PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2024-12-20, 04:02:45
News: If you have a suggestion or need for a new board title, please PM the Admins.
Please remember to keep topics and posts of the FE or casual nature. :)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Author Topic: Bedini 10-Coil Alternative Discussion  (Read 72851 times)
Group: Guest
Here is my second "Beyond the Joule Thief" posting that is directly applicable to solid-state SSG designs also.

The thing that you get when you go solid-state is complete control over all of the parameters related to the pulsing of the current into the charging battery.  You could literally shape and form the nature of the pulse if you wanted to.

>>>

Supposing you do implement an advanced timing setup for your "Beyond the Joule Thief."

Some of the variables that you can play with are the following:

The source voltage for the coil.  Yes you can use a 1.5 volt battery if you want, but there are no limits now.

The inductance of the coil.  Larger inductors can store more energy, giving you a higher energy spike.

The initial current when the transistor switches off.  This is critical to have control over the initial current, for example you might want to tune it to the optimum current for a given LED.

The operating frequency.  Go crazy here and experiment.  For LED lighting applications the optimum frequency would be about 70 Hz.

The pulse width for the transistor ON time.  This is very critical in controlling how much current is flowing through the inductor when it switches off and for controlling how many L/R time constants you want to charge the inductor with.

The amount of energy in the pulse.  Here you can mix and match your source voltage, the pulse width, and the inductance of the coil to dial up any amount of pulse energy you want at whatever initial current you want.   If you are firing neons, then set your pulse energy to be quite low.  If you are going to drive an ignition coil and you want to create some real fireworks, you set your pulse energy to be quite high.

The list goes on and on.

MileHigh
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3537
It's turtles all the way down
Agreed, a lot can be done with todays upower PIC controllers. A lot can also be done with a few transistors if you are very creative.

About 25 years ago or more I designed a simple three transistor offline switchmode controller. The basic arrangement used a FET as a low side switch of the inductor, one transistor to sense inductor current for switchoff and another for the frequency generator/turn on. This circuit is still in production today, after hundreds of thousands have been produced, even though much more intelligent designs are available (at a higher cost).

I've designed both ways in addition to using 555's and other timer chips.

When you work for a company that is trying to shave costs in every way possible, you design with a high degree of synergy and choose components carefully. Many times you do the very best you can with discretes before moving on to integrated circuit solutions.

Of course this philosophy does not apply to high density LSI circuitry and above. It shines in the low power arena, but people are no longer using their brains when it is easier to pull a ready made chip off the shelf, complete with circuit and app notes.

I see a lot of people becoming less and less familiar with how to apply a simple transistor e.g. in a blocking oscillator (hate to use the word "Joule Thief").

The base drive does not have to suck a lot of power, but if one is not good at analyzing simple one transistor circuits one will not know how to overcome this problem as is now seen in many JT designs.

Enough rant for now.....I'm mobile when I get back to the lab maybe I'll post that circuit.


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   
Group: Guest
I'm just glad some folks graduated from rubbing bare wires or reed switches.
   
Group: Guest
Ion:

Yes simple parts are still used in many high-volume applications.  You see that in the clips where people open up disposable cameras to look at the electronic flash circuits.  In the "old digital design days" when PALs were just coming into vogue, you would try to make sure that you had a few extra gates unused or some PAL input and output pins unused on your circuit board.  When you debugged the board you had those few extra gates lying around to implement fixes.

All:

I am still browsing around online looking at Bedini stuff.  The "Bedini SG:Self-Runner" that Rick Friedrich developed and John K. replicated was probably the highlight of the season in 2007 and it must has caused a tremendous buzz.

Here is the main Peswiki link for Rick Friedrich's replication (Includes links to Rick's videos.):

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Bedini_SG:Self-Runner

Here is the link for John K's replication video:

http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=5205888621309318996&hl=en-AU#

I will make a few comments on the next posting.

MileHigh
« Last Edit: 2010-08-19, 21:25:57 by MileHigh »
   
Group: Guest


I am trying to insert the image of the self-runner block diagram above, not sure why it is not working.  You will have to open the first link in the previous posting to see the block diagram.

Anyway, this device is not a self-runner.  This is from 2007 so I doubt that there will be much interest.

The main problem is that the pick-up coil on the top of the wheel is not dumping any real energy into the charging battery.  The coil is open-circuit for most of the time when the wheel is turning.  In Rick's case, a commutator then shorts the "output" from the coil (through the FWBR) into the source battery.  In John's case, a relay shorts the pick-up coil output into the source battery while disconnecting the source battery from the Bedini motor at the same time.

In either case, when the switch closes to connect the coil output to the source battery, there is no current flowing through the pick-up coil.  Also there is no capacitor across the FWBR to collect any energy from the rotating wheel.  Therefore by definition there is no energy available to pump into the source battery, because there is no energy stored in the pick-up coil, and there is no storage capacitor.  The coil is only generating EMF.  Rick and John may believe that "pure EMF" from the coil is charging the battery but that's not true.  So when the switch closes in both cases, the "output" from the FWBR gets instantly clamped to the source battery voltage.

In both cases, whatever energy that might be pumped into the source battery would be coming from the magnet(s) that might be moving across the pick-up coil during the brief period when the switch is closed.  Neither of them checked that, so we don't know.  When John K checks the timing for his relay-based switch he shows it to you relative to the magnets that are moving past the main drive coil, and not past the pick-up coil, which is what he should have been looking at.

So this "self running" setup for Rick's version, and for John K's replication, is simply a standard Bedini motor setup with an extra pick-up coil where the pick-up coil is possibly pumping an insignificant amount of energy into the source battery.  Whether or not the pick-up coil is pumping any energy into source battery depends on the timing of the switch closing and where the rotor magnets are relative to the pick-up coil, and neither of them checked this.

It's interesting to note that Rick actually tried putting a capacitor across the DC output of the FWBR because that's normal practice.  He doesn't mention the value of the capacitor, which he should have.  Rick says something like, "the 'effect' goes away when he adds the capacitor and the motor starts to really slow down."

The motor slows down when Rick adds the capacitor across the output of the FWBR because for the first time, he is really putting a mechanical load on the rotor!  The pick-up coil is charging the capacitor in this case for a dump of that energy into the source battery, and that causes a mechanical drag on the rotor.  In other words, when he finally sets up the "self-charging" system properly and it is really supposed to "self charge," the motor croaks.  Instead of trying a smaller capacitor, Rick gets rid of the capacitor and now the rotor turns at a normal speed.  By removing the capacitor, he removes any possibility to recharge the source battery through the pick-up coil as he originally intended to.

There are so many other holes in these presentations that I won't go there in detail.  Both Rick and John look at the battery voltages.  The last third of John's clip focuses on the multimeter displaying the voltage for the source battery.  If he sees a 1/100th of a volt increase in the displayed voltage this is interpreted as "evidence" that the battery is recharging.  Neither of them try to make any measurements of of what's going on in terms of power and energy.

The claim that these two motors are self-runners is false.  They both had large enough battery sets such that with swapping and the whole nine yards, both batteries would run out of juice within a few days or perhaps within a week or more.  The "source battery recharging" circuit in both setups is simply not working.

This kind of stuff is in a way just too much.  I think that some soul-searching needs to be done here, by everybody.  What people need is some basic knowledge and then to try to keep working on the learning process as time goes on.

MileHigh
« Last Edit: 2010-08-20, 11:22:14 by MileHigh »
   
Group: Guest
I think that I am going to wind down with respect to looking at all things Bedini and leave it at that, and wind down the thread unless conditions change.

I think that it is fair to say that this thread gives you a lot of good legit information about Bedini motors.  It truly explains how a Bedini motor works and explains how to make real measurements, but without going into the nitty-gritty details.  This thread takes away the mystery from Bedini motors and shows you how they are in fact simple pulse circuits.  Do not be fooled into believing that something special is going on here, because it is clearly not true.

At this point, if a real Bedini experimenter wants to join in and discuss his setup and what he is trying to accomplish, that would be fun and interesting.  Otherwise I won't be posting much more.

To the Bedini lurkers:  I think some of you are following this thread and you have some questions or want to comment but you are reluctant.  I say a lot of things in this thread that go against the grain, and that puts peer pressure on you from other Bedini enthusiasts to keep lurking but not join.  Here is where the real challenge with respect to "open mindedness" confronts you.  If you really want to join the thread to learn about your Bedini motor then you are welcome to join and I will be happy to try to answer your questions.

For any Bedini enthusiasts that are coming to the thread late, I strongly recommend that you read the entire thread first!

MileHigh

   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3537
It's turtles all the way down
The increase in source battery voltage is easily explained even on "peswiki"

here: http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Batteries:Increase_Voltage_Under_Load

Those videos don't last long enough to see the source battery wind back down.

Quote
I think that I am going to wind down with respect to looking at all things Bedini and leave it at that, and wind down the thread unless conditions change.

Good job and good finish MH. Now we sure could use your point of view on the TPU. How about starting by reading Dr. Schinzinger's tests at his lab at U of C. Then watch all the SM videos. Your input will be greatly appreciated.

We can point you to some puzzling aspects of his devices.


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Yeah MH - come on over to TPU-land.
   
Group: Guest
Well, back to some comments around here, this time about something new, battery charging.  I noticed that Rick Friedrich posted a preliminary user manual for the new Renaissance charger model for solar panels, the "Tesla Solar Power Amplifier."

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_Monopole3/message/13281

I am wondering if this and other Renaissance Charger LLC models have UL (Underwriters Laboratories) approval.  Personally I would not buy any kind of battery charger that is supposed to charge big lead-acid and other batteries unless it has UL approval.

This comment by Rick caught my eye:

Quote
A smaller
solar system usually consists of 4 or 8 six-volt batteries rated at about 225AH.
These weigh about 62 pounds. They are connected in series and parallel
arrangements for 12 or 24 volts.

In my opinion it would be potentially very dangerous to connect big lead-acid batteries in parallel.  Batteries are voltage sources and if you clamp all of their output voltages together so they are at the same potential, there is the possibility that one or more of the "stronger" batteries will start to discharge into the "weaker" battery.  I believe there is the possibility of setting up a positive feedback loop where as the batteries heat up the discharging current flow becomes larger and larger, and this could destroy your batteries and cause a fire.  This is known as thermal runaway, and there have been some famous cases in the news about laptop lithium-ion batteries simply failing and going into thermal runaway.

For putting big batteries in parallel, the simple solution is to add power diodes on the discharging side, and on the charging side of the batteries, so that they are in a "quasi parallel" configuration so that it is impossible for one battery to discharge into another battery.  In my opinion you pay a small price for the diode voltage drop as compared to eliminating the possible risk of fire.  I hope you are listening Rick, John, and John.

Batteryuniversity.com is just a spin-off website from a commercial website so they are not not necessarily a neutral and unbiased source of information.  However, I read through some of it and it looks legit to me.

http://www.batteryuniversity.com/partone-24.htm

Quote
A high resistance or open cell is less critical in a parallel circuit than the serial configuration but the parallel pack will have reduced load capability and a shorter runtime. It's like an engine running only on three cylinders. An electrical short would be more devastating because the faulty cell would drain the energy from the other cells, causing a fire hazard. Figure 4 illustrates a parallel configuration with one faulty cell.

Figure 4: Parallel connection with one faulty cell.
A weak cell will not affect the voltage but provide a low runtime. A shorted cell could cause excessive heat and create a fire hazard.

Note the above discussion is not specifically about lead-acid batteries but I think it is directly applicable.

http://www.batteryuniversity.com/partone-13.htm

The above link is all about charging lead-acid batteries, there is a lot of good information there.

Everybody sees the UL (or CSA in Canada) sticker on almost any electrical device that they purchase.  To repeat, I would not buy any type of battery charger if it is not UL approved.

MileHigh
« Last Edit: 2010-08-20, 21:16:36 by MileHigh »
   
Group: Guest
I had a look at one of the Bedini groups on Yahoo:

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_Monopole3/messages/

What's quite interesting is that there are quite a few people that believe that the 10-coiler can "power a house" and they are making serious inquiries for how to go about doing this.

Sure you could get a huge battery bank and inverters and the whole nine yards.  Factoring in the inverters, batteries, wiring, the 10-coiler, and the labour, it would cost a small fortune.

Why would anybody do this?

If you believe that some "magic" happens when you recharge the charging battery bank and you can get more out than you put in, then there is no reason for this setup to not work.   Certainly the YouTube user "MachineOfTime1" (http://www.youtube.com/user/MachineOfTime1#p/u) believes in the "magic" because he is investing a lot of time and money into automated battery swappers and inverters to go along with his 10-coiler, the whole nine yards.

If you don't believe that there is any "magic" then you are looking at a system where you use mains power to charge the source battery bank, and then use the source battery bank to charge your charging battery bank.  The you run your inverters off of the charging battery bank which then powers your house.  This is a pointless exercise, where ultimately it is the mains power that is powering your house and the batteries are just storing energy that came from the mains power feed.

Obviously, if you don't believe that there is any "magic" going on then there is no point in getting a 10-coiler Bedini motor if you want to power your house.  The YouTube user "prestonstroud" (http://www.youtube.com/user/prestonstroud) clearly states that he is getting no extra energy when he swapps batteries back and forth and he is not a happy camper at all.  He clearly indicates that he pursued this project with expectations of getting extra energy out of his system based on what he gathered from the "Bedini scene."

So, if I was in a position to consider buying a 10-coiler to "power my house" the first thing I would need to see is convincing proof, hard data, that clearly demonstrates that when I charge batteries with my 10-coiler that I get more out than I put in.  Without that irrefutable proof, there is no way I would purchase a 10-coiler and all of the other hardware that goes along with a setup to power your home off a bank of batteries.

We will look into this in some more detail in the next postings and I will propose a simple test to check for this that does not require a formal regimen of load testing with a lot of measurements.

MileHigh
« Last Edit: 2010-08-23, 16:59:09 by MileHigh »
   
Group: Guest
Sterling Allen had a debate with Rick Friedrich about Rick's 15-minute video clip demonstrating his Bedini motor setup and some of the data that Rick presented.

http://freeenergynews.com/Directory/Inventors/JohnBedini/SG/RickFriedrich_SSG/index.html

Sterling presses Rick for some hard data for the commonly accepted allegations of over unity when you charge the charging battery with spikes from the Bedini motor.

Rick balks and here are two paragraphs that illustrate this:

Quote
The truth is no amount of data would be enough. You would always belittle it until perhaps the whole world finally had it in every home and laughed at disbelieving it. I say this because you have not shown any idea of the amount of free mechanical in these systems. I have given you a very simple way of looking at that in comparing it in the most direct way with conventional motors. All you have to do is replace the circuit and drive the same motor and load. One gives you no return, the other does. One gives you more Watts with less work and one gives you less W with more work. SAME MOTOR (not even an identical motor). When you do that then I will start to take your response more seriously. When you understand what it takes to move a big fan and notice how much it was taking with that fan with the SSG then I'll see.

Again, I have tested and compared identical work done with identical speeds, both AC and DC motors. I have run ceiling fans, computer fans, and even cage motors for the furnace blowers, and many others. In each case I drove the motor with significantly less Watts. This was done with all types of meters used. With or without batteries. Even with transformers connected to the wall with the wall watt meters connected between, running it either way to compare the difference. You saw two of these running on the SSG with some numbers. This shows you it can be done. This is not proof, but it is all that is needed to take this seriously. You already know that it can charge batteries. So the fact that I can get the same fan running while charging batteries ought to take away that skeptical attitude that keeps demanding more.

Sorry Rick but we do need some hard data.

It is very obvious to even the most casual reader when reading the Yahoo Bedini thread or the Energetic Forum Bedini 10-coiler thread that the majority of the participants in the threads believe that they can get extra energy from the batteries in their Bedini setups.

If you present some hard data that backs up the claim of getting extra energy out of the system, and two other parties do the same, then you would start getting some attention.

But it has to be solid hard data, and unfortunately based om my qualifying of Rick's electronics knowledge and skill set, in my opinion he would not be able to perform these tests properly.  Unfortunately, the same thing applies to John Koorn, based on reading him and looking at his one clip.

Unfortunately, in my opinion, the same problem with not having enough knowledge to perform proper tests applies to all or nearly all the main contributors to the 10-coiler thread on the Energetic Forum.  I read the entire thread and I am quite sure about this qualification of the participants.

That leaves the majority of the 10-coilers on the forums and Rick Friedrich and John Koorn in a conundrum.  You are working within a "Bedini belief system" but you don't have the skill sets to test those beliefs to see if they are true or not.  A case in point is the belief that the "mechanical output of the rotor is free."  Not a single person has presented any evidence that this is the case.  In fact it is not the case and I describe tests earlier in this thread so you can confirm this for yourself.

MileHigh
« Last Edit: 2010-08-23, 23:07:53 by MileHigh »
   
Group: Guest
Okay so here is the simple test to check for excess energy from a Bedini setup.  It could be a 10-coiler or any other Bedini motor configuration.

In the following description of what to do, I am going to mention some action items that are very basic.  If you don't know how to perform the tasks or don't understand what is being discussed, then feel free to post asking your questions and I will be pleased to answer them.

Here is the logic behind the simplified test:  Swap your source and charging batteries back and forth, and each time you do this discharge 20% of the energy from the charging battery.  If the system is over unity then this should not matter and you should be able to do hundreds of battery swapping cycles.

If I recall correctly a mid-sized car battery stores about 200 ampere-hours of energy.  Let's assume for the sake or argument that this is the case.

In my example I will work with a brand new pair of 200 amp-hour batteries.  You will also need a car headlight or some other way of discharging the batteries.

For starters, using your amp meter connect the headlight to the battery and measure the amps.

Take a fully charged source battery and set it aside for the moment.

Take your fully charged charging battery and connect the headlight to it and leave the headlight connected for long enough so that the intensity of the light drops noticeably.  Measure the voltage with the headlight connected and if it is less than 11 volts, then you can consider the charging battery to be fully discharged.

So you are ready to start your test, you have a brand new fully charged source battery and a brand new fully discharged charging battery.

Here is the test:

1.  Charge the charging battery with the source battery.
2.  Discharge 40 ampere-hours worth of energy from the charging battery with your headlight.
3.  Swap the source battery and the charging battery.
4.  Go to step one.

If there is any "magic" in the Bedini motor spike like so many people believe, you should be able to run this test indefinitely.

If there is no magic then you can expect that after eight or nine charge-discharge cycles that both batteries will end up dead.

I can assure you that both batteries will end up dead.  Before you buy a Bedini 10-coiler and all of the other required hardware and battery banks to "power your house" I strongly urge you to do or see evidence of a test like the one described above.  This would be a bare minimum.  You really should see serious scientific load testing with Joules-in and Joules-out as I have discussed earlier in this thread.

MileHigh
« Last Edit: 2010-08-23, 17:12:54 by MileHigh »
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3537
It's turtles all the way down
The tests for the 10 coiler should be run on as small a scale as possible before people invest a lot of money in this. That's why I also posed the question earlier as to which type of battery technology it will work on, specifically which electrolytes help the "magic" along.

I would use a transfer relay that automatically switches the batteries at a preset voltage discharge level of the source battery.

In this way the test can be left to run unattended for as long as necessary (till both batteries go flat).

I would also hook up a dual pen strip chart recorder to log the battery voltages throughout the testing, or a data logger if you have one.

If I can I will predict that JB will put the 10 coiler on the back burner soon (kits will remain available), for some new device he will have conjured out of his (hat)?

That will be the new sliced bread and will leave a trail of disgruntled 10 coil kit buyers, and a few true believers while a whole new wave of buyers line up for the latest "wave of the future".

This seems to be the pattern over the last 30 years, and someone is laughing all the way to the bank.


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   
Group: Guest
Ion:

Thanks for your comments.  As a general rule for myself personally, whenever I read about strange or unusual claims in the free energy domain, I wonder if someone is simply fabricating this information in order to seduce believers into parting with their hard-earned money.  It's human nature on both sides of the equation.

I stumbled upon Peter Lindemann's comments about Sterling's Bedini replication and testing that was done in 2004:

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Bedini_SG:Replications:PES:Sterling_Allan:Lindemann_Coaching

Quote
Oct. 10, 2004

[Moved from discussion page for Sterling's replication index.]

Sterling,

I took a look at your video. Everything looks pretty good. At this point, I highly recommend that you finish soldering everything and finalize the circuitry. It is obviously wired correctly.

Next, I also recommend that you stop disconnecting the output or input to take your current readings. As you have seen, they will not change significantly until the battery voltage drops. Even then, you have established that the measurable "efficiency" of the recovery circuit is about 28% (.05/.18). This is enough to establish that the unit does NOT produce more WATTS of electricity than it is running on.

What recharges the second battery is the accumulation of the "radiant spikes" that are way over 90 volts (enough to light the neon bulb). This is an accumulation process that works best when left uninterrupted. Please keep in mind that you have built a "flea power" device. The point is that everything that happens will happen slowly!

Your batteries seem to have sufficient capacity to run the unit for long intervals without any problems. I recommend that you simply switch the batteries from front to back every 12 hours (twice a day) at regular intervals such as 9am and 9pm. This will keep the batteries running below their C-20 rate and not super-deep discharge them. Then, just watch.

As I have said before, don't be surprised if the system runs down after a few days and the batteries need to be recharged with an external charger. The battery conditioning process that allows the continuous running can take up to 15 cycles to establish, so just keep going. Commit to running the experiment for 30 days and simply documenting what happens, without drawing any conclusions.

Lastly, I would remind everyone watching this process that THIS is NOT how science is done. This is JOURNALISM about science. These systems, when properly built and studied, work every time. Sterling is not a scientist, he is a journalist. He was offered all of our help to build and test this system and we recommended that this be done PRIVATELY and QUIETLY until he had it working. Then, publish the complete method and path to success. He has chosen to put all of these recommendations aside, and publish the PROCESS of discovery.

The conversion of radiant energy to usable electricity happens in the BATTERIES in this system. The motor and it's recovery circuit DOES NOT produce more ELECTRICITY than it uses! The process of conditioning the battery chemistry to respond to this alternate way of charging takes a little time. I hope everyone watching can be patient while this happens.

Peter Lindemann

We don't know what the voltage of Sterling's source and charging batteries were but lets assume for the sake or argument that he was using two 12-volt batteries.  Standard disclaimers about the unknown current measurement techniques, a 28% charging efficiency for Sterling's unknown setup seems to be in the ballpark.

For the highlighted "radiant spikes" comment, I am not sure if Peter is implying that there are high-voltage spikes when the charging battery is connected, or if he is oversimplifying things.  Obviously there are no high-voltage spikes when the charging battery is connected because the discharging inductor is a current source, not a voltage source.

The other two highlighted statements above indicate that Peter Lindemanm is clearly stating that a Bedini motor is a free energy device.  The only "catch" is that you have to have the patience to keep at it until the batteries are "conditioned."  This is arguably a pretty convenient "pitch" because very few experimenters will have the patience to stick around for the long haul.

Then Peter talks about how science is supposed to be done.   Well, I can challenge Peter, or Rick, or the two Johns, or any astute Bedini experimenter to do some serious scientific experiments.  There are some good ideas in this thread, perhaps you have some of your own.

I will categorically state that after the batteries are conditioned that there is zero chance that you will have a self-runner.  It's a "free energy" fantasy and no more than that.

MileHigh
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Eric Kreig issued a challenge to JB:
http://www.nuscam.com/eric_krieg_challenge.htm

The link above also references this link:
http://www.phact.org/e/z/bedini.htm

Stirling writes:
Quote
After all I learned in this process, I can confidently say in hind sight that
never did I see evidence that "radiant energy" was being tapped. All test
results (and I did a slew of experiments) can be attributed to the energy
inherent in the batteries.

Quote
I will concur that the rate of charge of the output batteries versus the rate
of discharge of the input batteries as measured by volt change versus amps
measured does show a disparity that could be of scientific interest. I know
that part of the reason for this will be because a regular amp meter is not
picking up the spikes that an oscilloscope will show, which will give a much
more accurate amp reading.

But still, from a "free energy" point of view, we're not interested in unusual
scientific phenomenon if it is not going to lead us to tapping free energy.

Quote
On a final note, for the sake of those reading on, I need to make reference to
another statement made by Peter that to me was/is a major red flag. While
visiting John's lab, when I was brainstorming experiments to run on the Bedini
SG to prove radiant energy, Peter said, "You can't prove it." And the context
at the time was not just the Bedini SG but the phenomenon in general. At the
time, I just thought to myself, "I'll show you wrong on that. If it's there,
of course you can prove it." That he would say such a thing indicates to me
that you don't have it and never have.
   
   
Group: Guest
A few more comments... They come to mind now and then.

We know that if you rewire a small or large computer fan so that it operates like a Bedini pulse motor it runs more efficiently.  The experimenter Imhotep ("the one who comes in peace") on the Energetic Forum practically became a bloody rock star when he did some "how to" clips so that people could do the fan conversion for themselves.  This was about two years ago.  People went crazy.   The name of the thread was somewhat exaggerated, "Free energy at last, step by step, a must see."  There was no free energy to be found but what the heck, it's good marketing.

And we can't forget that while the fan is running it can be recharging a charging battery.

So there is an implicit question there that is posed by Bedini enthusiasts, "Why isn't everybody doing this?"

Let's have a reality check here and look at this with respect to computer fans.  There are actually a lot of downsides to this fan implementation and they explain why it is not being done in the real world.

1.  The fans can't self-start with the Bedini wiring configuration.

2.  There is the distinct possibility (would have to be confirmed through experimentation) that although the modified fan speed may be comparable to an unmodified fan while offering reduced power consumption, the available torque under even a minimal extra load might be insufficient to ensure the proper operation of the fan for the long term.  Note that a standard fan "bounces back" when you apply friction with your finger whereas there is a decent chance that a Bedini fan will croak.

3.  Average users have no interest in swapping batteries or more realistically having a "charging output port" on their computer box.  Without a charging battery connected you have a nasty spike that you have to somehow deal with.  When you don't have a battery jacked into the port a switch built into the female jack receptacle could switch in a load resistor for you.  That makes your parts cost and complexity go way up.  You can't rely on average users to disconnect their batteries when they are fully charged.  It's simply not doable.

4.  This one is the biggie:  The spikes generate electromagnetic interference.  You simply can not sell electronic products in the marketplace that produce excessive EMI.  Almost every electronic product has to be tested to see how much EMI interference it generates.  You will ruin radio and television reception in the surroundings if you don't meet the stringent EMI radiation requirements.  The airwaves are strictly policed and for good reason.

So the notion that rewiring a computer fan to run as a Bedini-style pulse motor makes it a superior fan is false.  The companies that manufacture and sell computer fans are conscious of the desire to reduce the power consumption of the fan, but there are other factors that come into play.  Cost is the biggie, cost is king.

Same thing for ceiling fans and just about any other rewiring of a fan or motor to "Bedini-ize" it.  It's NOT going to work in the real world.  The radio interference issue is probably the main Achilles Heel.

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
Another posting about the 10-coiler based on lurking on the public Yahoo Bedini_Monopole3 discussion group.  This is the place for beginners to get up the learning curve before they graduate to the private group.

A lot of the 10-coilers are struggling to get their motors to turn.  There is a lot of confusion with respect to the polarity of the signal from the pick-up coil for firing the transistors and there is a crude trial and error process that they are following for the base resistor setups for the transistors.  Apparently they are supposed to mix and match with a bunch of huge 50-watt resistors, trying series and parallel combinations to look for a combination that works.

There is another issue with respect to the inductance of each coil.  Since the inductance of 8 parallel wires that make up the coil is 1/64th the equivalent inductance of a single-wire coil, the charging time-constant of the coil is 1/64 the amount of time for the single-wire equivalent.  That means that the coils fully energize quite quickly, and that could mean that shortly after a given magnet passes TDC, the coil is already fully switched on.  That means that you are energizing your electromagnet too soon, and you are not getting any usable torque to keep the wheel spinning when the magnet is very close to TDC.  It's only a few degrees later as the rotor turns that you start getting usable torque from your energized coil.  For the big 10-coiler setup, there is a very good chance that you would be better off to delay the firing of the coils so that that they only start to energize when the magnets on the rotor are offset a bit from the the TDC of the coils and you will get more usable torque that way.  Another way of stating this is that there is a decent chance that you are burning extra energy for nothing to get your required torque with the 10-coiler assuming that you energize very close to TDC.

Knowing that you are playing with 50-watt base resistors and you have a big pick-up coil, it sounds like you are burning a lot of extra energy just to do the pick-up coil timing system.  The higher the effective base resistance you use for your base resistors, the more energy that you are burning for nothing through the base resistors just to turn on the transistors.

There is another problem with using the waveform from the pick-up coils to switch the transistors on and off.   The switching on and switching off of the transistors is dependent on the slope of the voltage waveform coming from the pick-up coil.  If the slope is not too steep, then the transistors will switch on and off slowly.  This is to be avoided at all costs because the transistors become partial conductors during the switching process and act like resistors and therefore dissipate power unnecessarily.  You never want to operate the transistors in this region of partial conduction, you want them to be ON or OFF, nothing in between.

So, let's break up this problem into a few parts and let's see if we can improve on this situation.  Here is what I think is needed to make the transistor firing system "smarter."

1.  Flexible timing starting from TDC so that you can get more torque put into the rotor for each time you energize the coils.  You also want as fast as possible switching on and off for each transistor to eliminate wasted power dissipation in the transistors themselves.

2.  A properly matched base resistor setup for each transistor so you use the least amount of energy possible to switch on each transistor.

3.  Some method of visually confirming what your transistor timing system is doing so you can tweak it and not be running your system "blind."

MileHigh
« Last Edit: 2010-08-30, 00:50:44 by MileHigh »
   
Group: Guest
Okay so let's tackle these three points one by one.  I am going to give high-level descriptions of everything, no specific circuits.  If somebody wants to do any of this they are going to have to work with someone in a Bedini group that knows how to take the high-level descriptions and turn them into actual circuits.  Also, we are going to assume that the circuits described below are being powered from a 12-volt source battery.

1.  Flexible timing starting from TDC so that you can get more torque put into the rotor for each time you energize the coils.  You also want as fast as possible switching on and off for each transistor to eliminate wasted power dissipation in the transistors themselves.

This part is actually quite easy.  You need a 555 timer chip configured as a monostable multivibrator (a.k.a. one-shot) that is is triggered by the low-to high transition through zero volts from the pickup coil.  So this 555 circuit is always triggered at TDC by the passing magnet.  The length of the pulse is your delay from TDC before you switch on the transistors.  The length of the delay is controlled by a timing capacitor and a potentiometer.  You choose your component values so that the potentiometer gives you from nearly zero delay to an appropriate amount of delay as per your motor setup.  You can label this potentiometer "Delay"

The output from this triggers another 555 monostable multivibrator.  This second 555 circuit generates the actual pulse that switches on your transistors.  So you need another timing capacitor and potentiometer to determine the length of the ON pulse for the transistors.  You can label this potentiometer "Duration."

So, to summarize, you have a "Delay" potentiometer and a "Duration" potentiometer for controlling how much delay after TDC and for how long you switch on the transistors as the rotor turns.

An important note is that you loose the simplified self-timing that you get with a standard pick-up coil-based system when you do this.  So there will be a learning curve where you give the rotor a spin by hand and start adjusting the delay and duration potentiometers and see the resultant RPMs and charging that you get from the motor.

This system has a couple of big advantages, (a) You are consuming almost no power from the pick-up coil at all, you are only using the EMF from the coil to trigger the timing system.  Therefore the pick-up coil will not load the rotor down with any Lenz's Law drag at all.  (b) You can get more bang for your battery energy buck in terms of torque to make the rotor spin by adjusting the delay in firing the coils, (c) You have a certain measure of control over the back-EMF pulse output power from the coils by adjusting the duration that they are energized.

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
Moving on to the second point:

2.  A properly matched base resistor setup for each transistor so you use the least amount of energy possible to switch on each transistor.

If I understand correctly in a 10-coiler system you have 9 energizing coils, and each energizing coil has eight filaments, and each wire filament has its own transistor + diode setup.

For starters, let's just talk about a single filament and its transistor and diode and associated base resistor.

I am not sure if in the standard 10-coiler configuration you are ganging all of the transistor bases together and using one big fat combination of 50-watt resistors to supply the base currents together or what.  Let me just say how I would do this setup.

Each individual transistor should have its own individual base resistor.  We are going to say that the ON/OFF signal going to the base resistor is either 12 volts or 0 volts.  I am not going to discuss basic transistor switching design here.  Here is a very basic description:  If you short one of the filaments of the coil to ground and measure the current through it, that tells you how much current the transistor has to sink when it is switched on.  If the current gain specification for the transistor you are using is 50, that means that you have to put 1/50th that amount of current through the transistor base input.  Supposing the short-circuit current is 2 amps.  Therefore you have to put (2/50) amps through the transistor base input to switch it on fully for the coil load.  Therefore the resistance you need is ((12-0.6V)/(2/50A)) = 285 ohms.  Then you add a "safety factor" and decrease the base resistance by a bit, say to 250 ohms.

That's it, there is no need to play with the base resistors after that is done.  We are assuming that you are not going to let your source battery voltage drop much past 12 volts.  

Honestly I wonder if for the 10-coiler, the individual transistors can even pull enough current to fully switch on the coils.  The short-circuit current for each strand of the coils might be much higher than 2 amps, but I am just speculating here.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that each individual base resistor is going to be 250 ohms.  That means the base current for each transistor is going to be ((12-0.6)/250) = 46 milliamperes.

So you have the "Delay" pulse that needs to switch on (9 x 8 ) = 72 transistors.  Each transistor base input will sink 46 milliamperes.

To do this I would use nine octal CMOS buffer chips.  These are off-the-shelf parts.  You may need the high-output-current versions, you would have to check the spec for the chip in question.

So here is the setup:

The "Duration" pulse from the second 555 monostable multivibrator gets fed into all of the inputs of the octal CMOS buffer chips.   Each output from each of the CMOS buffer chips goes into a 250 ohm base resistor for each individual transistor.

This allows you to turn on and off 72 transistors at the same time from a single control signal.  Honestly I wince at that and I wonder if the source battery could possibly supply all of that current to all 72 strands in the nine coils.  But, I did not design the thing and all that I can say is that I would be suspicious.  I would turn on all of the coils and measure the source battery voltage.  If the source battery voltage were to croak and drop below 10 volts in my opinion you would need a bigger and beefier source battery to meet the very high current demand.  On the other hand, it's possible that the amount of time the transistors are actually on when the motor is running is such that the coils never become fully energized so you don't have to worry too much about the maximum current draw of the motor.  Whichever way you look at it, it looks scary to me.

Note for this setup, the transistors always see a sharp and fast transition from OFF to ON to OFF.  This is exactly what you want.

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
Finally the third and last point:

3.  Some method of visually confirming what your transistor timing system is doing so you can tweak it and not be running your system "blind."

This one is very easy and incredibly useful.

Get black construction paper and glue it to the out edge of the rotor so that you make a ring that's about one inch thick.   Then carefully paint a straight white radial line that is exactly lined up with the TDC of each magnet.

Take your "Duration" signal from the second 555 monostable multivibrator and use that signal to drive a buffer chip that switches on and off about eight super-bright white LEDs.  You can run this whole setup off of a separate battery or power supply.

Arrange the eight super-bright LEDs in a line next to one of the coils.

So as the motor gets up to speed the LEDs will illuminate the white lines and give you visual confirmation of what you timing is for firing the coils relative to the TDC of the firing coil.  As you play with your "Delay" and "Duration" potentiometers you will see the timing changes in a scope-like display where the LEDs are set up.  It would be incredibly useful to have visual confirmation of what your transistor firing timing is relative to the spinning rotor.

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
Just some peanut gallery comments from lurking in the Yahoo Bedini group:

Quote
No. The purple flash indicates that the bulb is experiencing a higher voltage.
The metal electrodes within the bulb are evaporating as they break down. When
the circuit is powered off you will see that there is a black discoloration
inside the neon bulb. This indicates it is about to fail completely.

We have said probably hundreds of times that we do NOT recommend operating the
SSG with no charging battery connected, as every time you do this there is a
good chance that all of your semiconductors will be irreparably damaged. So
every time you operate the SSG without a charging battery just to see the purple
flash, you really should retest and probably replace all the transistors and
diodes.

Marcia

Actually Marcia, you don't have to worry about the diodes, they should be fine.

What everyone in the Yahoo Bedini groups should try to understand is how a discharging inductor actually works.  Without that fundamental piece of knowledge you are are all crippled in your ability to understand what you are doing.  From my readings, it is clear to me that Rick Friedrich and John Koorn do not understand this fundamental concept either.  They are welcome to come here to discuss and learn.  They are both in leadership positions so it is incumbent on them to know this stuff so they can teach others properly.

Moving on, some other goodies.  To quote Rick:

Quote
We just spent the last 5 days at the Coeur D'Alene Fair. It went well. I brought
and tried to sell my electric 1990 Honda which all the youth loved. I ran all
the kits constantly and had a really good response. Only two smart guys with too
many degrees to be good for anything had a problem. I asked the one guy how the
battery was charging in the SG circuit and he stood there for 20 minutes with a
smerk on his face and then put the picture frame down and walked away without a
word.

I find that incredibly hard to believe.  You are referring to your framed picture with your schematic of a Bedini motor.  Anybody with a reasonable knowledge of electronics would be able to explain to you exactly how your motor works and exactly how it charges the battery.  To be quite honest Rick, you are the one that needs to be taught how a Bedini motor works.

Finally, there is a huge flaw in the charging battery COP testing method that I wrote to some members in the Yahoo group about:

A poster to the group said the following about his or her charging battery COP testing:

Quote
I went with the higher number (20ma) for the Test Run.
The Test went from 12.47V to 14.50V in 20 hours and 51 minutes.
(5 AmpHr Battery)
Rested for 6 Hours down to 12.9V
Then Discharged for 2 hours and 33 minutes with a constant current Draw
of 250ma
to 12.2V
Rested for 5 Hours up to 12.5V

Is a Battery COP of 1.53 realistic???

Quoting myself:

Quote
There is a fundamental flaw in this logic.  Please don't be offended and
permit me to make my case and suggest how to overcome this flaw with a
copy/paste from my posting on my thread about the COP issue.  I hope
that's fair enough.

The flaw is this:  You are putting some energy in the charging battery
and measuring the ampere-hours.  That's fine.  HOWEVER, you are then
discharging the the charging battery in an arbitrary fashion. You have
no true idea of how much energy was *originally* in the charging battery
before you started the test.  Then you discharge the charging battery at
250 ma down to 12.2 volts and measure the total time and then crunch the
numbers and get a COP of 1.53.  I am assuming that 12.2 volts is your
"cutoff" point for making your COP measurement.  It sounds like it makes
sense, but you have a fundamental problem because you didn't know how
much energy was in the charging battery *before* your started charging
it.

I hope all three of you can see this.  In effect, your COP measurement
is dependent on the *total* energy in the charging battery and not
dependent on how much energy you put into the charging battery when you
ran your test. The big problem is that you don't know how much energy is
in the charging battery when you start your test.

I hope that the three of you can recognize this flaw in the logic.  The
COP value is going to vary depending on how much total energy is in the
charge battery at the end of the charging cycle.  You may know how many
ampere-hours you put in the charging battery, but you DON'T know how
many ampere hours were sitting in the charging battery before you
started charging it!

In the group there was some acknowledgment of this problem because a posting was done stating that they were going to review their charging battery COP testing method.  This was more than a week ago and since then there have been no updates.  Their current COP testing method is junk, they never account for how much energy might already be sitting in the charging battery before they start the COP testing.  I have to assume that this has been going on for years.  This will almost guarantee that you get artificially high COP numbers that suggest that "some magic" is going on in the charging battery because of the charging method.  This is a major problem that has to be fixed.

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
Here is an interesting little conversation that I had with someone on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rEZuRKKdRk

The experimenter below was commenting on a Bedini motor clip where the description is "Creating overunity for charging batteries.By useing magnents,and coils."  He thought that the person posting the clip might have found the "secret sauce" so I had the following brief conversation with him:

<Experimenter>:  Please can you share your build details. If this is really overunity then there are many people who would love to replicate it ( including me ). I've built various versions of this machine but obviously with different sized coils etc and none of them have performed with the effect you describe. They all lose energy if you keep swapping the batteries around the overall energy in the batteries decreases little by little.

<Me>: Don't be fooled into thinking that if you find the "right" configuration that you will get over unity. You results showing the continuous loss of energy as you keep swapping batteries are the right results. Any other configuration will do exactly the same thing. The Yahoo Bedini group people want you to believe that "magic" happens in the charging battery but it's not the case. Most Bedini experimenters don't know enough about electronics to understand what's going on.

<Experimenter>:  After a lot of experimentation I came to the same conclusion. I questioned one of the moderators about if they had seen overunity and they mentioned a few names (eg Tesla) of people who had proved it. Funny how the people making the claims are either dead or making money from it eh ? And all the while Bedinie's faithful flock keeps growing and wasting countless hours doing tests. The money doesnt bother me much but I feel like I've been fooled into wasting so many hours of life.

<Me>:  I looked at lots of the video clips and the postings of the moderators Rick Friedrich and John Koorn and quickly realized that they don't really know what they are talking about or doing when it comes to electronics. I know a fair amount about electronics so I am confident in my appraisal. I started a Bedini 10-coiler thread on the website overunityresearch and you are welcome to pass by.  There are lots of good tech points and sometimes the talk is tough, with justification.
« Last Edit: 2010-09-08, 15:59:43 by MileHigh »
   
Group: Guest
Quote
Okay so let's tackle these three points one by one.  I am going to give high-level descriptions of everything, no specific circuits.  If somebody wants to do any of this they are going to have to work with someone in a Bedini group that knows how to take the high-level descriptions and turn them into actual circuits.  Also, we are going to assume that the circuits described below are being powered from a 12-volt source battery.

1.  Flexible timing starting from TDC so that you can get more torque put into the rotor for each time you energize the coils.  You also want as fast as possible switching on and off for each transistor to eliminate wasted power dissipation in the transistors themselves.

This part is actually quite easy.  You need a 555 timer chip configured as a monostable multivibrator (a.k.a. one-shot) that is is triggered by the low-to high transition through zero volts from the pickup coil.  So this 555 circuit is always triggered at TDC by the passing magnet.  The length of the pulse is your delay from TDC before you switch on the transistors.  The length of the delay is controlled by a timing capacitor and a potentiometer.  You choose your component values so that the potentiometer gives you from nearly zero delay to an appropriate amount of delay as per your motor setup.  You can label this potentiometer "Delay"

The output from this triggers another 555 monostable multivibrator.  This second 555 circuit generates the actual pulse that switches on your transistors.  So you need another timing capacitor and potentiometer to determine the length of the ON pulse for the transistors.  You can label this potentiometer "Duration."

So, to summarize, you have a "Delay" potentiometer and a "Duration" potentiometer for controlling how much delay after TDC and for how long you switch on the transistors as the rotor turns.

An important note is that you loose the simplified self-timing that you get with a standard pick-up coil-based system when you do this.  So there will be a learning curve where you give the rotor a spin by hand and start adjusting the delay and duration potentiometers and see the resultant RPMs and charging that you get from the motor.

This system has a couple of big advantages, (a) You are consuming almost no power from the pick-up coil at all, you are only using the EMF from the coil to trigger the timing system.  Therefore the pick-up coil will not load the rotor down with any Lenz's Law drag at all.  (b) You can get more bang for your battery energy buck in terms of torque to make the rotor spin by adjusting the delay in firing the coils, (c) You have a certain measure of control over the back-EMF pulse output power from the coils by adjusting the duration that they are energized.

MileHigh

Excellent idea MileHigh. I will try that today.

Fausto.
   
Group: Guest
Fausto:

Good luck it would be very interesting to see that kind of setup.  If you read the whole thread you probably saw a few references to swapping the charging battery for a large capacitor in parallel with a resistor just to measure the average output power to the charging battery from the main coil.  The average output power is simply the capacitor voltage squared divided by the resistance.  I suggest using a resistor value so that when the motor is running at a typical speed the voltage across the capacitor stabilizes at about 15 volts.

If you did this setup you could then experiment with the "Delay" and "Duration" potentiometers and monitor the voltage across the capacitor.  Then you could convert the output voltage measurement to the actual output power from the motor in watts by using a calculator or a spreadsheet.  You could do this in real time, it is a trivial calculation.  This gives you real knowledge, where you can say with confidence that for a certain "Delay" and "Duration" setting your Bedini motor is outputting and average of X.XX watts of power into the charging battery.

Just to be clear I will repeat a key fact:  When you measure the output power of the motor with the capacitor-resistor setup, you can then swap the capacitor-resistor out and put back the charging battery.  Exactly the same amount of average output power will then be pumped into the charging battery.  It is a fundamental property of a discharging inductor, it does not matter what the load is, it always outputs the same amount of power.

Also, if you have a scope you can easily measure your pulse frequency.  Since you know the average output power, and the pulse frequency, you can then easily calculate the number of Joules of energy per pulse.

Knowledge is "power" and knowing the average output power of your Bedini motor and the number of Joules per pulse is very interesting.  You are moving out of the "fog" and into the "light" of self-enlightenment.

With this knowledge and by making a few other simple measurements you can easily calculate the inductance of your coil.  In other words, your don't need to buy an inductance meter, you can do the calculations yourself so that you get a better understanding of what is going on.

Probably the most interesting exploration would be by varying the length of the "Duration" pulse and then measuring the amount of energy per output pulse from the discharging coil.  What you will find out is that eventually you hit a "wall."  Another way to put it is that the "law of diminishing returns" comes into play here.  You probably know that as the coil becomes energized with current, eventually you reach a plateau and the current does not continue to increase as the "Duration" pulse gets longer.  If you know how an RL circuit works, eventually the current reaches a maximum value which is the battery voltage divided by "R."  "R" in this case is modeled by a few resistors in series:  1) the output resistance of the battery, 2) the "ON" resistance of the transistor, and 3) the resistance of the coil.

So as you increase the length of the "Duration" pulse the amount of energy per output pulse from the coil will at first increase.  Then as you continue to increase the length of the "Duration" pulse the output pulse energy will continue to increase but more slowly.  Eventually you will get to the point where you will see that further increases in the length of the "Duration" pulse will not give you increasing energy in the output pulse from the coil.  At this point the drive coil starts to act as a pure resistor and you are simply pouring battery energy down the drain if you increase the "Duration" pule past a certain amount of time.

Again, this gives you real knowledge about your motor.  You will know for yourself what length of "Duration" pulse is your preference for generating a given amount of average output power to the charging battery.  If you are familiar with the L/R time-constant for charging an inductor, most people would say that charging the inductor for one time-constant or less is preferable.  This strategy reduces ohmic resistive losses in the coil itself for a given amount of energy stored in the coil.

MileHigh
« Last Edit: 2010-09-11, 22:32:16 by MileHigh »
   
Group: Guest
Fausto:

A few more comments for your consideration:

In addition to all of this, I will also repeat something that I am sure that I said earlier in the thread.  If you put a low-pass filter between the supply battery and the Bedini motor itself, then you can make very accurate measurements of the average power consumption of the entire motor.  If you did this, then you could measure the average motor power consumption and the average output power to the charging battery as you experiment with different values of the "Delay" and "Duration" variables.  It can be argued that the "sweet spot" is the combination of "Delay" and "Duration" that gives you the maximum ratio for (average coil output power)/(average motor power consumption).

Note that all of this could be done in real time, all that you need are a few multimeters and a calculator.  Find the sweet spot and then put your charging battery in place and you now have optimized the configuration and timings for you Bedini motor.

Note also that I never mention the motor RPMs, another recurring theme in this thread.  The RPMs of a Bedini motor are meaningless if your goal is to optimize the charging efficiency of your motor.  I define charging efficiency as (average coil output power)/(average motor power consumption).

Just a final comment about Bedini motor RPMs.  Many Bedini enthusiasts are very interested in seeing how fast they can get their motors to spin.  When they do this they are forgetting about charging efficiency and just having fun.  The faster the motor spins, the more source battery power is wasted in having the rotor overcome air friction.  I believe that the air friction is proportional to the square of the rotor speed.  Therefore a very high speed Bedini motor rotor is simply wasting a significant percentage of the source battery power and turning it into heat power via air friction.

In other words, a very high speed Bedini motor is simply pouring source battery power down the drain and turning it into heat power due to the increased air friction.  This is power that is lost forever and never goes into the charging battery.

MileHigh
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-12-20, 04:02:45