Open discussion for projects on this forum.

[bistander]

Voltage

When I put my volt meter on a battery, what am I measuring?

You are measuring the potential difference (also called voltage) across the battery terminals.

[bistander]

Stock motor

I have not run the generator with a modified motor in a really long time. Here’s why. When I first replicated the little two coil unit run with the modified motor that Matt built, it worked. So I tried to build a 12 coil machine run by the same motor. The amp draw burnt the motors up. So I got another one, rewound it, and burnt it up within a couple days. It made NO SENSE to me to go through all that work of rewinding the motor and then have it burn up, so I resolved to use STOCK motors until I was sure I had the magnetic cogging issue solved. I even went to a rewound MY1020 and burnt it up. I still have it, minus some chunks of the commutator that blew off when it arced. So the numbers of 24 volts at 12 amps are running a STICK MY1020 on my big 12 coil machine with magnetic cogging eliminated. If you build the generator I detailed in the video the amp draw will be LESS. I guarantee it!!

So after all that crap Turion gave me about my test being invalid because I used a stock motor (not the Matt modded motor), it turns out that he (Turion) uses a stock motor. Allllrightyyythen.

bi

[bistander]

Which motor was it?

Yes I do use a stockmotor, but I am NOT running the generator on a 3 Battery setup either. It is a prototype test setup and I am working with it as a STAND ALONE device. I run tests and want the fewest variables possible when I do that. If you want the BEST results, use ALL the right parts. Or DON’T. I could really care less WHAT you do.

When you ran the test which gave 2,000 watts output from the generator, were you using a modified motor or a stock motor with the 300 watt input?

[bistander]

All about the generator

The generator output is not dependent on the MOTOR other than the rpm it turns the generator at. Both modified and stock motors can deliver the rpm necessary for the generator to put out 2000 watts. Probably lots of other motors can too. And they will probably ALL do it for less than 400 watts input to the motor, IF magnetic cogging is eliminated. The advantage the modified motor has when run in the correct circuit is how much of that 400 watts can be RECOVERED and reused. That’s all. It isn’t magic. It isn’t the ONLY motor that will run the generator. It is just the most EFFICIENT method I have found. If you’re only going to build a one or two coil generator, you need to take advantage of every trick we have found. If you’re going to build a 10-12,coil generator, all the little tricks aren’t necessary, but they DO improve your overall COP.

I have gotten over 2000 watts out of the generator with the stock MY1016, the modified 1016, the stock MY1020, and the modified MY1020. I have also burnt up all four kinds of motors when there was too much magnetic cogging. There have been fmany different versions of my generator, and I have probably tried all four possible motors on all of them at one time or another to see what would happen. It isn’t like I only burnt up ONE rewound motor and then quit using them.

If you’re going to try to get the recovery circuit working efficiently WITHOUT the Matt motor, you are on your own.

So, again, you are saying that the motor driving the generator can be "any" electric motor. And that your generator will output 2000 watts while requiring the motor to use 300 or 400 watts of input power. That is a incredible claim. Again I ask for proof.

BTW, your use of the term "magnetic cogging" infers it is the load torque. It is not. There are good definitions on Google search for "magnetic cogging in generators". There are also a couple of excellent papers on the subject listed on the first Google page.

Carry on,

bi

[NROC]

bistander

Hey bistander,

I can appreciate what your saying in some of your posts but if you only argue theory with someone your never going to change your mind. Even if they gave you proof I'm not even sure that would change your mind either.

So I think the only real solution is to just build something small to prove the principle to yourself. If the reason for not building something is because of financial outlay then save up for parts for the small one. If you don't find the results to be satisfactory or in keeping with whats been mentioned then sell your parts, yeah you'll make a loss on it but probably not that much. To be honest there's probably people on here who would buy them from you. The actual risk of taking on the project isn't really that big in the grand scheme of things.

I can see your trying to catch Dave out on any little thing he's saying but what is the endgame of that? In my experience it doesn't really get you anything. There's so much information and other replicators out now to make one and even some underlying theory to help you understand it. Come on have a go!

Can I ask what your background is?

Best
N

[citfta]

So, again, you are saying that the motor driving the generator can be "any" electric motor. And that your generator will output 2000 watts while requiring the motor to use 300 or 400 watts of input power. That is a incredible claim. Again I ask for proof.

BTW, your use of the term "magnetic cogging" infers it is the load torque. It is not. There are good definitions on Google search for "magnetic cogging in generators". There are also a couple of excellent papers on the subject listed on the first Google page.

Carry on,

bi

Hello Bi,

I am not sure why you are being deliberately obtuse. Dave has several times explained why he has used different motors for different purposes. It all depends on what he is trying to accomplish. And all of his testing is for the purpose of trying different things to see what works best. He has found some things that work better than others and freely shared those results.

Dave knows exactly what magnetic cogging is. He has also explained that many times on this and other forums. He is clearly referring to the attraction of the rotor magnets to the cores of the generating coils. NOT the torque load of the Lenz effect. And he has a proven method for eliminating that cogging. I know it is proven because the first prototype that Matt designed he sent to me and I assembled it and with a couple of hours of adjusting proved you could reduce the current draw considerably by reducing the magnetic cogging.

Please read Dave and Matt's posts in the context of earlier posts. Just picking a post without understanding the context of earlier posts and then criticizing it is not helping anyone.

Respectfully,
Carroll

[Ufopolitics]

[....]

Dave knows exactly what magnetic cogging is. He has also explained that many times on this and other forums. He is clearly referring to the attraction of the rotor magnets to the cores of the generating coils. NOT the torque load of the Lenz effect.

[....]

Respectfully,
Carroll

Hello Citfta, hello All,

Well...sorry to jump in all the sudden, but I've been reading all this OPEN discussion here, just to follow and learn, however after reading your above statement between cogging and Lenz...I feel kind of confused, so please correct me in the event am wrong.

I will start by my understanding of "Magnetic Cogging":

As I understand, magnetic cogging relates to PERMANENT MAGNET ELECTRODYNAMIC MACHINES ONLY. As it could ALSO relate to the MOTOR COGGING and NOT ONLY RELATED TO GENERATORS.

Magnetic Cogging takes place NO MATTER IF MACHINE IS LOADED OR NOT (Understanding General Term "machine" includes MOTORS and/or GENERATORS)

Now, LENZ LAW applies ONLY when Generator is LOADED, understanding it is a REACTION OR REACTIVE FORCE against previous FARADAY POSITIVE INDUCTION LAW.

If We have an ELECTROMAGNETIC ROTOR AS EXCITER in a given Generator (and NOT PERMANENT MAGNETS)...as long as we don't apply an ELECTRICAL LOAD at gen output...there would be EXACTLY; ZERO MAGNETIC COGGING.(this is NOT ON DEBATE, AM SURE OF THIS FACT, SINCE I HAVE TESTED IT MANY, MANY TIMES...only the typical friction plus weight of rotor...and brushes if not brushless is all We feel.)

Now...Am I correct so far?

Thanks in advance for your assistance Citfta...I feel our discussions on a type of Forums like this should always be done for the greater education and enlightenment of our readers/viewers...no matter if logged in members or just visitors.


Sincerely



Ufopolitics

[bistander]

New guy

Hey bistander,

I can appreciate what your saying in some of your posts but if you only argue theory with someone your never going to change your mind. Even if they gave you proof I'm not even sure that would change your mind either.

So I think the only real solution is to just build something small to prove the principle to yourself. If the reason for not building something is because of financial outlay then save up for parts for the small one. If you don't find the results to be satisfactory or in keeping with whats been mentioned then sell your parts, yeah you'll make a loss on it but probably not that much. To be honest there's probably people on here who would buy them from you. The actual risk of taking on the project isn't really that big in the grand scheme of things.

I can see your trying to catch Dave out on any little thing he's saying but what is the endgame of that? In my experience it doesn't really get you anything. There's so much information and other replicators out now to make one and even some underlying theory to help you understand it. Come on have a go!

Can I ask what your background is?

Best
N

Hi N,

Hard for me to know how long you've been following this. But please review this. http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post311870.

Here I built and tested, documented and presented, the system Turion recomended. Instead of reasonable discussion, it quickly deteriorated into insults and personal attacks towards me. Nobody else has built and posted results on that system.

I also comment about some of my experience in that sequence. But I have said before, look at the content of my posts. What difference does my background make?

All I am after here is one specific thing. The motor/generator test with 2000 watts output power and 300 watts input power. Turion claims he has done this. Such a machine would change the world. Yet, apparently, he has it packed away in a box.

Regards,

bi

[bistander]

Obtuse

Hello Bi,

I am not sure why you are being deliberately obtuse. Dave has several times explained why he has used different motors for different purposes. It all depends on what he is trying to accomplish. And all of his testing is for the purpose of trying different things to see what works best. He has found some things that work better than others and freely shared those results.

Dave knows exactly what magnetic cogging is. He has also explained that many times on this and other forums. He is clearly referring to the attraction of the rotor magnets to the cores of the generating coils. NOT the torque load of the Lenz effect. And he has a proven method for eliminating that cogging. I know it is proven because the first prototype that Matt designed he sent to me and I assembled it and with a couple of hours of adjusting proved you could reduce the current draw considerably by reducing the magnetic cogging.

Please read Dave and Matt's posts in the context of earlier posts. Just picking a post without understanding the context of earlier posts and then criticizing it is not helping anyone.

Respectfully,
Carroll

Respectfully citfta,

Obtuse or not, Turion claims he has a machine which outputs 2000 watts while using only 300 watts input. I want him to stand behind his claim and prove it. What's wrong with that?

And I have been reading his threads for many years. I know what he says.

bi

[bistander]

Magnetic cogging

...
Dave knows exactly what magnetic cogging is. ...

The generator output is not dependent on the MOTOR other than the rpm ... generator to put out 2000 watts ... ALL do it for less than 400 watts input to the motor, IF magnetic cogging is eliminated. ...

It doesn't appear so.

[NROC]

Hey bistander,

I saw what post you sent me to on the 3bgs thread and followed what you did. Its a joke to be honest. You said you wanted reasonable discussion and they tried to provide you with answers. Why didn't you just make a modified motor?

Looking at the content of your posts you seem to say big words but its basically you going on google and looking at the first thing you see to make you sound like the big man. The reason I ask about your background is so I can be certain of your experience. Since you have not said anything apart from something to the effect of - you worked with some motors.

Your a troll plain and simple, if you can genuinely point me to some credible published work you did ill listen to you. As it stands see you around.

N

[bistander]

Make the motor?

Hey bistander,

I saw what post you sent me to on the 3bgs thread and followed what you did. Its a joke to be honest. You said you wanted reasonable discussion and they tried to provide you with answers. Why didn't you just make a modified motor?

Looking at the content of your posts you seem to say big words but its basically you going on google and looking at the first thing you see to make you sound like the big man. The reason I ask about your background is so I can be certain of your experience. Since you have not said anything apart from something to the effect of - you worked with some motors.

Your a troll plain and simple, if you can genuinely point me to some credible published work you did ill listen to you. As it stands see you around.

N

Turion has said it doesn't need the modified motor. He didn't specify the motor when he posted the diagram and told people to make it with parts they had.

I know motors. The modification to that motor is terrible. I resist building junk. We have just seen two guys test the modified motor and confirm this. I don't think it would run in that circuit. Nobody has shown that it will.

What benefit is there for me to build something I know will fail? It is up to the guy making the claim to support the claim.

And what answers did I get. They could not even tell me the objective of the test. Matt started to build it but quickly stopped and never finished. Turion, like always, claims he did but recorded no data or photos.

You ever think that I am the voice of reason, logic, fact and truth and Turion and Matt are the bad guys?

Regards,

bi

[ricards]

same question baack

..

You ever think that I am the voice of reason, logic, fact and truth and Turion and Matt are the bad guys?

Regards,

bi

bi,

What benefit is there for us If we believe you?...

There is no "bad guys". just independent researchers who could not get along well.

I understand where you are standing, but to keep insisting for proof of someone who has a conflict of Interest isn't really smart.

[bistander]

Answers

bi,

What benefit is there for us If we believe you?...

Hi ricards,

Thanks for the civil questions. Benefit? Fact. Truth. And please, don't just believe me. Look it up. Research it. Try it. At least think about it.

There is no "bad guys". just independent researchers who could not get along well.

Bad guys. Ever notice that I don't namecall and try to be polite. Bad guys were not the first words which came to mind, but I was hoping to make a point without falling to the level of Matt. He is outright vulgar.

I understand where you are standing, but to keep insisting for proof of someone who has a conflict of Interest isn't really smart.

Everytime I request proof of evidence is when Turion makes the claim of an over-unity machine. I honestly do not see what's wrong with that? After all these years of bad physics and bad math and excuses, anybody else starting to think they are mistaken about their claims? I do.

I don't understand what is the conflict of interest. Please explain.

Regards,

bi

[ricards]

Can't you tell?

Bi,

I dunno but I can clearly tell that He (turion) instinctively wants to tell what he knows yet his plans on his machine tells him not to.

I did try and researched, and found that there really is something worth looking at the a pulse motor in a 3 battery arrangement.

There is nothing wrong about asking for proof, whats wrong is to ask it repeatedly to someone who clearly doesn't like you. I know this a Open forum where an Open discussion should takes place, but see there are just some people who likes to draw little circles around them and shoo away those they don't like, they were Mean to you, you should've taken the hint.

I should mention too, that a single battery and a pulse motor with generator coils. Ala bedini style.. It is worth something, just not that something you could use large scale. But its still there, the concept that is the recovery of electrical energy after using it to generate mechanical motion