David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device

[Dbowling]

For quite a while we have been saying that when you put a battery in a charge OR a discharge situation you get the ions moving in a specific direction. Then it COSTS YOU in energy to slow that down, stop it, and reverse it. The system will always work better if you move battery to a rest position before REVERSING the direction of energy flow. Battery one and two are interchangeable, since both are discharging. But if you are going to move a battery from one OR two to position three, it should rest first. And when you move one from position three to either of the other positions it should rest first. So it takes FIVE batteries for the perfect conditions. Two batteries always resting.
If one OR two move, they go to rest and the resting battery moves to three
If three moves, it goes to rest and the rest battery goes to one or two. 

[citfta]

I can verify what Dave is saying about the rest period.  I have been running some tests on charging batteries.  I have found some interesting things when using a battery analyzer to check out the battery.  I have taken a battery right from my pulse charger and tested it for internal resistance, voltage and capacity in cold cranking amps.  What I have found is that after letting that battery sit overnight the voltage goes down as would be expected when letting it rest after coming off of the charger.  What I found interesting was that the internal resistance dropped overnight and the cca went up.

Carroll

[tinman]

I can verify what Dave is saying about the rest period.  I have been running some tests on charging batteries.  I have found some interesting things when using a battery analyzer to check out the battery.  I have taken a battery right from my pulse charger and tested it for internal resistance, voltage and capacity in cold cranking amps.  What I have found is that after letting that battery sit overnight the voltage goes down as would be expected when letting it rest after coming off of the charger.  What I found interesting was that the internal resistance dropped overnight and the cca went up.

Carroll

Carroll

This is normal for any type of battery.

Right after being charged,the battery will be hot,and heat increases the internal resistance.
Once you let the battery cool,the internal resistance go's down,thus the voltage go's down,and the CCA will go up.

Brad

[tinman]

Hi Brad (tinmam)

At this time I would prefer not to get in more debate until I've completed both tests. It's going to take several days or even weeks before we can conclude with any certainty.
I understand you're not agreeing with the discussion but I'm asking you to hold off a little for now.
There's been a lot of drama over all this and it has finally cooled down when they realized I'm doing the best I can with the components I have available to test with.

Thanks for your understanding mate

Luc

Luc

I was only agreeing with what you were showing--nothing more.

Enjoy.


Brad

[tinman]

 author=Dbowling link=topic=4612.msg512611#msg512611 date=1509644525]
Brad,
We started with 3 batteries and a stock motor. It was hit and miss. Sometimes it worked and sometimes it didn't. Some people NEVER got positive results. Some people got them some days and not others. But we could see from REPEATED testing that there were possibilities. We have since come to understand some of the factors that influenced our successes: Size of batteries and condition of batteries. Rotation of batteries was and is essential with the basic system.


When we replaced the stock motor with the Matt motor, the results became MUCH more consistent. I was getting positive results on nearly every run. Others were still hit and miss, but still getting better results, even with smaller or poor condition batteries, but very LITTLE luck with batteries that were BOTH poor and small. If you go back and look on the forum, there were VERY FEW people who even BOTHERED to build the Matt motor.


Then I asked Matt if there was a way to increase the voltage to the motor to increase the RPM, and he came up with the circuit for the addition of the boost module. At THAT point my results became positive every time. The system flat worked.


So we substituted an inverter for a pulse motor and that worked. But you could only run the inverter with 250 amp hour batteries because you had to have time to adjust the boost module and it had to be readjusted every time you switched batteries. Too much of a hassle, so we abandoned it.


There were lots of other folks who contributed ideas that made the system more stable and all of those were "part of the system" at one time or another, so depending on when I was posting, the "system" was different. Now it is pretty much stabilized. For a while anyway.


I can understand your frustration, but I have little empathy. How do you think I feel when I have had to argue with folks like YOU for TEN YEARS that this thing works when I have had working systems on my bench running my generator?


It sounds like you probably have everything you need to replicate Luc's test with a stock motor. If your batteries are GOOD and large enough, you should get the same results Luc is getting. When he finishes his testing he can share his results and you can make a decision. Then you can rewind the motor as a pulse motor and improve those results. Then add the boost module and improve them a second time.




Luc did a series of videos debunking this system, and I have not been kind to him because I felt he gave the attempt at replication NO chance at success. The use of small batteries and an off the shelf motor is NOT a recipe for CERTAIN success, and failure would only reinforce his opinion that his doesn't work. I didn/t want THAT! But at least he is rotating the batteries. I expect he will see extended runs, but not not very long at all. I would say I hope it is enough for him to explore this further, but I already know he is going to test it with larger batteries and a pulse motor. If he adds the boost converter I have every confidence he will see the results I would like him to see.


It is not worth continuing the argument about how Luc is measuring the system. You have your opinion based on what you know. I have my opinion based on what I know. All that REALLY matters is results. Let's wait and see what THOSE are. If I am right about THAT, perhaps I am also right about the measurements and my understanding of how this system works as opposed to what other people have to say.


Attached is the data from Luc's testing as of today, and he is not finished yet. He began with two charged batteries and a discharged batteries so about 120 watt hours of available power to run the  motor according to his statement. He has currently shown 160 watt hours of work performed and is not done yet. I will be interested to see what conclusions he draws at the end of his testing and what results he gets with a setup that has large batteries, a pulse motor and a boost module.


Dave
[/quote]

So we substituted an inverter for a pulse motor and that worked. But you could only run the inverter with 250 amp hour batteries because you had to have time to adjust the boost module and it had to be readjusted every time you switched batteries.

Perhaps include a voltage regulator into the boost converter circuit--or after it.

It sounds like you probably have everything you need to replicate Luc's test with a stock motor. If your batteries are GOOD and large enough, you should get the same results Luc is getting. When he finishes his testing he can share his results and you can make a decision. Then you can rewind the motor as a pulse motor and improve those results. Then add the boost module and improve them a second time.

Yes,i still have all the gear from the last tests.
The batteries are(from memory) 360CCA,and 52A/h.

I also now have my own version of a high powered pulse motor.
The scope shot below shows the resulting wave form.

I started this project to prove you right Dave--not wrong.
It's just that all my numbers turned up negative.

I still am wishing you the best on this,and if anything is there,i have faith that Luc will find it.
As for me,well i am about to embark on an !already proven to work! large project with Russ Gries,who has just popped up showing a system that i built and tested many years ago--so i will leave you guys in peace-so to speak.

Brad