Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device

Started by sterlinga, April 30, 2008, 10:56:29 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 12 Guests are viewing this topic.

tinman

Quote from: Dbowling on June 08, 2016, 11:33:34 AM
Brad,
Your schematic is the one I started with 8 years ago. You are not going to be able to keep the inverter running because as the voltage on the two primaries drops and the voltage on battery 3 rises, the voltage potential decreases and the inverter shuts off. Also, you are going to damage battery three because you are hitting it with voltage that is too low for a proper charge. I talked about this, and about the fact that I have a pile of DEAD batteries from running the setup this way over the last 8 years.


Since I came back on this forum to talk about my experiments after a LONG absence I have made SIX posts. In FOUR of the six I speak of the NEED for a DC to DC converter to maintain the charge level at a voltage higher than what is in battery three in order to properly charge it and to properly run the inverter.
     post # 384
post #394
post #392
show it in a video in post 392
post # 397



But it isn't in the schematic you posted. Nor do I see it in the video. So please don't assume you are testing the system I am working with when you are running your tests, because you are not. And I use FIVE batteries, not three. Charging or discharging batteries causes ions to move in a specific direction. To reverse the flow of those ions, as in moving batteries from a position where they are charging to a position where they are discharging uses up energy to reverse the ion flow. So I let batteries REST before switching their positions.


I will show a single battery moving through this rotation to explain it.  It begins as battery one of the two batteries in series. Battery one and two are discharging so a battery can move from position one to position two with no problem. Then it needs to move into a rest position. Then it moves into the battery three position where it charges. Then it moves into a rest position. Then it is ready to begin the cycle all over.


With only three batteries, you have no way of keeping the system going. You will charge battery three as you run the inverter for a little while, but once battery three is charged,  you are done. I'm not sure how, with such a short term LIMITED test you will have the data necessary to determine whether I am correct or incorrect in my claims. Bt at least you are testing. That's more than most folks do, and I sincerely appreciate that.


I should also mention that if you do not measure the continuity between the two negatives on your inverter (there shouldn't BE any, but some inverters show continuity there) you will damage the batteries) You SHOULD be using a pure sign wave inverter.


As to the wonky behavior of your AGM battery. My first experience, which I related here years ago, was with three 12 volt AGM batteries. One battery would take a charge, but would not hold it, so I put it in the third position, much as you did with your wonky battery.  When I connected the system up, the voltage across battery 3 was over 24 volts, and the motor would not run. When the voltage across battery three dropped down to 18 volts, the motor would begin to run, and the voltage across battery three would continue to go down. Now with EVERY OTHER SETUP I HAVE RUN SINCE, the voltage will go down to around 14 volts and stabilize, but with this FIRST setup, the voltage would go ALL the way down to around 8 volts, and the motor would shut off. The voltage across battery 3 would immediately jump back to over 24 volt, and the cycle would repeat over and over and over. I decided that if I could keep battery three from charging, it would prevent the system from shutting down, so I hooked an inverter to battery 3 and ran loads off the inverter. I ran loads 24 hours a day for over four weeks, and the system never ran down. Then I took it on a plane to California (to show it to a patent attorney) and it never worked again. Since that day I have been searching for a way to replicate that system, so do not discount the value of a wonky battery. It may be a treasure.

Hi David
To quote your post 390

QuoteAm I correct that this is your question? If so, the answer is "No". When you run the energy through the inverter and into battery three, the same energy gets used twice. Yes, there are losses in the wire from heat (friction) but essentially you get the same amount of energy in battery 3 that "left" the two primaries in series, and you ran the load for free.

This is what i will be looking at first--this !running! the load for free.
You need to understand that i am quite well versed in this type of experimenting,and will be able to provide accurate P/in and P/out,with an accountability of all dissipated and consumed power.

As far as the inverter go's,it is very close to being a pure sine anyway,and would not impact on the results what so ever. The newer modified sine wave inverters are fairly clean,but if needed,i can clean the wave form up quite easily,as we are using resistive loads on the inverter.
I also see on the other forum!!buy now-get nothing later!!,that most of the guys are using modified sine wave inverters anyway,and they seem to get the results you speak of,so lets wait and see what happens.

Maintaining a fixed voltage on battery 3 is also not a problem,so no need to worry about battery 3 rising to high. I will also be keeping well below the C20 rate of the batteries,so no damage will take place within the batteries.

But first,lets see if the load is really been run for free as you state.


Brad

tinman

@ David

Below is a scope shot across a CVR,showing the input current wave form to the inverter.
As you can see,it is the same as a pure sine wave inverters input wave form.
These are the spikes those on the other forum are speaking of on the input,that is one of the reasons that this setup works as claimed-!i believe!?.
As the batteries will only see the input side of the inverter,and not the output side of the inverter,i am at a loss as to why it has to be a pure sine wave inverter?,as battery regulation has nothing to do with the output of the inverter.

If you are not happy with the wave form across the input side of the inverter,i can clean that up to be a pure DC current,without the spike seen in the scope shot-->but i believe that these spikes are part of the !claimed! effect. All the spikes below the 0 volt line,is energy being returned to the supply battery,and if i clean up those spikes,there will be no energy returned back to the supply battery,but at the same time,the peak input current draw value will also drop.

So if you could post a scope shot of the current wave form on the input side of your inverter,we will know how i need to shape the wave form on mine,so as it matches yours,and we will then be working with the very same wave form the supply and receiving batteries are seeing.


Brad
Perhaps you could throw your scope across a CVR,and show us the wave form on the input side of your inverter?.

Dbowling

That's the wave form you are looking for. I had some problems with inverters that had continuity between the low voltage and high voltage negative, and neither one was a pure sign wave inverter, so I relegated non-pure sign wave inverters to my "do not use" list. But it is the wave form that is necessary, and you have that.

tinman

Quote from: Dbowling on June 08, 2016, 08:49:34 PM
That's the wave form you are looking for. I had some problems with inverters that had continuity between the low voltage and high voltage negative, and neither one was a pure sign wave inverter, so I relegated non-pure sign wave inverters to my "do not use" list. But it is the wave form that is necessary, and you have that.

Ok,so where off to the right start.

I am uploading a video now--will take a while,and will post it here when done.

As expected,battery 3(the charge battery) rose in voltage quite fast,and the potential difference dropped of quickly. this caused the low voltage alarm to come on in the inverter. But regardless of that,i was able to obtain some !ball park! power measurements. I then ran a quick test on the inverters efficiency in standard mode,where i use just one 12 volt battery to run the inverter,and did an efficiency calculation of the inverter.

Oddly enough,the efficiency of the system is some 15% !odd! higher with the 3 battery system,than it  is running the inverter off one battery alone :o. I must admit,i was not expecting this at all,and this has come as some what of a shock to me.

The test in the video was very quick and dirty,and with the low voltage alarm going off,well there could have been an error somewhere?. But i dont believe that to be the case,as the efficiency gap is too large for such an error to exist,so unless i screwed something up badly,then they are what they are.

I am in the process of building a much more stable system,where i can maintain a set voltage across the inverter. I have also carried out accurate inverter efficiency tests,and have an accurate efficiency value for the inverter--which is still way below what it was in the 3 battery system--but i dont know why yet.

I will post the video as soon as it is uploaded.


Brad

Dbowling

TinMan,
Thanks for taking a look at this. You are probably one of the only skeptics who has actually taken the time to actually build this and test it, and I appreciate that. As I said on the other thread, every single component we are using is designed to do something specific to create a working system. I know you are only testing the basic setup now, so I am looking forward to seeing your results when all the pieces are put together. And I DO realize that your current test does not support my claim that "hardly any energy gets used as it moves through the inverter" but I still believe you are in for more surprises when you get the system to run as a stable system by adding the boost module to the mix, and see what happens when you rotate and rest batteries.


I have found that as I rotate the batteries through the system over the long haul, my results get better and better as the batteries expand their capacity, begin to charge faster, and hold charge longer. But if you continue to be interested in this long enough to do the long term testing I have done, I believe you will see everything I have seen. I hope so.