More watts ... ? Please, replicate, and leave feedback !

[sigzidfit]

purpleflasher

Inquorate,

Tried to catch the purple flash on video. I know, my cam sux. Maybe you can see it though. It's there trust me.

YouTube - purpleflasher

Peace
PJ

[marseye]

Just can't believe it : I've burned 4 NE555 during these last 2 days...
Though they were protected by a diode preventing any + to get back through the ground... Too bad, since my job doesn't allow me to go to the electronic shop during the week when it's open... grrrrrrrrr.....
I've burned 2 2N3055 either... Beware of the HV sparks jumping from the coil's center plug to the + or the - of the same coil, as it seems that it's why my components fryed suddenly.

[nvisser]

[QUOTE=marseye;64779]To be honest : when a cfl is attached, the charging process to a destination battery is really slow. Seems like the most extra energy is burned into the cfl.
They say that energy cannot be destroyed. If you allow it to flow through a load back to the battery you are killing the dipole and you loose the energy
If you let it flow through a load into another battery you can actually charge that battery with the same energy. The load is between the 2 positives or the 2 negatives
It is like when you connect the other side of the bulb to the positive
The same way bedini charge the 2nd battery on the ssg. The other side of the charging battery is not connected to the negative of the drive battery but to the +.
If you connect it to the – , the drive battery will supply the load through the coil and transistor and diode when the transistor switch and that is undesirable as you only want the bemf to switch to the bulb.
Look at the following. It is a lot like the tesla switch. The energy are re-used over and over and only gets wasted by the leakage of the caps
http://www.anomalies.net/archive/Kee...s/FLEXFLO2.GIF
or all of it here:
http://www.keelynet.com/expcirc/flexflo.zip

If you charge a battery that way and your load draws a lot of current, a lot of current also goes to your charge battery and you loose some energy because your battery cannot charge so fast and store all the energy so fast and efficient
To do that you need 2 parallel batteries (12v) and 2 series batteries(24v) with the load between the positive or the negatives
Look at The explanation on the tesla switch on page 8 of this pdf
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapter5.pdf

[marseye]

They say that energy cannot be destroyed. If you allow it to flow through a load back to the battery you are killing the dipole and you loose the energy
If you let it flow through a load into another battery you can actually charge that battery with the same energy. The load is between the 2 positives or the 2 negatives

That's ok, that's what I was doing until my components got fryed...

... It is a lot like the tesla switch. The energy are re-used over and over and only gets wasted by the leakage of the caps
http://www.anomalies.net/archive/Kee...s/FLEXFLO2.GIF
or all of it here:
http://www.keelynet.com/expcirc/flexflo.zip

I could get the .zip, but the previous link took me to an endless loop... (Just for info). Anyway : usefull pointing, thanks.

If you charge a battery that way and your load draws a lot of current, a lot of current also goes to your charge battery and you loose some energy because your battery cannot charge so fast and store all the energy so fast and efficient
To do that you need 2 parallel batteries (12v) and 2 series batteries(24v) with the load between the positive or the negatives
Look at The explanation on the tesla switch on page 8 of this pdf
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapter5.pdf

That's ok too. You're right to send me back to such references, since that's certainly what I'm lacking of for now, and it's really a usefull info to remember just now for me. Thanks again, very wise from you, nvisser.

Just spent 2 hours on an online electronic shop where I finally had filled my basket with all these things that were meant to be usefull ( and to overcome the fact that I can't go physically to the 'one' shop in town during the week). Until I found that the site is closed until the end of the month (I had stopped there, hoping for a 3 days delivery...).
Definitely not my day....
Oh, sorry, nvisser, in fact you really did brighten it again for me. Great advices, nevertheless. Thank you.

[barbosi]

They say that energy cannot be destroyed.

If you didn't know that, "They" are right. It cannot be created either.

[rave154]

SIGZIDFIT,

congrats, you are now (along with INQ & myself ) a member of the purple flasher club

MARSEYE,

try putting some brown packing tape over the HV output of the coil, apparently its just about the best insulation for HV out there at a cheap price.

David. D

p/s, you might want to check out the "recycling BEMF" thread that GOTOLUC started and has championed ( with my own wee inputs here and there )...your circuit and the GOTO circuit are not a million miles away from each other.

[rave154]

cap swapper

hi,
not sure is this is even the right thread to post this in..but...here goes..


see attatchment..

C1 is fully charged, C2 is empty.

the "switching circuit" basically switches between state-1 and state-2.

each time in state-1, the motor is disconnected, the middle cap is connected and charges up.

in state-2, the middle is disconnected from the main circuit and the motor is connected to C! and C2, at the same time the middle cap is connected to a bulb as a secondary output ( the motor is the primary output )

it " seems" that by constantly "dipping" the middle cap in & out..you can milk off the flow between C1 and C2 without diminishing the output on the motor...

but of course....wont know until i can figure out the circuitry for the switching-circuit.

if it does indeed work, then there is nothing to stop us from using more than one middle cap...each connected to its own bulb.

what do you think?

David. D

[marseye]

David,
I think this is an interesting idea. And if I could predict any result, I'd say that it should work.
Your scheme could save some electricity, for moderate work, when all the power coming from the motor is not needed, as seen in the rotoverter at Panacea University. Unless I'm mistaking.
Wouldn't simple impulses do the same job, distributing only a certain amount of current ? Just a thought, since this scheme seems not to be creating any extra energy... And your bulb's cap must be grounded to allow the current to flow... into the ground.

[rave154]

MARSEYE,

it should work(s) as follows....
when the cap is in circuit and not the motor......it charges up as C-1 partially discharges to C-2...

once this has happened, the cap is taken out of circuit and replaced by the motor which can continue to do its work....meanwhile the charged cap is now discharged through the bulb (or whatever you want to put across it )...


and the same cycle repeats....the point about the middle cap is that it charges without "stealing" any of the charge of C-1 as it passes to C-2 ( IF it works )

hope this makes sense now

David. D

[marseye]

Mmmmh... My own dream is to find something solid state, with no moveable part... I try as much as I can to stay away from relays.

Just watched 2 very interesting videos about Tesla's Longitudinal Waves, found @ Free-Energy Devices, zero-point energy, and water as fuel (down the home page, among some other incredible videos) with Eric Dollard and Peter Lindemann. Very good presentations and demonstrations about what Tesla really meant, talking about different types of electricity. A must see !

[gyula]

hi,
not sure is this is even the right thread to post this in..but...here goes..


see attatchment..

C1 is fully charged, C2 is empty.

the "switching circuit" basically switches between state-1 and state-2.

each time in state-1, the motor is disconnected, the middle cap is connected and charges up.

in state-2, the middle is disconnected from the main circuit and the motor is connected to C! and C2, at the same time the middle cap is connected to a bulb as a secondary output ( the motor is the primary output )

it " seems" that by constantly "dipping" the middle cap in & out..you can milk off the flow between C1 and C2 without diminishing the output on the motor...

but of course....wont know until i can figure out the circuitry for the switching-circuit.

if it does indeed work, then there is nothing to stop us from using more than one middle cap...each connected to its own bulb.

what do you think?

David. D

Hi David,

I wonder what you think how many times the switching sequences can be repated (starting from a fully charged C1) ?
Because As I see this, it may be repeated 3 or 4 times only and then all the charges from all the three capacitor are used up, (what is more the just newly charged cap voltage values will be of a gradually diminishing amplitude, unfortunately). I say this by my common sense because I cannot see any reason why the charges should stay in the caps for any longer time than a few switching sequences?
There is one more thing I notice: when you switch in the motor between C1 and C2, it is sure that at the end of this sequence the voltage amplitudes of those two caps will be the same and if so how could you expect to get any charge get into the middle cap when you switch it in right after the motor? simply there will not be any voltage difference which could drive any charge into Cmiddle, unfortunately.

If you say that you would not use so long time duration for any state when the motor is just switched in between C1 and C2, that is fine, then you could postpone the total working time for the whole set up... but then I also think a game over is due soon.

Of course these are my thoughts, I have not done such tests with three caps and a motor like you propose so do not take me for granted but go ahead and try it.

Thanks, Gyula

PS: If I recall, member poynt99 has uploaded a pdf file at overunity.com some months ago on doing charge transfer between two capacitors via directly and via a suitable chosen inductance value (i.e. via a coil). He showed that the 50% loss by the direct charge transfer can be greatly reduced by using a coil to get a transfer loss of 5-10% only instead of the 50%. But this still not ou, unfortunately...

[marseye]

Please guys,
Do not think that I'm feeling here like at home, but I'd like this thread to stay focused around the initial experiments which led me to write these lines at first.

I personnaly dislike the threads that became too large because discussions tend to a progressive change from the initial subject.
I'd really appreciate that a new specific thread be created for David's idea. Surely, this may attract more like minded people (like minded : I mean 'about a particular subject'...) for great contributions.

Sorry if I seem rude, I didn't intend to be so (English is not my native language, but you can guess that easy, right ?).

I wonder sometimes if a chat room dedicated to renewable energies would be welcome (and possible) in Aaron's walls (with the same reserved accounts' names, of course) ?

[rave154]

MARSEYE,

i will quickly reply to gyula, then i will make a seperate thread for this topic to avoid disrupting your thread here :-)

the original schematic i have is setyup as i posted, so i tried it by hand, and sure enough could flip through the sequencemany times, i was hoping that if i could find a way to automate the switching...and place a battery behind C-1 so to speak, so that the charge from C! would function as in the diagram, but C1 would get trickle charged from the battery
then things might get intersting.. we shall see i guess... i realy could do with some help figuring out how to wire up a 4013B flip flop with a 555 circuit to produce to opposite outputs.....ie....when output 1 is high, output 2 is low....and vie versa.....i have zero knowledge of the 4013B

Gyula, if you respond to this....respond to the new thread i am going to make.......thanks