Muller Dynamo

[breakthrough]

@EMdevices
@hartiberlin
@JouleSeeker
@wattsup
@All

I posted a reply #3303 yesterday, but it was ignored. Perhaps, because I worded it awkwardly. Here it is again, worded as it should be.
In the first video by Romero (not self-running), there are two digital multimeters connected to the input. One measures the voltage on the battery and the other measures the total current going into the device. When the device reaches a steady state, without load, the input current is 0.94 A and the battery voltage is measured  at 12.59 V. When the load is connected, the current consumption decreases to 0.92 A and the battery voltage drops to12.28 V. The voltage drop under load is 0.3V and the current change is 0.02A. On this basis we can calculate the internal resistance of the battery,
Ri = dV/dI = (0.3V)/(-0.02A) = -15 Ohms.
This means that the battery has negative internal resistance: the more current we draw from it, the higher the voltage on the battery is. For instance, an increase of current draw by 1 A would increase the battery voltage by 15 V. Yes, we are looking for this, but is this really possible with this normally looking battery?

We can also calculate the equivalent resistance of the driver circuits; they draw 0.94A at 12.6V.
R = V/I = 12.5V/0.94A = 13.4 Ohms.
Having this, we can calculate the expected current decrease when the battery voltage drops by 0.3V.
dI = dV/R = 0.3V/(13.4 Ohm) = 0.022A.
This is what we see in the video, within the accuracy of the multimeter. No miracles here. Current consumption decreased because the voltage on the battery dropped.
If, however, we assume that this is a normal battery and has  0.15 Ohms of  internal resistance (a reasonable number for a battery of this size), then we can calculate the value of current change that would cause the observed 0.3V drop under load:
dI = dV/Ri = 0.3V/0.15 Ohm = 2A.
The question now is: where is this unaccounted load on the battery coming from?

Is there a logical explanation to this battery behaviour in this circuit?  Thank you for your contributions.

Best regards to All,

yfree

Hi yfree,

The current on Romero's battery is not constant, it is periodic. The DMMs are likely to be averaging the voltage fluctuations.

Attached is Romero's original drive circuit. Romero used the same winding style (turns, core etc) for his output coils as the motoring coils. We see the output coils developing ~15V peaks (at least) while the motor drive circuit is driven from 12V. Therefore the induced EMF on the motoring coils may crest 15V as well, periodically forward biasing the 1n4007 diode and recharging the battery. Romero made a comment he included a diode to keep the battery charged and this 1n4007 may be the diode in his comment. It should be noted that back-emf after transistor switch-off is not forward biasing this diode, it is induction on the motoring coil from the rotor magnets' moving flux which is capable of forward biasing it.

An electrical load on the machine obviously causes the loaded coils to become temporary electromagnets when the FWBR on each coil goes into conduction into the output capacitor. I think the magnetic reaction field from the load coils is likely to affect the Hall sensor in the motoring circuit a little, modifying its on/off timing since the total flux it sees is varying a little (it is the sum of all fields, including the reaction fluxes). Those timing variations may alter the way the motor performs, including its current draw and recharging activity.

The Vceo (max collector-emitter voltage) of the TIP42C listed in Romero's schematic is 100V. It's likely that a brief back-EMF spike was present when the motor coil switches off. This EMF would reverse bias the 1n4007 diode (up to 1kV PIV), and drive the TIP42C into its second breakdown region if it exceeds only 100V or so. Romero commented his transistors did not heat up, but this could be where some of the 12W input on idling is going. On the other hand the typical schemes for recycling the back-EMF are not always a good idea, since the current flowing during that time often results in a mechanical drag on the rotor (i.e., BEMF is EMF of reversed sign but current of the original polarity, hence the reversed power flow; the original current which may have been attracting a magnet as it approached will continue to attract now that the magnet is leaving, etc). "recycling back emf" is not magical, it is often a COP<1 transaction which, given diode drops and I2R losses will reduce overall motor efficiency.

Substituting the TIP42C with a higher Vceo transistor having the same gain figure (Hfe in the data sheet) may reduce the input current draw. (Or not!)

It would be difficult to assume the motoring circuit in Romero's build was entirely unaffected by the load, even if RPM doesn't change. If a subtle variation modifies the waveshape of the periodic current flow on the battery, the average voltage will change, and the DMM will report that change in a way that may look odd when represented as a static impedance.

cheers,
breakthrough

[Bruce_TPU]

Hi Chris,

Contrary to opinion, something is obviously missing from the builds, or there would have been a replication by now.  I know of no one whose amp draw was .98 or close to that.  Now why is that?  The idea of using feedback to bias the coils to assist overcoming lenz law is not new.  The magic is not going to be found anywhere but with the gen coils.  Until lenz is displaced no replication will ever be OU.  Romero leftout something and I still believe it involves current flow and direction, which affects polarity and strength of magnetic fields of the gen coils.

Cheers,

Bruce

[Tudi]

Romero leftout something and I still believe it involves current flow and direction, which affects polarity and strength of magnetic fields of the gen coils.

This whole thread is about speedup under load. And i can't remember one feedback that states if speed without coil ( at fixed input power ) is smaller then after adding a generator coil ( having the same or less input power ). Until we get at least one feedback on this we can theorize about stuff as much as we want.

I find it striking logical that if your rotor speed up under load then there should be a load that will maximize your speed. Use this SPECIFIC LOAD ( tune to specific load is secondary topic subject ). See if you can scale the effect by adding a second generator coil after the first one. If you must separate completly the output of coil 1 from coil 2 if they break the effect of the speedup or coil 2 requires a different load size.
Until now i seen posts confirming the speedup with the load, but i haven't seen anyone stating if they managed to add a second coil and how that scaled the output / input. Yes i seen mariouscivic ( if i recall corectly ) connecting all coils and stating that he has issues with 2 generator coils. What happened after that ? No idea.

Can anyone give feedback about scaling this speedup effect ? How many coils can you put on the rotor and you still get the speedup ? ( or input power reduction ). If this has no limit then there is no limit to OU amount.

[Tudi]

for posts about romerouk drama (MIB): Is there a point to even theorize about this ? Let's be constructive and try to get the man make he's next positive step. Even if you manage to guess perfectly the story it will not change the past. Try to focus on the future.

For posts that try to prove that device is a fake : Romorouk is still here, he is still doing research, he is trying to remake the device ( or similar ), no matter what was the past try to make the future bright.

PS: To bad trolls never read the whole topic and they will never read this post either.

[baroutologos]

This whole thread is about speedup under load. And i can't remember one feedback that states if speed without coil ( at fixed input power ) is smaller then after adding a generator coil ( having the same or less input power ). Until we get at least one feedback on this we can theorize about stuff as much as we want.

Hello Tudi, this is the essence of the OU quest in this setup here. The speed up under short (not very useful but still a huge step) or load (useful) to happen at same power levels and in comparison to coil that just not be there.

I have tried and seen in fact that to be the case, but according my view, this happened by better balancing the magnetic drag of rotor than any OU effect there. For example. Imagine you have a rotor with 2 stator coils. Those if are both same time magnetically lock-in (hence a bog drag and losses), then a third coil, "out of phase" will enhance system's efficiency even unshorted.

About shorting coils... my experience
..........

Regarding the short, i have considerable experience with Peripeteia generator.  In that setup, the huge cogging imposed by a laminated core coil(s) in front of magnets would break down the system, and a short would act as this "break" release, hence speedup, being some pre-requisites taken. (high impedance coil, above a frequency threshold etc)

In fact, for those who observed this thing, a standard coil that upon short will create drag, will also relieve of the cogging no matter the final outcome (drag instead of speedup).  Back there, Thane has formulated his own view about what is going on, with high impedance coils (delay current etc)
I proved, that this speedup is not only happening to high impedance coils but and to low impedance ones. i had made back then a 400turn (10 fillar 28 awg) whereas a typical speedup under load coil was 2000-4000 turns. My experiments confirmed that speed up can happen as far as the resulting impedance allowed a current that with the existed resistance would not extract much energy out of the system or in other words (I^2 x R) to be far less than the cogging effect which consumes energy.. its clearly related to phase shifting ..

based on the above premise, i am very very interested in setups like Ben's using air coils or mariuscivic with ferrite coils and odd-even config, that give speedup under load or short.() since in the first place they should not impose much or none (especially aircore) cogging to rotor... I have not being able to do that.

About phase shift
....

Nowadays i purchased an o-scope and can see what is going on in terms of wave forms. Bolt is right about phase angle between current and voltage waves.
I expriemented with the variac as an AC source and saw that. By having an inductor (2 x 12 mH) in series with a resistance (10w 12volt bulb) i can see that the current lags almost 60-70 degrees behind voltage. Similarly, by having a cap in series to variac and same bulb the voltage is lagging current by a large degree.
I noticed the well known that for give setups the lesser the resistance the larger the phase shift and vice versa.
Also, the larger the capacitance or impedance the lesser the phase shift and vice versa.

I have silently assembled a romero like setup and extended this concept.
I have achieved phase shift by adding inductors in series to pick up coil pair or capacitors. Unfortunately, i have not be able to accelarate the rotor by phase swifting (10-50degrees or so) the current either possitively (inductors added) or negatively (capacitors added) whereas it should...? (since magnets would be out positioned?)

Of course by adding any more resistance to the system other than that coil's pair inherent one (mine are 2,2 mH each, 3 ohms 7 x 0.125 wire wound in sewing bobbins) will diminish the phase shift and drag will manifest itself heavier.

hmmm what can i say...