Motor Generators

[bistander]

Thanks

Bistander,

.....

You will only frustrate yourself trying to reason with Bro Mikey. Reason is something he can not understand.

Respectfully,
Carroll

Thanks. I am aware of his condition and I am not frustrated.

bi

[bistander]

Poor efficiency

Okay someone was asking about maximum generator inefficiencies

and this video is starting to show us where Thanes gets the crazy

idea that these ReGenX coils could have an unlimited ceiling.

When one coil is used for testing the experiment looks almost

silly on the COP, however when more added we can begin to see

that electric motors will someday soon replace all other motors.

This video is all grown up and outputs more power than the motor

uses to run down the road.

The answer is correct "Infinite COP"

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QD1GGR5F1wg[/VIDEO]

Again. Another video showing terrible efficiency. Numbers right off his meters. 334 Watts input. 12.6 Volts, 3.9 Amps output for 49 Watts output. Efficiency is 14.7%.

[BroMikey]

Here is a low Lenz build.

[OrionLightShip]

Again. Another video showing terrible efficiency. Numbers right off his meters. 334 Watts input. 12.6 Volts, 3.9 Amps output for 49 Watts output. Efficiency is 14.7%.

No, no, no..... if mouse fart says infinite COP it must be so!

[BroMikey]

Back to the drawing board.

[Allen Burgess]

Again. Another video showing terrible efficiency. Numbers right off his meters. 334 Watts input. 12.6 Volts, 3.9 Amps output for 49 Watts output. Efficiency is 14.7%.

@bistander,

Thane's output is 86 volts at 3.9 amps: That's 335 watts or 100% COP!

[bistander]

12.6V under load

@bistander,

Thane's output is 86 volts at 3.9 amps: That's 335 watts or 100% COP!

It drops to 12.6V under load (when he connects the yellow clip).

[Allen Burgess]

Mistake.

It drops to 12.6V under load (when he connects the yellow clip).

@bistander,

The 1 reads as a 7 in the video! You just caught some reflection off the display window. At 2:59 in the video you can see the slight trace of the top of the number 7. The numbers disappear completely from the display window several times due to the reflection. It would make no sense at all to do a comparison video with that huge of a difference. Look at your snapshot: The top of the 1 is missing, along with the cross bar of the 7! The 1 should be visible extended right to the top of the 2.

That should place the COP at nearly 75% under load. Not too shabby!

[BroMikey]

Again. Another video showing terrible efficiency. Efficiency is 14.7%.

Okay i guess somebody had a slight error in numbers? Here is what
I got from that short video. After warm up to steady state

INPUT VOLTS = 101
INPUT AMPS = 3.9
RPM = 1400 approx.

Next these are the values I got from his blurry video for output
side coils. First we get the average voltage 72v all the way
up to 86v after 1400 RPM is reached.

This is a static condition of no load or non-loaded condition
therefore no amp reading is possible because current is not
flowing yet.

Next comes the loaded condition where the output readings
come into play verses input.

Input readings do not change upon loading and RPM increases
from 1400 RPM to 1700RPM approx.

INPUT VOLTS = 101
INPUT AMPS = 3.9
RPM = 1700 approx.

OUTPUT VOLTS = 127
OUTPUT AMPS = 3.89
RPM = 1700 approx.

This is where Thane says that the output exceeds the input.
The RPM going from 1400 - 1700 has a calculation also.

So in this case COP is over 1, some might say infinite because
the battery is saying charged while the motor runs and pulls
an EV down the road.

But that of course is not a practical expression in the real world
due to braking and not accounting for the period of time the
that the system has not reached the "CRITICAL MINIMUM"
operating frequency where extra energy can enter.

This is why Thanes say a 50 percent increase in distance is
their company goal.

Have a good day.

[bistander]

@bistander,

The 1 reads as a 7 in the video! You just caught some reflection off the display window. At 2:59 in the video you can see the slight trace of the top of the number 7. The numbers disappear completely from the display window several times due to the reflection. It would make no sense at all to do a comparison video with that huge of a difference. Look at your snapshot: The top of the 1 is missing, along with the cross bar of the 7! The 1 should be visible extended right to the top of the 2.

That should place the COP at nearly 75% under load. Not too shabby!

Sorry dude,

But I just looked at every frame and it is 12.6 not 72.6.

You'd think the guy should get a better shot of something like that, don't you? Or maybe a better meter?

12.6,

bi

[bistander]

OUTPUT VOLTS = 127
OUTPUT AMPS = 3.89
RPM = 1700 approx.

So BM sees a 1 in that digit but doesn't think there is a decimal point.



Here's what the decimal and a 7 look like in a frame near the beginning before he connects the load. 71.6

[Allen Burgess]

@bistander,

The top of the 1 is even with the top of the 6 above. The top of the 1 is shorter then the 2 in the other snap shot, enough to conceal the top of the 7!

[bistander]

@bistander,

The top of the 1 is even with the top of the 6 above. The top of the 1 is shorter then the 2 in the other snap shot, enough to conceal the top of the 7!

What is the resistance of his coil? And load?

[BroMikey]

Back to the drawing board.

[BroMikey]

Here again is proof or spoof? of an electric magnet
motor generator taking up very little space and
yet runs a 1000 watt load.

Naturally we all know it just can't be done, right?




Breakdown FOR THE NAYSAYERS