Reactive Power Generator (RPG) Replication Project

[Aaron]

7.25 compared to our fake it estimate of 10 isn't that far off and is believable.

One of the other charts on that site shows some Ah estimates at 1/10th as well so glad to see we were in the ballpark.

But, I wonder what their Ah rating is based on in terms of discharge hours because there's no way those Ah ratings are for 20 hours, which is the standard discharge rate for the posted Ah on deep cycles.

You could literally establish your own 20 hour discharge Ah rating for the starter battery by simply finding out how many amps the full charge battery will deliver steadily until it is at 12.00 volts. Actually, that is pretty useful to know that. Then the same for how long it will power x amps down to 12 over 10 hours and then the 5 hour rating.

For test equipment, battery capacitor analyzers, shorting type testers, etc. - basically, there isn't one that ever gives an accurate number and they're all flawed but are good enough to see maybe the parking lot of the ballpark. B & K battery capacity analyzer was tweaked by their company to my understanding at a certain point because of the feedback that Bedini gave them.

Here is some battery equipment that everyone in this field should have - it gives a constant current discharge based on your specs and graphs it so you can actually see exactly what your battery is providing, etc. and then when you charge the battery, it can graph that too so you can see when it's actually charged. These are a MUST HAVE - I still have a few.

https://www.westmountainradio.com/pr...oducts_id=cba5

All the charge/discharge tests for all the chargers and charge controllers here were done with that CBA IV - https://teslachargers.com/

You can use any resistive load like ohmite power resistors, incandescent bulbs, etc. that you calculate to give you the desired amp draw and measure the time - you don't need this equipment, but it is a time saver, you don't have to babysit it, etc.

[rs__]

JB told me when I first talked to him that you take the CCA / 20 = Ah. Ah / 20 = 20 hour discharge current rate.... I am not sure what Peter L. recommends. So 650cca / 20 = 32.5Ah / 20 = 1.625 Amps for 20 hours. But when you have very well conditioned and charged battery's, and are doing fast swaps, 5min or less at say 4-5A, than You are only stealing the surface charge, and are not running down the battery's very much each cycle. Then if your SSG is putting out 750V + spikes they should recover each cycle easily.

[ggx9]

I've seen very high voltage spikes often mentioned being fed into a 12 volt battery but in actuality I think the battery will act somewhat as a voltage regulator and so that voltage spike may not go much above 16 volts though the current spike may last only a few microseconds and go to 1,000 amps or more. IR losses and high frequency skin effect will likely be high. I wonder how often these high voltage/high current spikes are just theorized or actually measured. And under these conditions it would be necessary to switch between two battery packs because most loads will be damaged by such spikes and you dont want to damage your inverter or refrigerator for example.
I hope Aaron will comment on this.

[Energy_Hack]

GGX9,

I have noticed the same phenomenon. The Mosfet will register a large spike (hundreds of volts) but the battery only a couple volts during the same event.

It seemed to me this is due to the battery being such a large energy sink in comparison to the tiny Mosfet.

EH

[Aaron]

JB told me when I first talked to him that you take the CCA / 20 = Ah. Ah / 20 = 20 hour discharge current rate.... I am not sure what Peter L. recommends. So 650cca / 20 = 32.5Ah / 20 = 1.625 Amps for 20 hours. But when you have very well conditioned and charged battery's, and are doing fast swaps, 5min or less at say 4-5A, than You are only stealing the surface charge, and are not running down the battery's very much each cycle. Then if your SSG is putting out 750V + spikes they should recover each cycle easily.

So John is way less generous than Peter's comment of cca/ 10, which to my recollection was in conversations with John. The link Donald shows definitely looks like some empirical tests to show /7 to /10 range for sure and even less with /20.

Each starter battery from the charts on that page Donald linked to has a wide difference between them. Looks like it comes down to each person needing to find the load from full charge down to 12.00 volts for their own battery in order to see what their own 20, 10 or 5 hour discharge is.

[Aaron]

I've seen very high voltage spikes often mentioned being fed into a 12 volt battery but in actuality I think the battery will act somewhat as a voltage regulator and so that voltage spike may not go much above 16 volts though the current spike may last only a few microseconds and go to 1,000 amps or more. IR losses and high frequency skin effect will likely be high. I wonder how often these high voltage/high current spikes are just theorized or actually measured. And under these conditions it would be necessary to switch between two battery packs because most loads will be damaged by such spikes and you dont want to damage your inverter or refrigerator for example.
I hope Aaron will comment on this.

If you take 120 psi air and and blow it into a container of much lower pressure, you're never going to see that container bump up to that 120psi.

Your battery voltage is a gas pressure reading of the pressure of the polarized aether available at the battery + terminal when it is "charged up". This isn't an analogy, it is literally what the voltage reading is without any jargon.

The spike is also polarized aether at really high pressure so sending that 500, 750, 1000v spike into a battery will have the same effect as the air tank - it's being depressurized but you still get that monster instantaneous current impulse for that small blip in time. It polarizes the battery chemistry and the internal charging current (John told me there were either 5 or 7 separate currents) but for sure the charging current knows which way to go from the spike polarization and THAT charging current is independent of anything that came from the spike and is part of the open system. The impedance of the battery dissipates some of that spike back into equilibrium, while some of it polarizes the battery. That is the most important reason to have a battery with as low impedance as possible. Starter batteries and go as big as you can afford to go.

This is why the 1200 ah 2 volt cell phone tower batteries in 12v banks on the front and back of John's 10 coiler showed a 500% gain when Peter did the draw down test compared to what left the input bank - impedance so low you can't hardly measure it.

If you have capacitor plates and have water, a dipolar molecule between the plates, you can electrostatically or dielectrically separate the water without supplying any current to that water, which would be electrolysis. If your high voltage potential overcomes the covalent bond, the oxygen and hydrogen will pull apart and the electron freed up will go to toward the positive plate. That electron was sourced from the water itself and did NOT come from the electricity supplied to the plates and that internally generated current can help split more water, while all you have is hv potential from a potential transformer at the plates. This is a gain mechanism so that Faraday's Law of Electrolysis is not violated, it just has no application to this type of dielectric water separation - it only applies to electrolysis.

This is one of the gain mechanisms that you are taking advantage of in the battery when charging with spikes.

"Overpotentializing the battery" and "stealing the surface charge" is just jargon for describing two different facets of this potential, which is polarized and pressurized aether that is jammed into the battery. EMF is electromotive force and while electrical engineers and physicists want to tell you what EMF does, they don't tell you what it is made of. EMF IS the polarized aether that is at a certain pressure that moves from a high potential to a low potential over the surface of a conductor and this is what attracts and pulls electrons out of the orbit of the copper atoms electron field, which migrate down the wire at a few inches per hour - EMF moving at about light speed.

Overpotential = just slang for that pressurized aether potential jammed into the battery that is above what the battery chemistry can handle at any given moment to turn into chemical charge separation. It is in a buffer like backed up documents you sent to a printer but the printer of course can only print so much at a time and the rest is in the buffer. It is like a "static charge".

Stealing the surface charge = actively utilizing that buffer or cache of pressurized aether potential not to charge a battery but to produce real watt seconds of work on the input side of the SG type circuits.

You can see that this buffer or cache of this potential can indeed cause real internal charging current to happen, which you all are already experiencing even if you don't realize it.

In about 2001 when I worked for Chee Energy a couple buildings down from John after having known John for a few years, I was always running experiments with my trifilar SG bicycle wheel. One was with a large cap bank taking the recovery and I had a pully wheel with a mechanical copper contact switch that would discharge it into the output bank. The batteries were from a scooter, 2 x 12v, 7 ah gel cells. One on the front and one on the back. The capacitors were a bank of mallory 60vdc 33000 uf caps and I had like 4-5 in parallel. So 170k uf or so and they'd charge until they were 2 volts above the battery then the contactor would dump it to that small 7ah 12v gel cell.

After charging that battery with that ridiculously high impulse for that battery for an hour, I could disconnect it totally and that battery would continue to charge with REAL load powering capability, not just fluffy voltage charge for an entire extra hour. That shows that for one, a potential charge causes real charge and for two, lead charging current has real momentum that goes on for a while until that momentum slows down. That momentum is because of how massive that lead is, like a freight train and when it gets going, its moving with some serious kick.

Because of these facts known about lead acid batteries, it would not be easy to predict that 3 minute battery swaps would do anything and is why long run times so as to not kick back against that lead momentum because it would be like an effort in futility as it would be like getting he freight train going then try to push backwards. However, when the batteries for the most part are charged up and we're dealing with mostly the potential charge maintaining the dipole with very little charging and we're keeping that buffer up for the run time on each swap, it should be easy to see how it self sustains.

All of this potential is TIME potential. That is the most literal definition of what the EMF spike is without jargon - I'll give my opinion on that next.

[serendipitor]

Here are a some views of my test, started a couple of years ago. I followed along Mike's dimensions as best as I could discern from the videos. (I agree that "RPG" is a bit of a misnomer. Reactive power is more about the condition of the load. Not to detract from their accomplishment, but I'll refer to this as MC's generator.) Most of you have much better looking builds, but my modus operandi is to not sink any money into something unless I have a solid proof of concept. So I get by with sufficient quality for a test.

We have seen an array of form factors with these pulse generators, from large diameter, many poles, slow rpm, potentially good torque, as in the bicycle wheels, to small diameter, two poles, longer length, not much torque, as in the window motor or Newman's later motors. MC's gen is at the mid point of the spectrum, with 6 poles and what I guessed is about 300mm in length. I ended up about 275mm for diameter. I used the typical Grade 8 ceramic magnets (as common on the bicycle wheels) two layers deep. The rotor was made from MDF circles glued and turned. Slots took the magnets which were also glued in place. I thought it would be best to have the rotor smooth to avoid the windage of MC's gen. I used 12.7mm shaft, which if I were to do again I would use ~20mm.
MCgen1.jpg

The coils were a total guess based on the other motors I have made. The idea is that at lower RPMs, applying a voltage across a coil will create a more or less linear ramp of current, by the formula V=L*di/dt. As a quick back of the envelope calculation, putting 1V across 1mH, the current rises to 1A in 1msec. MC's gen runs at 1800 rpm, which results in 180 pulses per second, or about 5msec per pulse. He was showing 10A in his coils, no load, with 60V. Also, the current was on for about 2msec, as one has to shut off the pulse event before the next magnet rotates close by. This gives about 12mH of inductance total, with all 6 coils wired in series. I used wire on hand to just see how it would go, as I was going to use 48V to start with, and ended up with 5mH total inductance using #16 wire. More on this below, but I just want to point out that a critical piece of measurement gear for this work is an inductance meter, which is found on many cheap DVM's now. Always specify the inductance of your coils if you are really interested in passing on the information needed to replicate your work. My coils were wound on forms that just matched the footprint of the magnets. If I were to try a rewind, I would increase my windings by maybe 50%.

The timing was done using the typical slotted wheel, which fed into a CMOS 4538 dual one shot. The first one shot allowed to adjust for an amount of delay from the opto input, which then fed into the second one shot which allowed for adjusting the motor coil pulse width. I ended up with around 2msec motor coil pulse width to give 1800 rpm at 48 volts. But... I was not able to get this configuration to produce any useful torque. I did not see much difference between attraction and repulsion modes in this regard.
MCgen2.jpg
MC's gen uses bifilar coils however, and it looks like, from his battery swapper, he is using common battery negative connection. So one winding is apparently used for motor pulses, and the other winding for recovery. However, given the shape of his current wave forms, he is doing something a bit out of the ordinary. He mentioned having been in contact with David Squires, who gave a presentation about 10 years ago. Squires commented that driving these pulse motors from a voltage source is inherently a poor choice, in that one has to slowly ramp up the current in the motor coils to get decent amounts of magnetic force developed, as I showed above. It would be much better to use a current source to power the coils, as one could get high di/dt and hence shorter motor pulses, concentrating the magnetic force nearer the magnets where it does the most good. But the downside is that this method generates huge voltage peaks across the coils, which can be managed, but requires a careful approach. A large choke can act as a current source, and turning that on and off requires another layer of timing devices (I used a second 4538 for that.) At one point Mike talks up a largish toroid choke and says that is was something that "helps the motor run", so I wonder if they were trying this approach. I could not see the choke in a later video, so maybe it was abandoned. My testing was only brief and somewhat inconclusive, as it seems that just going to 60 volts or more gets into the "good enough" territory without the extra complication.

At any rate, in the MC gen video, the motor current wave form initially shows the expected linear ramp of current at low rpm, changing to an almost square wave motor current pulse of 10A at high rpm, followed by an identical recovery pulse, which however had an additional current spike tacked on the end. (A current clamp probe for the scope is critical to test these these circuits! It doesn't have to be very high bandwidth.) This looked like possibly a capacitor discharge being added onto the recovery pulse, but without more info that is all I can guess. I was not able to determine how to create those wave forms, and I feel he is doing something which is more than just a simple extrapolation of classical pulse motor circuits, like with the bicycle wheels. It would not seem to be complicated, as his control board shows only three large MOSFET or diode components with heat sinks, with the rest looking to be low level control circuitry.

With my tests, at 1800 rpm I ended up with a waveform that gave almost no recovery current due to the Lenz's Law potential degradation that occurs with salient pole motors. Lower rpm could be used, as others have pointed out faster is not better. It depends on the magnet spacing, voltage, and pulse width. Complicated. I saw in P. Babcock's subsequent video he talked about "back to basics" and showed a completely different motor drive wave form (and talked about not wanting to be bothered by ghosts). I set the project aside at that point, awaiting a better idea for designing my windings.

The main thing in this and my many pulse battery charging tests is that I have not seen any anomalous charging worth any practical utility. Yes, they are desulfated and charge to a higher resting voltage, but battery swapping always runs them down, with both inductive or capacitive discharge. It is clearly a case of some people see it, some don't, and there is no clear explanation of where the difference lies. I am testing solid state circuits at the moment, as the real question is, what is the required wave form for pulse charging a lead acid battery. The added task of running a motor is a side issue for now, as it is not helping to answer that.

I have some more comments on pulse motors of a general nature, but I will put those in a separate thread after I assemble some good scope captures.

[Aaron]

There's no such thing as 3D space and 4th dimension is time.

Space is ONE dimensional and that is the dimension of space. XYZ are COORDINATES and coordinates are not dimensions. This is an indisputable, engineering fact and nobody makes this more clear than Eric Dollard. It is a mathematical reality as the aether is directly engineerable and I'd recommend looking at Eric's work on the aether, which is authoritative and based heavily on the work of JJ Thomson, Heaviside, Steinmetz, Kennelly, Maxwell and others and he has for the most part unified their work in a way that has not been done by anyone, ever.

If anyone equates an XYZ coordinate with a dimension, then because each of us are at different XYZ coordinates and if coordinates are dimensions, that means, literally, that each of us are at different dimensions since we're all at different XYZ and that is completely laughable. Each one of us are at different coordinates within the SAME singular dimension of space. Space is 1D with multi coordinates.

Time is not a 4th dimension and can't be since there are not 3 dimensions to space and it is not the 2nd dimension after the 1D of space. It is inseparable from space itself so space and time are virtually inseparable.

Why this topic in this post? Because it might as well be explained what you are actually dealing with in these systems.

The way time is used is just a measured increment of movement of space and within space. Minkowski said time and space are interconnected and called it timespace. Einstein used that concept to help him develop general relativity but here we are to this day stuck with the popularized nonsense about 3D space and Time, which is literally in opposition to what Minkowski said. So between both of these men, simply discard Einstein as he was incapable of comprehending the simple nature of it but pay attention to this:

"Henceforth space by itself, and time by itself, are doomed to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality." - Hermann Minkowski

"Time" or simply motion in space and of space is governed at an absolute level by the DENSITY of the aether at any particular coordinate. From an absolute/omnipotent viewpoint, if you were to look at a section of space of high density aether, movement would be slowed down and in low density space, movement would be speeded up. If Earth had 1000 times its mass in the same volume, gravity would be ridiculously strong and movement of everything, including light, would be slowed down and you could measure the movement in increments that you call Time. If Earth had 1/1000th's the mass in the same volume as it has now, everything would be speeded up and "time" would be ticking fast. But to each observer in the high or low density, that aetheric density will dictate how fast the neural synapses are firing in your brain, how fast light is moving, etc. so by your observation, everything is proportionately sped up or slowed down by that density of the aether so obviously, each observer will see that light is moving at a constant.

So now it has just been defined what a constant light speed even is or why it appears constant but it is only constant to an observer in their own frame of reference, which has the aether at a certain density. But from the omnipotent/absolute reference point - looking at a high density area, light is moving slowly and at a low density area, light is moving very fast.

Aether is in a natural state of equilibrium, symmetrical and homogenous in nature. So what changes the density of the aether?

Mass and gravity - mass displaces the aether and aether rebounds back to where it was displaced from pushing down like an electrostatic push against the protons of all the substance that makes up the Earth for example. This is how anything with mass is pushed toward the ground. Tesla explained some kind of conversion process in the middle of the Earth or at least deep enough where electrons and other particles are created. He said electrons rise to the surface like artesian water. So this is why the downward flow of the aether is very dynamic and is not static as in the Einstein misinformation program. The more massive something is, the more aether is displaced per unit of space and the more dense the aether is toward the surface of that mass.

Mass and inertia - as a mass accelerates, it encounters more aether per unit of time giving an APPARENT increasing of the density of the aether against the mass. So the faster the acceleration, the more aether per unit of time is moving through the mass of the object imparting that repulsion against it and that is the CAUSE of inertia, rather than just a definition of inertia, which is all you get from the physicists and engineers.

This is the true equivalency of gravity and inertia that Einstein was incapable of comprehending and this IS why relativistic effects happen and it IS because of masses interaction with the aether and the real or apparent modification of the density of the aether.

How do you cancel inertia? An electrostatic potential on the leading edge of the mass can electrostatically repel the positive charge of the aether over the surface of the mass - preventing some, most or all of the aether from penetrating the mass itself so if THAT, which causes inertia to begin with can't go through the mass itself and is deflected over the surface, then you don't have the inertia or you have reduced inertia.

Or you can do it by rotating the mass at high speed so that the aether is perpendicularly deflected over the surface of the mass by its own rotation, then you get the same thing - reduced or fully negating inertia.

Electricity can change the density of the aether. As mentioned in the last post, voltage is a gas pressure reading. A dipole as Bearden described breaks the symmetry of the aether to give it asymmetry so it can move unidirectionally from one place to another. Many of you already know this stuff, so thanks for your patience, you can skip my posts. A battery is a dipole, which breaks the symmetry of the aether. When you charge a battery, you don't fill it with some magical charge that doesn't exist, you are simply polarizing the chemistry so it separates its own internal charges - some to the low end and some to the high end so you have a + and -. When a battery charges up, again, you don't fill it with anything, you just polarized the chemistry. A full battery or a dead battery has the same stuff inside it. It's either polarized or its been brought to equilibrium (dead battery). When a battery voltage reduces, it doesn't run out of anything, the polarized chemistry is depolarized to a certain point. The higher the voltage means the stronger the polarization to break the symmetry of the aether and the higher the voltage, the stronger the pressure of the + charge of the aether at the + terminal.

So you now have just united gravity, inertia and the stuff that makes both possible with electrical potential - its all the same aether, you interact with it with mass or with an intentional electrical dipole.

When the battery is charged, you have the aether available at the + terminal (and implied anti charge at the - terminal) at a certain pressure measured in terms of voltage. When you connect a path from the high to low potential (circuit conductor), the aether at the + terminal goes over the surface of the wire toward the low potential - terminal. That aetheric flow over the conductor IS what EMF is and what it is made of. It moves about at the speed of light. Loosely bound electrons in the 3rd electron field of the copper atoms of the conductor get pulled out of orbit by this EMF and slowly migrate toward the + terminal at a few inches per hour. Drude electron gas model makes the most sense of any I've seen and it is still very consistent with what we can observe. So that electron current is your loss measured in amps.

But look again, that EMF is made of the aether gas flowing over the wire and is the SAME substance of gravity and inertia at different densities or pressures. Mass is a dipole of its own sort, which also polarizes the aether during gravty or inertia. Space is not filled with aether, it IS aether and if there is no aether, then it is counterspace.

So, SPACE is what you are breaking the symmetry of and polarizing and compressing at various pressures to create the EMF.

Space being inseparable from time, which is only an incremental measurement of the movement of and within space at various densities. So when you polarize and compress space at various pressures, you are modifying TIME in and of itself. The higher the pressure, the less time there is because it is pressurized so that time is slowed within that space and if you compress it high enough to an infinite voltage, then the pulse width is theoretically infinitely small to the point of no time because all the potential for time to flow or unfold or tick is locked up in that pressurized aether.

You let that EMF go into a coil, "charge" and polarize it to realize the magnetic field - that magnetic field displaces the aether around it and nature abhors a vacuum - you disconnect the dipole from the inductor and the aether rebounds very fast into the space it was displaced from in the coil. The rebounding aether is what pushes the magnetic field ultra fast back to equilibrium and that is the cause of your fast rate of change induction that gives you a very high voltage spike with very little pulse width. You took EMF at a low pressure with a decent time component, which should only be long enough to saturate you coil, you get the magnetic field, you turn off the switch, 100% of that EMF is 100% dissipated back to equilibrium. That new EMF of reverse voltage is BRAND NEW potential from the aether pushing your magnetic field back into the coil so you are compressing space in that spike and the potential for time to flow is locked up in that potential.

You deliver that TIME POTENTIAL to the battery, which is what the EMF is to begin with at various pressures and now you have a buffer or cache of polarized, pressurized aether with the potential for time to flow - sitting right there in the battery. Some of it will be converted slowly to an internal charging current to "charge" the battery but when it is put on the front of the circuit to run it, that time potential is depressurized and you get the time back out of it, which will cause amps to flow (over time) at that reduced pressure or voltage, which is real work, watts seconds, or energy.

So, these are all time machines that setup a situation to compress space and space's ability to move and flow or having something flow within it (time), you capture and store up that time potential, some is used there locally in the output battery to charge it up and some of the rest is decompressed on the front end so that you get the time back out of that potential in terms of real time, watt seconds = energy. Energy having one definition = work.

[Aaron]

Gain mechanisms to achieve over 1.0 COP performance.

Conditioning capacitors - already mentioned that the repeated and long term charging of capacitors changes their dielectric constant and they exhibit a type of electret effect that allows them to bounce way up compared to a normal cap rebounding effect. This is extra potential that is above and beyond what you delivered to the capacitor electrically. The rest is the rebound gets the capacitor to break the symmetry of the aether so you have more and higher pressure potential available to discharge to a battery. We're not doing cap dumps here but this has been used for years in these systems.

Permanent magnets - I mentioned this before but did not explain. When you have an inductor charged up against a permanent magnet's magnetic field and the switch is turned off, the collapsing magnetic field sucks some magnetism from the magnet and adds it to the total amount of magnetic flux that is inducing the high voltage spike so you get a gain here. The aether instantly replenishes the potential of the permanent magnet in order to fill the void.

Self generated internal charging currents - like the water separation example, the impulses to a battery electrostatically polarize the battery, that polarization tells the chemistry where to go even if you are not delivering significant current to it (yes, you do get high current impulses) but some of this self generated current doesn't come from the spike itself - like the battery that charges for an hour not even hooked to anything - that polarization gets the charging current to move and this is another gain mechanism.

Sharp gradient - because of the nature of a high speed impulse, you create a very sharp gradient. At a point of a sharp gradient, you are instantly breaking the symmetry of the aether and extra EMF is added to the circuit at the place of the sharp gradient that is above and beyond what you are contributing.

High speed - the faster the rpm, the more potential is delivered to the batteries per unit of time - faster than the battery can deal with it so you have a really good potential buffer (surface charge).

I don't know many people that have used a ground rod with their SG and related setups. In John's early Schoolgirl diagrams, he showed an Earth ground coming off the ground wire that is separate from the battery ground. He told me long ago that it runs stronger with the rod so I used an Earth rod quite a few times over the years and my self running trifilar self oscillator wouldn't work without the earth rod. I'm not making any claims for the RPG type of situation, but it is simple enough to connect the output battery ground to an Earth rod, which is separate from any home grounding rod just like the MWOs. To me, just looking at it, it becomes a better, more conductive sink for the downward moving gravitational potential to enter the system but it's just speculation, but I do have some empirical evidence in my past experiments to justify such a belief. Again, it may or may not make any difference for you.

------------

I'd get the lowest friction bearings you can afford. If you can't spin the wheel by hand and have it spin for at least a few minutes, you have way too much bearing friction. We get all our bearings from Boca Bearings https://www.bocabearings.com/ - for $15 per bearing, they'll do their dry lube process, which is tungsten disulfide. https://www.bocabearings.com/product...?ProductType=0 I always knew it as Dicronite (look it up) so maybe that lightning name is their own version. They sent out our bearings for the Tesla Turbine 70k rpm rated for Dicronite so no idea if this is what they did or they do it in house now.

-------------
Repulsion vs Attraction mode

Paul likes repulsion mode but in the SG tests, attraction mode, which Bedini didn't know he was doing with one particular build until I discovered it, was much more efficient and produced more mechanical work. I don't know what works better for this but it's worth finding out.

Repulsion was around 15% mechanical and attraction was around 25%.

We don't have iron cores here so we don't get free attraction of the magnet to the core so that's irrelevant.

But, repulsion, magnet gets to the air core, switch on, repel magnet - the magnet cuts the windings on the coil so you get some back emf loss that you will NEVER get back.

Attraction, switch on, magnet gets pulled in, switch off, you don't get this same loss and with up to 10% more mechanical, it's worth seeing if it works the same with air core on these systems.

-----------------------

Start with fully charged batteries.

The Bedini chargers obviously aren't avail but you can at least charge batteries in good shape that don't need any real rejuvenating with a constant voltage constant current power supply and get them to the right voltages.

I use this all the time with all kinds of batteries, starter batteries and even up to marine batteries (which are the worst batteries ever made).

That's a 10 amp battery charger for me: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...SIN=B073TW8H2S

For a lead acid starter battery, leave the leads open circuit, dial voltage to 15.3 volts.
Then, short the leads and dial the current to whatever amps you want to charge the battery at.
Connect leads to battery - make sure electrolyte is topped and let it rip.

These work amazingly well and the current automatically tapers off as your voltage goes up so you don't accidentally overcharge your battery. If you see the voltage go up, then down, that's good, your battery is getting some rejuvenation. When it goes up to the top, it will drop down to hundreds of milliamps or less then your battery is done.

It works virtually identical to Bedini's solar charge controllers that were linear current regulators.

I'm not responsible if you burn out the supply or you have any other mishap. I've just used these things for years as battery chargers and it works great. I use this and a deep cycle battery on my security system as a home brew uninterruptable power supply - I just leave the power supply on the battery so the system mostly takes from the power supply and keeps the battery topped up. If the power goes out, the system runs off the battery from an inverter. It would cost me hundreds to buy a UPS of this capacity and it would come with a gel cell that would dry out quickly.

Some claim batteries charged with spikes won't charge with normal hot current chargers anymore. I've seen a few oddball instances over the years where this is true, but for the most part, I really haven't seen a difference. When batteries are charged with spikes, they definitely act a bit different than if they were charged with caps that forward convert the spikes or with regular steady current.

[Aaron]

MC's gen uses bifilar coils however, and it looks like, from his battery swapper, he is using common battery negative connection.

At one point Mike holds up a largish toroid choke and says that is was something that "helps the motor run", so I wonder if they were trying this approach.

Lower rpm could be used, as others have pointed out faster is not better. It depends on the magnet spacing, voltage, and pulse width.

It is clearly a case of some people see it, some don't, and there is no clear explanation of where the difference lies.

When you say Mike's "gen" coil uses bifilar coils. Are you referring to a generator taking power from the shaft or are you referring to the run coils on the "RPG"?

Which of Mike's presentations and at what time in the presentation was he holding up a toroid choke that you mention?

For those who prefer faster speeds such as myself and some others, it is important to have enough breathing room between the pulses/magnets. In the past, one of my SG type builds was significantly faster with 3 magnets set every 120 degrees apart compared to the exact same system when I just swapped a rotor with 4 magnets set every 90 degrees apart. Spacing, pulse width, etc. coil inductance, you name it. It's quite a few parameters to come together all at once. But there is something to slower speeds - Bedini added the fan to the bicycle wheel SG in order to deliberately slow it down.

Since I have seen multiple builds work as claimed, one of the reasons for starting this thread is to determine that exact difference between those who are not getting the same results and the successes. Everyone should understand that it did take Mike and Norm a number of years to get to that point and I don't really see any special circumstances outside of what Paul spelled out in his They are all the same presentation. I want to see at least a couple independent replication of results regardless of the variation of the build so whatever I can do to facilitate that, I will.

[serendipitor]

When you say Mike's "gen" coil uses bifilar coils. Are you referring to a generator taking power from the shaft or are you referring to the run coils on the "RPG"?

Which of Mike's presentations and at what time in the presentation was he holding up a toroid choke that you mention?

Hi Aaron. The bifilar windings are in the RPG motor coils. The external belt driven "T-gen" as he called it, appears to be conventional.

The toroid is in the first video, from 2019. He mentions David Squires at 20 minutes. At 56 minutes, toroid is seen on the left, orange color. I was mistaken about holding it up (he held up a number of other bits), but he did at 38 minutes say more about it. In the 2022 video, part 4, I don't see that component on the table.

[Aaron]

The T-Gen is conventional in the sense that it has back emf and other normal characteristics - what's unique is that it is the most compact AC generator with the lowest harmonic distortion ever developed for the density of its power output. David Squires developed it with inspiration from some of Jim Murray's work.

I downloaded the 2019 presentation, will have to skim it when I get a chance to reorient myself to that particular build.

[tarak]

hi Aaron I have been trying to post on the generator of yours, I have also sent you an email so I hope that this post will get to you, yes you call it the RPG, I did one back in 2003 and also have made two new upgraded ones, look similar to what you have

[tarak]

well here is a vid of my first one back in the 2003 or there about, I use and still do with my latest ones, a 120v battery bank, recovering the back emf as well, but it seems I can not upload a vid from my computer

[tarak]

trying to upload by attachments this is the first unit I built but not the start of it. it was too big