way so things can be easily swapped out to try all variables eventually for maximum output.

Hi,

Here is a link to Romero tests on Schottky diodes (because those types he refers to as tested are mainly of Schottky types taken out from PC power supplies):
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=3842.msg285229#msg285229

Member mikesstocks2006 already gave a possible explanation here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=3842.msg285247#msg285247

I can agree with this and wish add to it that the type STPR1620CT Romero included also as inferior is NOT a Schottky type, see data sheet:
http://www.st.com/stonline/books/pdf/docs/4407.pdf

So for this type the reverse current rating seems quite acceptable (50uA maximum at 25°C and 0.6mA maximum at 100°C)  and its forward voltage drop at 1-2A current is about 0.8V for one diode (this type is a double diode integrated into a single package).  In my opinion this type should have worked (connected as 4 single diode to form a full wave bridge from them) at least as good as the normal Si diode bridges Romero finally used and paralleled with the 1N4001 types.
Here is two other link on this diode topic:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=3842.msg285237#msg285237 and
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=3842.msg285244#msg285244

Unfortunately Romero has not returned to the diode issue since the above links.

Just noticed Doug Konzen wrote on the diodes too and I agree Schottky diodes with their 'faster operation' vs normal Si diodes would not be an advantage here. He mentioned the parallel connection trick Romero used and the explanation for the resulting less diode loss for parallel diodes is that they mutually shunt each other when forward biased so the voltage drop across them is reduced hence the loss too. Years ago I had access to a transistor curve tracer and saw the improvement in forward V-I curves when paralleled some diodes, parallelling 2 1N4001 for instance gave a 0.86-0.87V (or so from memory) drop instead of the 1V at 1A forward current, paralleling 4 of them however gave 0.78-0.79V drop, very nonlinear shunting effect and you cannot increase this to 'no end' of course.
Normally the paralleled usage of power rectifier diodes is not recommended because in case of any one of the individual diodes in the paralleled pair fails and becomes an open circuit then the other diode should handle the full current, so for any one diode the current ratings have to be picked according to the total current, this may make the cost higher. BUT in our case this is not an issue, for we know that free energy is not free... LOL

rgds,  Gyula