3 Battery Generating System

[Matthew Jones]

If this can happen in our motor, could it be made to happen in the 3 battery generating system? and what effect would that have on your system?

At the moment, I am not sure of this so any input would be appreciated.

It is exactly what happening. I wrote it all down about 2 pages ago.
All motors perform a boost on the voltage. The delima comes because generally by the time the voltage is stored up in the coil the connecting commutator section is off the brush. So you have no means to grab it.
A timed switch or a motor that has a solid commutator to the ground can easily be used to grab the increased voltage.

Matt

[mbrownn]

Thanks Matt

I will go back and see if I can find what you said. I must admit that I knew from reading that there were high voltage spikes in the armature of an uncompensated motor but what we are getting is a shock.

[Matthew Jones]

It just constitutes a Boost regulator. You can probably measure the inductance across one coil and run the numbers it will hit just right. You have got real low frequency with a high on time duty cycle. Lots of Iron also, to store a larger field.

Boost calculator.


Matt

[mbrownn]

I see what you are saying and it makes sense, because there is no place for this voltage to go except around the loop and back to itself, everytime we pulse the armature the voltage goes up. This is a very low inductance coil but we are hitting it with 30A so the power in it is big so sooner or later the voltage gets so high that it brakes out causing the arc. The VARIAC that has been used as a supply has been producing strange noises suggesting something is going back to it. I wish I had scope shots.

Of course the lockridge had a second set of brushes which would allow us to collect this. It does seem possible that the armature could have been standard.

It might be interesting to put one of these armatures in a PM motor and see if the same thing happens but of course with PMs we won't have the transformer actions between the armature and stator.

Lots to think about here

[Turion]

We are getting increased voltage output from our DC PM motors, probably because of the way they are wired between either two positives or two negatives. It's one of the things that makes the 3GGS work.

Dave

[mbrownn]

There is no doubt that the system is interesting, cannot easily be explained and has potential as a source of useable power. Mathew is, in my opinion, right about the boost principal but I believe there is more.

In a ring of inductors, if we short one inductor, the total inductance of the ring decreases by the amount of the shorted inductor, this is common sense. It has been put to me that the inductance can drop by more than this amount which has many implications if true.

Assuming that the coil that is shorted, allows the energy stored in it to flow as a current and causes an effect on the inductance of the rest of the coils as they are on the same core. It could be that the statement above is true.

If we time our pulses to coincide with the coil short, we are in effect charging a low inductance. When the coil short stops the inductance of the loop changes. At this point is there more recoverable or useable current or power available in the coils than we put in with the pulse because of the increased inductance?

My instinct says that the energy must be the same, the current flowing through an inductor tries to be the same but because of the higher impedance the voltage rises. The question is now how long does the inductor maintain the current before the energy is consumed?

I know I am not explaining this well, could use some help here.

The premiss is this

Two coils of differing inductance on identical cores are fed with a 1 amp current, which stores the most energy? I would say the highest inductance.

If we can change the inductance from low to high while flowing the same current, Is there more energy in the coil? My gut says no but is that true?

If the coil shorting changes the inductance of the armature, is there an apparent gain in power?

Do you see what I am getting at?

Energy has to be conserved but I'm not sure that power has to be. Is Squires right?

[boguslaw]

CORRECT! There is no law of conservation of power, you can reuse energy indefinitely if you can avoid leakage (heat ,RF). Hard task assuming that every circuit has resistance. even on 0.1 ohms 1/2 of energy of capacitor transfer from one o the other is lost as radiation.

[boguslaw]

One of the most important question on electromagnetism which has to be resolved but seems nobody care....

Is energy transformed or lost by radiation ? If transformed then why there is heat or flyback on primary of transformer or on motor or generator coil ?

I believe energy is lost by radiation AND OPPOSITE energy is lost on opposite side of circuit. Sound crazy but this is what need to be carefully checked...
Nature create opposite copy to balance energy state.

[Matthew Jones]

One of the most important question on electromagnetism which has to be resolved but seems nobody care....

Is energy transformed or lost by radiation ? If transformed then why there is heat or flyback on primary of transformer or on motor or generator coil ?

I believe energy is lost by radiation AND OPPOSITE energy is lost on opposite side of circuit. Sound crazy but this is what need to be carefully checked...
Nature create opposite copy to balance energy state.

I don't think its created, its just there. You have a full environment of electrically charged and magnetically charged particles. They are in constant process of attracting to what you have on the wire or in the component. Every time they make contact they short out a given amount and you loose.

This is why DC is so vulnerable to loss and AC isn't. No modulation, nothing to confuse the particles just straight attraction. So they come in and make heat, make resistance (Magnetically), and generally short out charges.

Thats what a Transient spike is also. Charge sucked into the system by the expansion and contraction of a magnetic field. The charge is caused from the mass of particles collected and compressed on the outside of the field. When the amount is high enough it cuts the flux of the wire on the way back in, when the field collapses. More power to create the field, or more induction, bigger spikes.

Nature doesn't do anything, the balance is set. Energy cannot be created, only changed. The amount is set.

Matt

[mbrownn]

CORRECT! There is no law of conservation of power, you can reuse energy indefinitely if you can avoid leakage (heat ,RF). Hard task assuming that every circuit has resistance. even on 0.1 ohms 1/2 of energy of capacitor transfer from one o the other is lost as radiation.

I agree, the capacitor looses half of the energy.

Is energy transformed or lost by radiation ? If transformed then why there is heat or flyback on primary of transformer or on motor or generator coil ?

I believe the only energy lost is in ohmic resistance and other iron losses. Magnetism is a free byproduct of passing a current through a wire.

I agree with Matt, I don't think its created and it is just there. We pay for it by setting up the charge and the opposite charge from the environment enters our system.

In a slight deviation from Matt I believe it is the electrical charge that we provided that attracts natures charge in and the magnetic field may shape the direction and pathway of the flow. Electron flow being a result of the the force applied by the charge.

Again agreeing with Matt, when we shut off the supply, the charge from the environment that was attracted in is still there in the wire momentarily and this is the spike as it leaves. All our charges are balanced by nature, everytime we alter the balance, nature moves to rebalance it. Opposites attract and likes repel etc etc.

I could go on but it is irrelevant, the fact remains that we do have the phenomenon of inductive kickback which does indeed provide an additional current which can be made to work for us, provide an additional magnetic field and that can be collected too.

[Turion]

The origins of the 3BGS lay with two different drawings that I saw. The first was something posted by John B. that showed three batteries and a load, which is what we are using. But the second drawing showed two batteries with a load between them. One battery was charged and the other battery was discharged. The statement that accompanied the drawing was that current would move from the higher potential through a load (powering it) to the lower potential until the two potentials were equal and there would be little or NO loss in the actual power in the system. It was with these two concepts in mind that I began working on the 3BGS setup. I have seen that when you use a DC motor it can actually contribute to the power in the system. The issue with the 3BGS has always been that it works until battery three charges beyond a certain point, and then it no longer works. Keeping it from charging has been the ultimate goal. How we get the energy created by the motor out of the motor will probably be a matter of some research, but it appears to be working the way we have it wired. Further testing may show that we are wasting energy that could be harvested, but we will have to see. We are hoping to have a looped system one of these days. That would be nice.

[mbrownn]

The origins of the 3BGS lay with two different drawings that I saw. The first was something posted by John B. that showed three batteries and a load, which is what we are using. But the second drawing showed two batteries with a load between them. One battery was charged and the other battery was discharged. The statement that accompanied the drawing was that current would move from the higher potential through a load (powering it) to the lower potential until the two potentials were equal and there would be little or NO loss in the actual power in the system.

Quite a bold statement, of course there has to be a loss in the system but, it would not surprise me to have more power in the charging battery and motor than was supplied buy the source as in a Bedini. The phenomenon of not draining the source is the one that has everyone puzzled but I think we are all beginning to understand that even that is not beyond reach.

I forgot if I sent you the info on my lockridge work so I have sent you some again.

[boguslaw]

Every time you have charge imbalance you have potential energy and ability to dissipate it if allowing to become current flow.
If you have a charge then nature provide opposite charge trying to neutralise it, thus we could have two potential energies in Newton III law if we have a way to let them stay separated. However the same is correct for magnetic fields. Stick magnet to fridge and you will create opposite polarity magnet in iron and that balanced state could exists for years.

[Turion]

mbrown,
I agree that there has to be SOME loss in the system due to heat, friction, etc, but I DO believe that when you move from higher potential to lower potential through a load, those losses can be MINIMUM. And that the actual load does NOT use up the energy. Our current system of use runs that energy into ground and out of the system. I have seen systems that recirculate the energy around and around and continue to reuse it until all of it has been expended in heat and friction losses, powering the load many times longer than you would ever see with a conventional system by doing nothing more than NOT running the energy to ground.

Matt has a great example of this he has shared with me, and I showed it to an electrical engineering friend. I ran two bulbs each off two brand new 9 volt batteries. The one wired according to Matt's directions ran many, many, MANY times longer because it recycled the energy. My engineering friend (of course) focused on the fact that the bulb I was lighting with Matt's circuit was not quite as bright as the other bulb rather than on the issue of how long it ran, and it was his assertion that the power used by both was the same. Since I didn't have meters to hook up and a timer running, there was no way to disprove this to him, and I did not try, but I know what I have seen, and I HAVE put meters on these kinds of setups.

And that is what we are doing with the 3BGS to some extent. And one of the reasons it has so much potential.

Dave

[mbrownn]

mbrown,
I agree that there has to be SOME loss in the system due to heat, friction, etc, but I DO believe that when you move from higher potential to lower potential through a load, those losses can be MINIMUM. And that the actual load does NOT use up the energy. Our current system of use runs that energy into ground and out of the system. I have seen systems that recirculate the energy around and around and continue to reuse it until all of it has been expended in heat and friction losses, powering the load many times longer than you would ever see with a conventional system by doing nothing more than NOT running the energy to ground.

Matt has a great example of this he has shared with me, and I showed it to an electrical engineering friend. I ran two bulbs each off two brand new 9 volt batteries. The one wired according to Matt's directions ran many, many, MANY times longer because it recycled the energy. My engineering friend (of course) focused on the fact that the bulb I was lighting with Matt's circuit was not quite as bright as the other bulb rather than on the issue of how long it ran, and it was his assertion that the power used by both was the same. Since I didn't have meters to hook up and a timer running, there was no way to disprove this to him, and I did not try, but I know what I have seen, and I HAVE put meters on these kinds of setups.

And that is what we are doing with the 3BGS to some extent. And one of the reasons it has so much potential.

Dave

Agreed, it does not seam as if we are powering the magnetic field in a motor, only the losses and my tests although not very scientific seem to suggest that inductive kickback from a coil is additional to the supply. This would suggest that "overunity" devices should be easy to produce. The problem with motors is that they are a lot less efficient than we are told, they are giving apparent efficiency and not real efficiency. For example a PM DC motor is typically 35to 50% efficient yet when given an efficiency by the manufacturer it can be 90+% efficient. The reason for this is that their efficiency was calculated under optimum pulse width modulation where the inductive kickback is being used.