Are Tommey Reed´s pulse motor circuits overunity ?

[Ergo]

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.

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.

[poynt99]

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.

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

[Goat]

@ 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

[Ergo]

@ 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.

[Tommey Reed]

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.