3 Battery Generating System

[bistander]

Got tricked, stupid me

...
Now that you have lied ...

Matt

... I'll get the film up for sure in the morning.

Matt

Just like this?

[Matthew Jones]

This one works.

But you spoke about physics, what physics models applies to electricity in an open system. And if that ones pertain where is the math? Handing that picture out is like accusing someone of using bad terminology, That is not physics model it a drawing.

Give me the physics model that applies to electricity in an open system. The name of the physics mathematics that apply. Or just be smart and say you don't know, because you know damn well you don't. It doesn't exist. The math model for electricity was manupulated by Henry A Lorentz to fit the Newtonian physics model. Without the grounding of all power in the system there is no physics model that fits electricity.

You are a lot like the hillbillies that live around me. They love to eat GMO food and GMO fed and raised foods, because generally they are cheap even though they make themselves sicker by the day. But confronted with good facts about GMO they always say things like "There is Science behind cheap GMO foods" somehow thinking that by throwing in some dialog that sound intellectual they then become intellectuals who therefore are noteworthy in the debate.

Now that you have lied and you didn't go away you should really think about bowing out. You are as guilty for your ignorance as anyone, just depends on how deep that ignorance goes. Yours runs pretty deep if the best you can do is criticize one person for his terms of measurement. You contribute nothing but pure ignorance.

Matt

[bistander]

Open system

And exactly which physics model applies to electricity in an open system?

This one works.

[Turion]

bi,
Do you happen to have simulator handy where you can plug in 12 volts as the voltage at ground so that your physics formulas can even be applied? Probably NOT. They (current formulas) only apply to a system where ground is -0- volts. Just because something is different doesn't make it wrong.

[Matthew Jones]

Hi Turion,

I'll leave for now. But last thought:

It is easier just to wind up some wire and throw together contraptions on the bench, then grab some numbers from randomly placed meters, sticking them into misused formulas and claim "working models" than it is to actually learn the physics and understand what is really going on.

I got no problem with that.

Good luck.

bi

And exactly which physics model applies to electricity in an open system?

[bistander]

Just build it

Hi Turion,

I'll leave for now. But last thought:

It is easier just to wind up some wire and throw together contraptions on the bench, then grab some numbers from randomly placed meters, sticking them into misused formulas and claim "working models" than it is to actually learn the physics and understand what is really going on.

I got no problem with that.

Good luck.

bi

[wantomake]

Chin scratching indeed

Wow seems all the fun happens after my bed time.

I'll still building even if it's outdated. I've invested too much to stop. Besides how will I re-invent the Lockridge type self contained motor/generator? Yes I understand that this setup, system, or idea is obsolete. I've no idea what the next evolutionary stage. I want to know yes, but to achieve good results with the 3BGS will take more effort and building.

The wisdom shared is appreciated. I can replicate and follow instructions but I cannot invent any new ideas.

Dang it my coffee is cold and my chin is sore from scratching,
wantomake

[Turion]

Lol

Awwwww Matt,

You weren't supposed to TELL everyone that all of this is already obsolete! LOL. Only a couple have even BUILT it. The rest are watching or arguing or coming up with theories, or explaining why it CAN'T possibly work or editing my posts. To tell them it works but is already OBSOLETE....that's just awful! LOL. Well, it will save them from getting hit in the head by flying magnets, so that's a plus.

The bad news is that everything shown here is obsolete. The good news is, the PRINCIPLES are absolutely sound. Build this stuff or DON'T. It doesn't matter to us. But until you do, and you start messing around with this system and these circuits, you are NEVER going to begin to see what is possible. That's all I've got to say about it.

bi,
Does running a 12 volt motor off a battery require work? Does lighting a light bulb require work? Was the work done by two different systems? You could say that the motor battery is one system and the generator light bulb is another system, but without the motor, the generator does not turn, therefore all those components are part of a single system. Work done within that system is work done BY that system. Therefore turning the motor AND lighting the light bulb were both done by a single system. I realize you are going to say that running the motor off the battery is what turned the generator to produce the light in the light bulb so we shouldn't get to count both as work. Well, if lighting a light bulb isn't doing WORK, what is it? If running the motor isn't doing WORK, what is it?DIdn't both of those things happen? You tell me.

But that's not even the POINT. What I was TRYING to point out to folks in my own way is this: When you compare running a motor directly off a battery and turning a generator to light a light bulb to running a motor on the 3 Battery system while turning a generator that speeds up under load to light a light bulb, one system has a higher COP than the other. By a long ways. Believe it or don't.

[Matthew Jones]

I shouldn't post but I see someone trying so I can't help it.

@RON, and WantToMake and DAVE

Get 2 spools 3.25 tall 3.5 inch's wide with a 3/4 inch center. Use 3 strands of 24 awg in parallel around an iron core composed of 6013 welding rods cleaned of their flux. COUNT THE TURNS OF WIRE.
Now you should have 10 ohms when measuring the wire. 2 spools separated.

Your rotor need to be composed of 2 inch n42 - n52 magnets every 60 degrees. The N42 magnets need to spin at 3600 rpms and the n52's at 3200 rpms.

Put the rotor between the 2 spools. Run the motor or the primary mover and short the coils.

Now from here it will be up to you to do the math. If you are at 3200 RPMS and you accelerate 320 thats 10%. Remove enough wire to reduce the OHMS of wire 10%. 9 Ohms is what should be left in this case.

Now that should reduce the acceleration to 0. Thats been my experience. As long the other parameters hold. At this point you should be able to run loads and get acceleration. Now the voltage may be high. If you get lucky it will be manageable but if not you can lower the ohms to get a manageable voltage but you may have to accelerate the prime mover, or retard it. This is on YOU have to make sure you can do these things before had.

Now if your mover is drawing more power on acceleration this is because the generator is disabling the BEMF in the motor allowing current to flow uninhibited. INRUSH CURRENT. Lower the voltage input into the prime mover or restrict the current through switching.

Now as far as these people who need to be perfectly correct in everything, ignore them. They can sit on their ass and do nothing while anybody else who chooses tries. This is how I did it and it works. How you move forward is up to you. There is no reason to hold on to this, this is antiquated as of today.

OH YA, You can put in books, stick on stage and even try to raise capital with it. Its old, old as dirt baby!!!!.

Have fun, ignore the idiots.

[bistander]

Add = plus

I never said adding those things together determined the COP. ...

...
The amount of work done by the motor in watts plus the amount of watts of power produced by the generator is the TOTAL amount of work DONE by the system.
...

So you don't use "TOTAL amount of work DONE by the system" to calculate your COP?

[Turion]

Clarification

I never said adding those things together determined the COP. I said add the two together in BOTH systems and COMPARE them and tell me what YOU THINK the COP of our system is.

But let’s spend as much time as possible arguing about this instead of building anything. ��
And by the way, in the paragraphs where I talk about watts INCORRECTLY I am talking about using a kilowatt meter, and we both know what THAT is going to measure and it isn’t just watts.

[bistander]

More work

bi,
Thanks so much for always pointing out my errors. What would we do without you? If you saw my PREVIOUS post you would see that I ALREADY acknowledged I once again used the term watts incorrectly and why I did. When I bother to think about it, I know what is correct, but old habits die hard. I understand technical perfection is your goal. Just so you know, you're probably wasting your time with me. Perfect use of terms is not that important to me, as is quite obvious. I will go on my merry way, using terms incorrectly willy nilly, leaving confused and upset perfectionists in my wake. But I will be building things that work rather than spending time working on vocabulary.

...
The amount of work done by the motor in watts plus the amount of watts of power produced by the generator is the TOTAL amount of work DONE by the system.
...
Now add the two together and tell me what the COP of the system is.
...

Hi Turion,

This is fundamentally incorrect. The "work" done by the system is one or the other, not both, depending on how you define the "system". Therefore, it is wrong to "add" these figures to calculate efficiency.

You are functionally incorrect calling "watts" work. Watt is the unit for power. Watt hour is the unit for energy. Work is energy, so has units of watt hours, or watt seconds, or joules.

Regards,

bi

Hi Turion,

For convenience I copied and pasted my post above. Please notice 2 distinct references, one fundamental, and one functional.

The functional part is your "confusion" between watts and watt hours. Maybe that is carelessness on your part, maybe it goes deeper.

The other aspect of my post was a fundamental error on your part. And that goes to the core. You build what you think works. But when you, as you say, add generator power and motor power to get COP, you are seeing erroneous results. It is not performing as you believe it is.

Just so you know.

bi

[i_ron]

I_ron,

I wasn’t talking about you and I didn’t mean to offend you. I have NO PROBLEM with people trying different things. I have learned WAY more from blowing things up than from getting them right. And even though you tried something different, it’s WORKING, so who could argue with that?

I was talking about people here and on other forums who make things that can’t really even be called replications, and use them to “prove” that this doesn’t work. What YOU showed was that a coil CAN cause the motor to accelerate when the coil is put under load. BEAUTIFUL. There are lots of sizes and shapes of coils that will do this. The more different things we try, the more we will learn. The only time trying something different than the examples I have given will bother me is when they are used to try and prove this doesn’t work

OK, apology accepted. I wasn't so much offended as disappointed.

After 23 years of coil building I had a coil that showed reduced input on being loaded... I was elated and just wanted to share my joy.

It was just a feeling on my part that a coil that "speeds up under load" is too narrow a definition. This only applies to a DC motor. AC motors are locked into, in our case, 60 Hz and so for an AC motor test bed this definition should be expanded to include, "reduced input draw"

Wantomake had suggested that perhaps my coil configuration was incorrect and so having built a successful coil from your directions I thought it appropriate to repost those directions for anyone thinking of doing the same. It would seem that wantomake and I are still on the same page and offer our thanks to you for sharing this information.

Saying that your instructions change from day to day was not a criticism, just a statement of fact. After all you have spoken of everything from 3 stands to 60 strands, from 1 foot to 1000 feet hence my reposting the set of instructions that I found so helpful

Anyway I think I can speak for most on the list when I say that at the back of our minds is hope for the solid state version...

Take care,

Ron

[Turion]

Lol

bi,
Thanks so much for always pointing out my errors. What would we do without you? If you saw my PREVIOUS post you would see that I ALREADY acknowledged I once again used the term watts incorrectly and why I did. When I bother to think about it, I know what is correct, but old habits die hard. I understand technical perfection is your goal. Just so you know, you're probably wasting your time with me. Perfect use of terms is not that important to me, as is quite obvious. I will go on my merry way, using terms incorrectly willy nilly, leaving confused and upset perfectionists in my wake. But I will be building things that work rather than spending time working on vocabulary.

[wantomake]

Not at all

No Dave you didn't offend me. Of course not. I think like you do.

I will continue here as I get something to post about that has to do with this "system".

wantomake