|
I'm a bit behind, so bear with my last post on this thread, please.
Nice that the Hydrometer was mentioned, again. (That's kinda what I meant by specific gravity. Add a load test and that is very close to a "True" charge level on a battery. I have also done a little with the "Pulse Charge" stuff, and this test IS required. SG should be enough, but SG and Load is best. Voltage test on most rechargable batteries is a waste, for the most part. Gel cells and Sealed cells are even more of a pain, but that is not a discussion for this thread.)
All these "Complex" electrical tests are completely part of the "Smoke". Stop falling into the "Trap". No over-thinking allowed.
Remember the "KISS" rule, as if it is not followed, the word "Scam" applies. (Even if they are only scamming themselves.) I would not doubt that some that are involved with this actually are convinced they have what they say they have.
Last Time! Start with ANY setup, measure the "True" charge on the batteries. Run with "ANY" amount of load for some unmeasured amount of time, by itself. Measure the "True" charge on the batteries. THIS is the only useful OU test. Any more than this assumes this test passes already and is pure smoke and mirrors. If OU, the charge increases by some amount. Decrease means junk. End Of Test.
Of course, IF this passes, then the power, flows, etc. become VERY important, but they are ALL After the OU fact. I can put this simply, for those who are just reading this, without commenting. We want to know if the engine RUNS, NOT HOW WELL IT RUNS. This eliminates sweet spots and all "Mystery". Who Cares! The tester can tweak any way they like to get it to RUN OU. If they cannot do that SIMPLE thing, then "Baffle them with BS" is the only recourse. I notice that the OU researchers avoid even discussing this little aspect. Does this make it clear?
I'll drop out now and leave this to those who have the willpower. The other references I found, as I got no useful links here, all have the same deceptive (or questionable?) tone, as the basic first test is avoided. Why? The answer should be obvious. Any OU researcher with a few hours of actual bench time with batteries is fully aware of this stuff. Bits, are you saying your group is not?.......(No Answer Required nor Desired! I'm not saying "I Think". I won't type the words I would like to use. I am sorry for even that remark, but your comments speak for themselves. Is there a device that can increase the standard charge, operating by itself? Of the dozen or so Bedini - style devices I have personally replicated, I haven't seen one pass the basic test. They WILL do certain other things, but that is a different story. I WILL NOT get into the charge recovery of sulfated cells with pulse charging, as that provides false data, as you should already know. I also discount pure RE charged cells, for reasons you should understand, assuming you have preformed the basic, initial, proof of concept test. All I mean to say is, no pulsed or inductive "loads" are acceptable for charge quantity testing, for obvious reasons. AFTER the OU Test, anything is acceptable, but NOT BEFORE. A simple true test would be NO batteries, except for starting, but I have not even seen a design for that concept. My apologies for coming on so strong. I promise to stay away, from now on. If you ever show either the simple test or the Cap test that I can replicate then I'll shout to the world how wrong I am, but till then.....)
MileHigh, Thanks for the answers to the questions I put to you. You are correct in that such a discussion should be in another thread, although I think I mentioned that too. As that gets too long, and too crazy, I doubt such a thread will prove fruitful for quite a while and I certainly won't be the one to start it. I do appreciate the response as it gives me insight into your positions on many concepts. Nice, solid, reality based. I would make only one suggestion for thought. Remember Einstien's quote, which I always take to heart: "Imagination is more important than knowledge." You seem to easily have enough of the knowledge part, and with a little imagination, I think you could go very far in this area of study. (I'm not being a kiss-a**. Just my opinion.)
I must now avoid this topic, as certain battles are outside my abilities to handle. It is certainly not worth me spending my time on something I'm not proficient at and I'm never going to convince those that "Worship" at the "Ministry", anyway. Those that are willing to continue this fight are better than I, but that is just not where my skills are. I prefer the Actual bench work to the "Social" work.
Thank-you for allowing me to post, even though my attitude is not acceptable. Certain things just get to me. Sorry, again.
Good luck to all.
|
Author
Topic: Bedini 10-Coil Alternative Discussion (Read 72872 times)
