Effects of Recirculating BEMF to Coil

[gotoluc]

Hi everyone,

last night I decided to Test the (gotoluc) circuit with just batteries and here are the results to date.

The supply battery is one 12 volt 5 Amp/hr Sealed Lead Acid Battery and an identical battery is in series on the flyback return side instead of the resistor or bulb. The 555 PWM that controls the IRF840 is set at 5KHz with a 30% duty cycle.

Test started Tuesday 21st at 10pm

Supply Battery voltage 12.95

Charge Battery voltage 12.82

Test stopped Wednesday 22nd at 9pm and measured after 2 hours to allow stabilization.

Supply Battery voltage 12.91

Charge Battery voltage 12.90


The Batteries will be re-tested again tonight but I will exchange their position to establish if the charged battery has been charge with usable power.

I will post the results tomorrow evening at about the same time.

Stay tuned.

Luc

[rave154]

good idea !

great test there LUC, comparing apples-to-apples.....like it :-)

keep us informed ( *eager for the results NOWWWWWW !!! lol )

[gyula]

...
is this increase in magnetic field in the coil actually caused directly by the flyback???........it shouldnt be...because were told that HV flyback has little or no current and since it is current and not voltage that induces a megnetic field..the flyback should NOT induce any magnetic field..

Hi Dave,

If I may chime in with some thoughts, A flyback pulse in itself is a sharp / narrow voltage pulse (a kind of pulse source, created across a coil when you disrupt current in that coil) and this pulse is able to drive current (like any voltage source) whenever the loading impedance across this coil is of proper value to be able to pass current through via itself, i.e. if this loading impedance has a high value the current flow can only be small in it (consequently the flyback pulse can maintain a high amplitude) and in case the loading impedance has a low value the current flow can be high in it (so the flyback pulse gets proportionally smaller and smaller). An example for this latter case is when you place a diode across the coil, the flyback pulse's amplitude can only be as high as the forward voltage of the diode lets it: about 0.7V for an Si diode type, however the current can be quite high via this diode, ok?

removing the "output" bulb...and replacing it with another coil....so now i have two coils...first one as normal recieving the flyback.and the second coil with a magnet on top.

if the switch is set to NOT recycle flyback..when i run the circuit...there is absolutely no effect on the magnet sitting on top of the 2nd coil, however....when the switch for recycling flyback is turned on ...and then i run the circuit....immediately the magnet goes flying down into the core of the 2nd coil like a ferret down a rabbit hole !!!

is this proof that indeed flyback CAN induce a magnetic field?

Well, you may now also answer your question: The flyback pulse was created in the first coil due to the current's switch off in it and you loaded the flyback pulse thus created by a 2nd coil in which a current was forced to flow (and the flyback pulse from the 1st coil was the source i.e the force), and this current made your permanent magnet to move.

and finally, going back to having jusst a 2nd coil in the place of where the output bulb was.....

this time i placed the magnet inside the core resting on the desk...when i turn on the circuit with flyback recycling the magnet moves BUT..when i disconnect the power to the pwm...guess what happens?.,youve guessed it...the magnet jumps right up with a boost...just like the flash on the bulb.

This what I cannot answer, sorry, somehow the charge in the Bedini cap gains 4-6V extra from somewhere and this extra voltage in that cap causes the flash on the bulb or the magnet jump.

rgds, Gyula

[gotoluc]

Hi everyone,

a sneak update taken at 9:30am this morning of the exchanged batteries tested on the (gotoluc) circuit.

Both batteries are identical 12 volt 5 Amp/hr Sealed Lead Acid Batteries. One as supply and the other on charge in series on the flyback return side instead of the resistor or bulb. The 555 PWM that controls the IRF840 is set at 5KHz with a 30% duty cycle.

Test started Wednesday 22nd at 11pm

Supply Battery: previously at 12.82 and charged by circuit to 12.90

Charge Battery: previously used as supply at 12.95 and dropped to 12.91

Voltage check Wednesday 23rd at 9:30am while circuit still operating.

Supply Battery voltage now at 12.80 (under load voltage)

Charge Battery voltage 13.01 (under charge voltage)

It does appear that after a 10 hour period the battery charged from 12.82 to 12.90 went down faster (now used as supply battery) then the prior test which the supply battery started at 12.95 and dropped to 12.91 (after 2 hours of sitting time) and this was after a 24 hour period.

I'm off to work again but I'll let it run and stop it late this evening and post the results after a 2 hour settle down time.

Stay tuned.

Luc

[rave154]

LUC,

interesting, is that starting to imply that it is fluffy/phantom charge in the battery and not actual "real" charge?

going quickly back to your circuit, i stilll have two coils in parallel but with a bulb inbetween them, bulb lights & flashes as normal and magnets levitate and also jump upon disconnection.

the coils really sing when connected with flyback-recycled...with flyback turned off....no singing... the tone is a high pitched thin whine,not unliek a quiet dentist's drill ( brrrrr ! )

[gotoluc]

Hi everyone,

Test stopped Thursday 23rd at 10pm and measured after 2 hours to allow stabilization.

Supply Battery voltage 12.81

Charge Battery voltage 13.01


The Batteries will be re-tested again tonight but once again I'll exchange their position to better understand what is taking place.

I will post the results tomorrow evening at about the same time.

Stay tuned.

Luc

[gotoluc]

Hi everyone,

Test stopped Friday 24th at 9pm and measured after 2 hours to allow stabilization.

Supply Battery voltage 12.89

Charge Battery voltage 12.91

Well, I don't quite know what to make of this

Three days ago the battery that first started as supply was at 12.95 and dropped to 12.92 after 24 hours of supplying. It was swapped positions and it charged back up to 13.01 and again swapped position and now dropped down to 12.89

The battery that first was under charge started at 12.82 and went up to 12.90 after 24 hours of charging. It was swapped positions and went down to 12.81 and again swapped position and is now at 12.91

To me, I would conclude that even though the battery under charge are showing voltage gains after a 24 hour charge they seem to loose it (and more) after being swapped back as supply battery. The charge seems more superficial and drops faster after being put to work.

If someone can enlighten me on something that can do to improve the quality of the charge during the charging period so the battery perform better under load (like when charged with amps) it could help the results.

Other than that I see no real gain using this method. We need to keep in mind that the tests are only using 12vdc and could have a different effect using higher voltage.

I will recharge the batteries and try it with 3 identical batteries in series (36vdc) as supply and on the charge side as I have a total of 6 of these 12vdc 5AH sealed lead acid batteries on hand.

I'm open to suggestions.

Luc

[poynt99]

Luc,

Are you thinking of feeding the bemf into a series of 3 batteries (in series) or maybe feeding the 3 batteries in parallel?

Sorry if you already stated this, but what frequency and duty cycle are you using?

.99

[gotoluc]

Hi .99,

I was thinking of both sides in series but a test can be done with the charge side with 3 batteries in parallel. However, the problem I'm finding is the battery charge quality once placed under load is not holding up as good as a normal battery charge so one would think that 3 batteries in parallel may come to the same thing. Never know though until tested.

The frequency used on the 12vdc tests was 5KHz with a 30% duty cycle.

Luc

[poynt99]

Luc,

With the 3 source batteries in series, you'll be using roughly a 38V supply to pulse those charge batteries, compared to a 12.8V source.

The inductive kickback from the coil should be amplified quite a bit from the previous.

The conceptual idea behind obtaining effective charging of batteries using pulses, is to try to get the ions moving in the battery and take advantage of inertia to perpetuate the charging process, if that makes sense.

By hitting the ions in the batteries with a higher, but shorter impulse of current, this object might be achieved. This is what will result from using a 38V supply driving three 12V batteries in parallel.

You may also want to try varying the pulse width and frequency. Some say that batteries have a resonant frequency and so if we can find that frequency and pulse it accordingly, the idea is the battery will take on effective charge but at a fraction of the input energy required by conventional means.

How does that whet your appetite?

.99

PS. Another benefit of pulse charging batteries, is it keeps them de-sulfated (breaks down crystals) and operating at their highest efficiency...at least those are the claims

[gotoluc]

Hi .99,

okay, I will just do the test with the 3 in series at source and the 3 in parallel at charge.

I have heard about all those claims but not experienced any of them yet. You would think by now that a recommended frequency range that this works best at would be suggested.

Do you think if I sweep frequencies and duty cycle to obtain highest voltage rise at the charge batteries with the less drop in voltage at the source batteries would be the way to go?

Do you also think I should do a resistive load test on the 3 batteries in parallel and note the performance and then put them under charge in the pulse circuit would be a good idea?

Thanks for your suggestions.

Luc

[poynt99]

Hi .99,

Do you think if I sweep frequencies and duty cycle to obtain highest voltage rise at the charge batteries with the less drop in voltage at the source batteries would be the way to go?

I think this is one way to try to optimize the settings yes. It may not be such an easy thing to do though and get meaningful results. Battery voltage typically drops and increases fairly slowly right, so you would have to make a change in frequency/PW and monitor the voltages for a while to plot their changes, then make another change to frequency/PW and repeat to see if you're going in the right direction. Unless you had another idea? I'm no expert with batteries so there may be another way. Bedini (or maybe Lindemann or Rick Frederick) is the guy you need to talk to about this.

Do you also think I should do a resistive load test on the 3 batteries in parallel and note the performance and then put them under charge in the pulse circuit would be a good idea?

Thanks for your suggestions.

Luc

Again, I'm not the expert on batteries, but like MH suggested, to properly test before and after for any benefit, one probably need to do these type of load capacity tests.

Need to find someone with more battery charging/loading/testing experience than I.

.99

[gotoluc]

I think this is one way to try to optimize the settings yes. It may not be such an easy thing to do though and get meaningful results. Battery voltage typically drops and increases fairly slowly right, so you would have to make a change in frequency/PW and monitor the voltages for a while to plot their changes, then make another change to frequency/PW and repeat to see if you're going in the right direction. Unless you had another idea?

Well, it's easier for me to see voltage changes since my quality meter displays an extra 3 digits! example 12.76329 vdc. This was one of the main reasons I got this meter.

Again, I'm not the expert on batteries, but like MH suggested, to properly test before and after for any benefit, one probably need to do these type of load capacity tests.

Need to find someone with more battery charging/loading/testing experience than I.

.99

Okay. I'm sure most would agree that a baseline test should be done so we have at least something to compare with.

Luc

[witsend]

exemplary thread gotoluc. I never seem to have time to look at other threads and I'm missing out. I shall make a point of doing so in future. And such interesting results. I hope we'll be able to snaffle you for some of our own tests in due course. Can't wait.

And all the best on your trip.

[gotoluc]

Hi Rosemary,

thanks for looking and your positive comment.

Many of the post here that would be of interest to you I have also posted in your topic so that you can be aware of tests or results. However, those who chose to reply here, the discussion stays here. Also, now that you posted here you should get an email notice of any new posts here.

Luc