Tweet
Thanks for your comments and words of wisdom.
Yaro
Yaro
-
Yaro
"The Universe is under no obligation to make sense to you." -Neil Degrasse Tyson -
Hi Gary,
SG or Window Motor, we are not finished until we commutate the Generator output, battery back-popping it is called, dangerous, so requiring battery bucket covered and fan vented for possible "Pow", Baking Soda and water enough wipes for mahem, else do not begin. I began anyway with ultra slow SSR, and found that is OK for Motor on-portion, but not for tapping FWBR +DC Out to Battery + at every 'opportunity'. No leaky Cap's, i need best Photo-Flash types for Cap Dump Box. This is really a tool for metering charging rates by counting dump rates i say. Not faster charging... so far, for me.
My request to Gary and All here for these answers:
-Links to previous posts in This Forum about tapping the FWBR at correct moment(s):
-Spring Brass or alternate materials for brushes, like Spark-Snubber type Erwin posts in his fight-4.
These links were pointed out:
The 1984 Free Energy Guide w. accompanying Bearden "Towards a New Electrodynamics", and icehouse.net all describe the Ion / electron current hysteresis, and if you Cap Dump, you have seen that the Voltage Hump fades away in about 1 second after a heavy dump. So it was hard for me to accept to ditch Cap Dumping, and use the full 1KV peaks from the Generator by only connecting at certain moments. Knowing it 'is dangerous if done wrong'. So why so little info??? Truth is, it is posted here and i cannot find it per too old. (Posts, not me too old).
It took a long time for me to notice Rick's comments about Mike's Cap-only Window Motor, maybe having a hidden 9V in the SSR body. I tried and saw no way in hell are Halls going to switch at sub-4Volts, nor Trigger Timing going to line up at slower speeds. It could NOT really be an LC resonance. It is NOT. But JB validated Mike's replication, and PESwiki at least posted Rick stating that later he Rick and JB tried to replicate Mike's JB rep' backwards, and suspected hidden 9V. Or is it just safer for All to say that, just because Mike needs peace?... idk. I tried Mike-like, and in my opinion, it was rigged.
* * * What this SG or WM Finish is about for me is Generator Coil Commutation which Tom Bearden says "Must be less than 5nS switching speeds". For Generator back-popping i mean. Drive even trigger wire SG/WM with a SSR, and that is OK for Trigger WIre or Halls motor timing, but not for Gererator-Battery Ion/electron hysteresis resonance we really must ride, and be ready for battery explosions as we test At Our Own Risk.
NO Capacitor should be used at all on Generator coil, just FWBR, and FWBR -DC Out always to Battery -. To "Tap" the FWBR +DC Out when a magnet is at 90 degrees, or 270 degrees makes best sense.
PESwiki Rick and John Bedini both show 1-per-revolution back-popping. I still need mechanical commutator finish to test fully, but i see it foolish to fail to tap every half-cycle peak voltage point, and THAT is where having generator coil at 90 degrees to motor coil comes in, else FWBR Tap will sap the motor pulse.
However, my window motor with Hall commutators, showed me trigger winding is really best, and no need to fire every North magnet. Nor every North and South with Bedini-Cole full circuit. I can fire 1, 2, or 3 magnets, or even a partial magnet location with adjustable Motor On-time Adjustable Latching Hall Commutator. What i found so far is Halls can fire transistors well, but momentary for timing FWBR shorting does not work so well with a SSR. I tried anyway just to perfect the adjustable concept. Copper disk style to replace John's cylinder Slant-cut resin-filled commutator.
So please Gary, continue to full sefRunning commutation, by ditching the Capacitors.
(edit)Some photos i was unable to upload before.
Only 5 at a time, so more next post.
Eager to hear how your commutaion is working, and about your brushes.Last edited by Volty; 04-23-2015, 09:05 PM.Comment
-
Comment
-
So this is what i must utilize, whether from SG energizer or Window Motor energizer. I do not call it a generator coil this time to reflect that it is unusual, being Tesla-series connected, multi-strand, and if i hook it like a usual generator coil, always through FWBR to Cap or to Battery, always, it brakes hard to a stop. Patrick shows 'generator coil shorting' on Youtube, and he says he shorts top of coil to bottom.
For WM Lockridge-style, JB just stated 'Use the second coil to charge a Capacitor, and run the motor from that Capacitor'. Rick's archived statements at PESwiki have me seeing the photos with my own eyes of his SG bike wheel with Copper pipe taped on side, to whack two welding rods to short the Energizer at top to battery. The arc length looks like 1cm i guess, once each revolution.
So i tried 1-per-revolution with a SSR turned on extra long with latching 3175 Halls. A 3020 passing slowly would not even turn on the SSR. Worthless for FWBR commutation the SSR is. In this Scope shot i am firing all 3 North magnets, so the best once-per-revolution South magnet FWBR +DC Out, through SSR to Battery is shown below.
I could have used MJL21194, or FET's like Cap Dump, but i had never used SSR's much, nor Hall's, so i gave all this a try. Tom Bearden stating the </=5nS FWBR commutation or Microwave switching technique for battery back-popping, brought me back to faith in Erwin's posts. He used JB's Slant-cut Copper Pipe Coupler commutator, so always had that ultra fast switching, in the only place it is really required, to back-pop the battery. That is why the sketch at fight-4 shows only one single commutator. For sefRunning, and so the sketch says "It runs itself". The slant-cut commutator, mine, is noisy, and i am already making a disk instead. I will put 3 segments so i can connect every 270 degree South magnet Top Dead Center, for zero drag, with WM alone at least.
After i get this tits, i will dust off the bike wheel again and try it. As of now i am hooked on 4" Razor Scooter wheel SG with round counter-sunk hole Neo's, and they do not saturate the core. I had to double stack em to make them work. I made the 4-Coiler with same rotor, and was headed towards 10-Coiler when i read tenured people here stating it "Still" runs batteries down, even if rotating them around. I am way dumb, so i figured it was time to try what Erwin was saying and learn about the "Real" energizer JB says he may not comment about. 4 stand Tesla-series connected x6 in series... to a Capacitor build up he shows in SG Handbook, but Rick, when in the click, swore ditching Cap is really best. Monopole. I never understood that until Peter made Tesla's findings about 'pure DC pulses' clear here:
Then Aaron in the News Letter pointing out UFO Politic's work, Enlightenment to Asymmetry video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mj4rV0AoI-Q , he also so clearly shows why a coil should not be reversed, else radiant operation is impeded. I cannot do so much about that with Window Motor, but the SG with Energizer on top, oh boy i can hardly wait to finish the WM. With energizer at back end, monopole-Tesla-series style.Comment
-
Hi Gary,
*After typing the story below, I was looking which thread would be a proper one to post it, then read through this thread again and added some comments/answered some of my own questions already. I denoted the parts I typed after reading this thread with an “*”.
After the CG switch modification, I wanted to “scan” the influences of the coil-magnet gap again in combination with the base resistance (potmeter in my case). During these tests I was primarily interested what was happening at the input side (rpm/amperage draw/pulse signal). So I did not pay close attention to the output other than that I tried to start with the output battery sitting more or less at the same voltage level when I started the a new test sequence (did the same for the input battery).
The things that were most important during a test sequence were:
A. Finding the first optimum (resistance) where the machine would speed up to max rpm with least amperage input. And looking at the pulse signal.
B. When this primary optimum was found, I would switch off the SG and start it up again (leaving the resistance at the same value, to see if the rpm/amperage/pulse would look the same as in A. (this was not the case
C. Continue scanning to see if there was a second optimum, with even higher rpms.
Rather than scanning all the distances, I decided to go with a 1mm, 4mm and 8mm gap. I thought that would give me ballpark figures to see if I would need to go to smaller increments for more fine tuning.
For all tests the batteries where sitting at more or less the following voltages at rest before starting:
Input battery: 13.10V
Output battery 12.90V
Results:
1mm gap / Radiant mode
R1.1 Tuned to first optimum: 107.5-Ohm on potmeter / 0.8A / 214rpm / double pulse
R1.2 Switched SG OFF and then ON again: 107.5-Ohm on potmeter / 0.9A / 179rpm / triple pulse
R1.3 continued tuning (second optimum): 65-Ohm on potmeter / 1.5A / 314rpm / single pulse
1mm gap / CG mode
C1.1 Tuned to first optimum: 80-Ohm on potmeter / 1.9A / 248rpm / single pulse
C1.1 Switched SG OFF and then ON again: 80-Ohm on potmeter / 2.25A / 124rpm / double pulse
4mm gap / Radiant mode
R4.1 Tuned to first optimum: 55.5-Ohm on potmeter / 1.5A / 285rpm / single pulse
R4.2 Switched SG OFF and then ON again: 55.5-Ohm on potmeter / 1.55A / 180rpm / double pulse
4mm gap / CG mode
C4.1 Tuned to first optimum: 84.5-Ohm on potmeter / 2.1A / 232rpm / single pulse
C4.2 Switched SG OFF and then ON again: 84.5-Ohm on potmeter / 2.xA / 225rpm / double pulse
8mm gap / Radiant mode
R8.1 Tuned to first optimum: 49-Ohm on potmeter / 1.4A / 245rpm / single pulse
R8.2 Switched SG OFF and then ON again: 49-Ohm on potmeter / 1.6A / 162rpm / double pulse
8mm gap / CG mode
C8.1 Tuned to first optimum: 90-Ohm on potmeter / 1.9A / 192rpm / single pulse
C8.2 Switched SG OFF and then ON again: 90-Ohm on potmeter / 1.75A / 103rpm / double pulse
1 gap 1mm
Now the first thing I find interesting is that in R1.1 the SG had an 0.8A draw at 214rpm and double pulsing. With my 8 power windings that brings it to 0.1A/winding!
Now I guess it depends on the output whether this is something significant or not. What I mean is if the output is very little as well, then this is useless.
Furthermore this 1mm gap setting was the only one with a second optimum. You mentioned earlier that the triple pulse area in general is the one with the least output, but I guess that depends on the rpms as well? If output would depend on pulse x speed, than the tripe pulse area would win:
R1.1 = 214rpm x 2pulses =428
R1.2 = 179rpm x 3pulses=537
R1.3 = 314rpms x 1pulse =314
*l guess this is answered in your post #1, where you tell that the 3/8 gap outperformed the 1/8 gap, while the latter had higher rpm and lower amperage draw.
2 Another anomaly:
Looking at the pulses on my scope, the peaks of the H-wave would generally fit within the +5V / -5V scale (with a 10x probe, so actually -50V / 50V)), but with some settings I had to switch to a +10V / -10V and once even to +20V / -20V. What causes the peaks to change?
3 Power Supply at input
Earlier you told me that having a power supply at the input was not recommended, one of the reasons being it could not handle the pulses well that come back to the input. I saw that for myself now too: before starting the 1mm gap/radiant test with the battery at the input, I did the same test with the power supply at the input. I just wanted to see how it would compare to the battery as an input. The max rpm I could get out of it was 218rpm, would not go any higher (12.7V as an input voltage).
4 Aaron’s YT video “Bedini SG - Open gap for faster RPM”
Now in this movie Aaron increased the gap to about 1/3 of an inch he says (=8.5mm). And he says that he does not have to “flick it” any more, that it goes into single pulse on its own. I’m not sure if he’s using radiant or CG mode.
Apart from going straight to single pulse mode, he also got more rpms. Looking at my results, I encountered the opposite: the more I increased the gap, the less rpms I got.
Now I did not went over 8mm, what I mean is, that in theory if I would go beyond a certain threshold gap size, the rpms could increase again and also yield the effect that it would go straight into single pulse. But based on the measurements I mention above and measurements I did before, I do not expect that. (At 8mm I’m more or less at the maximum position of my rpm sensor, so far has been too lazy to modify it so I could go beyond 8mm since I thought it would not be beneficial).
*reading your posts #1 & #6 I might need to go above 8mm, since you got the best results with a 3/8 gap which is about 9.5mm…
I was hoping that the input rpms/pulses would give away something about the output, and that based on that I could determine what would be the best gap/resistor/pulse area to use.
Reading through your initial posts on this thread, it looks like output cannot really be predicated based on these input paraments. And to determine which combination yields the highest COP, I do need to do the tests again, including the output measuring/CBA tests. And probably need to extend my tests beyond 8mm.
Looking forward to your feedback,
Best regards
Rodolphe
Comment
-
Hi Rodolphe,
Your scanning experiments pretty well agree with what I found with my machine. But size, condition, and internal resistance of the batteries also greatly influence the performance of the machine. When I started this thread, I was trying to replicate what Peter demonstrated with the added generator coil and cap dump. While I was able to get the RPM up to the level he did, it didn't charge well there because the air gap was too small and the current draw was too low. I still have the generator coils attached and have gone back to the larger air gap and 100 ohm potentiometer. The generator coils still put out, but not at their maximum.
I use a small piece of 3/8" plywood as a "feeler gauge" to set the air gap and it actually measures .350" instead of .375". That's about 8.89 mm. And although my wheel is well balanced with a long run down time, it is slightly out of round. So when I adjust the gap some of the magnets drag on the "feeler gauge" and some have a little slop. The gap is continuously adjustable and can even be adjusted while the machine is running, but it still always ends up at the thickness of my "feeler gauge". Every build is a little different so you have to experiment to find the best gap, pot setting, etc for your machine and the batteries you are using.
What I try to tune for is the best charging rate for the least current draw. That is the ratio that determines the overall efficiency or COP. For my machine, this occurs at a slower speed than where I get the most out of the generator coils.And it still charges batteries best when single pulsing in the CG mode without the cap dump I made. (The cap dump from teslagenx may well be superior to the one I made!)
If you go back and look at my post #7 the way I had it tuned it not only charged very well, it was also able to carry a one amp load across the charge battery and still continue charging.
The peaks you see on the scope is the radiant component that is not absorbed by the battery. This is the momentary voltage across the transistor when it switches off. The higher the voltage , the more the radiant. But if the wiring and battery can't absorb it all, it shows up across the transistor. That's the reason for putting neons across the transistor to limit it to 100 volts or less. The idea is to tune for the highest radiant with the greatest possible transfer into the battery. Every parameter you were changing affected the di/dt of the transistor switching off. The steeper the gradient of the di/dt the more radiant shows up in the circuit.2 Another anomaly:
Looking at the pulses on my scope, the peaks of the H-wave would generally fit within the +5V / -5V scale (with a 10x probe, so actually -50V / 50V)), but with some settings I had to switch to a +10V / -10V and once even to +20V / -20V. What causes the peaks to change?
I use a photo tach to measure RPM. And when single pulsing, the scope will also give you the frequency from which you can calculate the RPM.(At 8mm I’m more or less at the maximum position of my rpm sensor, so far has been too lazy to modify it so I could go beyond 8mm since I thought it would not be beneficial).
Reading through your initial posts on this thread, it looks like output cannot really be predicated based on these input paraments. And to determine which combination yields the highest COP, I do need to do the tests again, including the output measuring/CBA tests. And probably need to extend my tests beyond 8mm.
That's pretty much correct. Have fun, it's a great learning experience.
Gary Hammond,
Comment
-
Hi Gary,
Thanks for your feedback!
First thing that I did was modify my rpm sensor bracket so I could increase the gap and set the gap to 11mm. (While the SG was running I looked how round/oval my wheel was, and although it is pretty round, I placed a marker on one of the magnets so from this moment onward that will be my “reference” magnet to adjust the gap. I use spacers as well to set the gap).
Focusing on CG mode for now, I started to run some tests with the following results:
-If I set the base resistance with my pot correctly, my SG will now go straight into single pulse when I switch it on.
-At the point -what I thought was- the optimum (99.4-Ohm, 0.9A, 141RPM, single pulse), the output battery didn’t seem to charge beyond 13.43V (or if it did, it was very slow). So while running, I turned the potmeter down (lowering the resistance, increasing the amperage). At the same time I was watching the voltage on the output battery and saw it increase immediately. I then left the potmeter at a certain/random value, only based on seeing that the voltage in the output battery increased again (65.4-Ohm, 1.8A, 185rpm, single pulse) and let it run till the output battery was 15.3V. What I did notice on my scope was that the peaks of the latter pot setting (65.4ohm) were higher than on the first one (99.4ohm).
I then reconsidered whether I misunderstood the whole expression “tune for min amperage/highest rpm” (or maybe the term was a bit misleading). When tuning the SG while watching the amp meter, there is a “minimum amperage point” (MAP): from that point, if you increase the pot resistance the amperage increases, and when you decrease the pot resistance the amperage increases as well. So far I thought that MAP was the point spoken about. (However, I had noticed in previous testing that this ”minimum amperage value” was more often than NOT the highest rpm point.)
So when I yesterday noted that at this MAP the output battery wasn’t charging any more + the fact that my amp draw was way lower than the values I read in the handbook and you posts, I did some more tests today with the 11mm gap / CG mode and came to the following conclusion/findings:
-From +/-1.8A to +/-2.8A the rpm is at its max (+/- 184rpm). Below 1.8A and above 2.8A the rpm’s drop. Finding the “band width” where the max rpms are (1.8A-2.8A) and then try and sit as close as possible at the beginning of this band width (1.8A) is probably the optimum point? However, I did notice that the peaks on my scope at 2.8A where higher than at 1.8A (by +/-10V), so it might be that sitting a bit further inside the band width, with higher peaks still yields the best charging results?
Speaking for myself, I would have found it beneficial if this tuning would be explained in a bit more detail in the handbook for newcomers. I’ll write it down in my “suggested updates” doc for the handbook at hopefully discuss them with Aaron and/or Peter in the future.
Another thing maybe worthwhile mentioning, is that while I’m doing these tests I keep swapping input and output battery (+ now and then putting a power supply at the input to fill up the batteries completely if needed. While having a power supply at the input, I do not perform tests, just charge the batteries. Although my power supply doesn’t like the CG mode with this 11mm gap -> have to switch to radiant, otherwise the power supply makes very “strange” sounds…). This I mentioned in relation to our previous talks whether the input/output battery can/can’t be swapped, although we were talking about radiant mode then.
I thought about this before and had formulated two theories in my head:The peaks you see on the scope is the radiant component that is not absorbed by the battery. This is the momentary voltage across the transistor when it switches off. The higher the voltage , the more the radiant. But if the wiring and battery can't absorb it all, it shows up across the transistor. That's the reason for putting neons across the transistor to limit it to 100 volts or less. The idea is to tune for the highest radiant with the greatest possible transfer into the battery. Every parameter you were changing affected the di/dt of the transistor switching off. The steeper the gradient of the di/dt the more radiant shows up in the circuit.
1. Lower peaks are better since more radiant is absorbed by the battery
2. Higher peaks are better since the real peak (that can’t be seen on the scope) is higher too, and with the vertical line(s) of the H-shape not being “really” vertical, but on an ever so slight angle, the scope shows a higher peak. The cause being the “almost vertical lines” diverged at a higher point and now can be picked up at a higher point too by the scope.
With my findings of today I assume statement 2 is the cause of seeing the higher peaks on my scope.
Looking forward to your input.
Best regards,
RodolpheComment
-
Hi Rodolphe,
John always said you could exchange batteries front to back and back to front when running in either straight common ground mode or whenever using a cap discharge device in either run mode.
And yes, higher peaks usually result in better charging even though the charge battery isn't absorbing all the radiant in either run mode. However, I've found that running in radiant mode always produces higher peaks on my scope than running in CG mode does. I assume that's because more of the radiant is absorbed by the run battery in CG mode. The coil discharges through both batteries in series when in CG mode. The wave form shape on the scope is also very different from what you see in radiant mode.
Another thing I've found is that in CG mode the RPM increases and the current draw decreases automatically as the charge battery voltage goes up. This is much more evident in CG mode than in radiant mode.
Try setting the gap at 9mm, the pot at 12 ohms, and see how that does for you. Mine charges best in CG mode at these settings and draws 1.8 amps at start and 1.6 amps at finish. And the rpm starts at 216 to 220 and finishes at about 265. It also goes into single pulse very quickly at this setting on mine. Your machine is going to be a little different because you have 8 power windings on your coil and mine only has 7. But I would think that anything over 2 amps on your machine would be wasting energy in heat somewhere.
I think you're beginning to see why a power supply is not recommended to run these machines from.
Gary Hammond,
Comment
-
Hi Gary,
Thanks for your input!
Just a quick response to your suggested settings:
Input battery@ rest before starting 12.89V
Output battery@ rest before starting 12.85V
9mm gap
Temperature 23C / 45%
Amp meter scale 3A max.
Potmeter 12-Ohm -> 3+A (off-scale) / 158 rpm / single pulse / -10/+10V scale (10xprobe)
Potmeter 48.1-Ohm -> 3A / 201 rpm / single pulse / -5/+5V scale (10xprobe)
Potmeter 70.2-Ohm -> 1.8A / 198 rpm / single pulse / -5/+5V scale (10xprobe)
Potmeter 7.3-Ohm -> 1.6A / 194 rpm / single pulse / -5/+5V scale (10xprobe)
Best regards,
RodolpheLast edited by pearldragon; 05-26-2020, 12:56 PM.Comment
-
Hi Gary,
Hope you and your close ones are still healthy and unaffected by the corona situation.
Recently I started to do some charge/discharge cycles to get a baseline/ballpark figures how my SG performs Ah-wise.
I performed the cycles as followed:
-I monitored the time it took to charge my output battery to charge up to 15.3V with my SG after I drained 1Ah out of it with my CBA. After a this SG charge cycle was done I charged up the input battery with regular charger. (So input and output battery where not interchanged during these cycles. I always waited at least an hour before charging/discharging a battery after it was charged/discharged).
I did these cycles with 3 different gap heights (8mm, 10mm, 12mm). 3 cycles @12mm, 3 cycles @10mm and 2 cycles @8mm, 8 cycles in total.
All these cycles I did in CG mode, without:
-Generator coil
-Cap dump circuit
-Fans
Both input and output batteries are 12V 12Ah AGM
As a rough calculation used from the input battery, I took a reading from my analog amp-meter* at the start and one at the end, took the average value of those 2 and then multiplied that by the time it took to charge the output battery. E.g. the amp meter was 2.1A at the start, and 1.9A at the end, and it took 0.5 hours to charge the output battery, that yields 2A x 0.5H= 1Ah.
*I have an amp-meter with a bypass switch, so only flipped it briefly at the beginning and at the end of the charge cycle to take a reading.
See enclosed screenshot summary of the 8 cycles.
(I do have more data available, like battery voltages, outside temperature, humidity, but left those out of the summary for now)
As you can see in the summary, all the (roughly) calculated Ah at the input, are above 1. And with only 1Ah drained out of the output battery, all have yielded a COP below 1 (Ah wise).
1. Could you comment what in your opinion could be the cause for my COP staying below 1? Main difference that I see is the drag, meaning that you either ran with fans or with the generator coil. Yaro mentions in post #14 as well that he had some better results with a his friction wheel. My wheel runs with extremely little friction/when turning of the SG, it runs out for a while.
2. Another thing I noticed is that the input battery after being charged with the normal charger always ends up higher at its resting voltage (+/-13.20V) than the output battery being charged with the SG in CG (+/-13.10V). I would have expected the opposite…
Best regards,
Rodolphe
Comment
-
Hi Rodolphe,
Thanks. My family and I are all in good health, but everyone has been adversely affected economically. And our Constitutional Rights have been severely restricted by an overzealous Governor in our State. This is more about politics than it is about health! It's past time for a return to normal.Hope you and your close ones are still healthy and unaffected by the corona situation.
Some differences I noted are that your wheel has 24 magnets while mine has 21. Yours has 8 power coils, while mine has 7 power coils. You changed to matched 100 ohm base resistors as suggested in the intermediate handbook, while I stayed with the 470 ohm matched resistors recommended in the beginners handbook. That's why my potmeter is set to a lower value than yours. Mine was running at a higher RPM, starting at 220 RPM and finishing at 265 RPM. I was using two flooded batteries in parallel, 230 CCA each, for the primary to recharge one flooded 230 CCA battery in common ground mode. My amp draw averaged about 1.6 amps for 29 minutes.1. Could you comment what in your opinion could be the cause for my COP staying below 1? Main difference that I see is the drag, meaning that you either ran with fans or with the generator coil. Yaro mentions in post #14 as well that he had some better results with a his friction wheel. My wheel runs with extremely little friction/when turning of the SG, it runs out for a while.
I suspect the batteries may be part of the difference in results. Fist chance I get I will test mine using two 5.5AH AGM batteries in parallel charging two more 5.5AH AGM batteries in parallel. With more internal resistance in the run battery, effective input voltage drops off more and reduces the charge rate to the receiving battery even while the amperage from the input battery remains high.
I'll report back the results of what I find.
I've noticed that after several discharge/charge cycles with my AGM batteries they all rest at slightly different voltages regardless of how they are charged. And I don't use any regular "hot" chargers at all, only Bedini chargers and machines with Bedini circuits.2. Another thing I noticed is that the input battery after being charged with the normal charger always ends up higher at its resting voltage (+/-13.20V) than the output battery being charged with the SG in CG (+/-13.10V). I would have expected the opposite…
Gary Hammond,
Last edited by Gary Hammond; 06-14-2020, 07:32 PM.Comment
-
Hi Gary,
Thanks for your input!
Yes, I think so too, that the politics play a big role in the current situation… Here in the Netherlands, being a country greatly depending on export, we suffer the economic effects too…
I do agree with the differences you mentioned regarding magnets, wheel size, and coils. I just expected that those differences would have more an influence for tuning, rather than having a huge impact regarding the Ah COP, especially since I built according to the handbooks. However I could image if the influence of a generator coil/cap circuit/fan would be profound enough, that would be reflected in the COP. The generator coil circuit parts I have ready here, and the a working comparator Cap circuit too, but to get a “clean” base line I decided to do a first set of test runs without them and discuss with you. (Fan I don’t have yet, where did you buy yours?)
I did consider the batteries too, but since in the DVDs John mentions that 13Ah would be good enough to start with, I expected my 12Ah AGMs to be close enough.
If what you say is true (which I don’t doubt), that the charge rate drops down if the effective voltage drops, that that certainly can explain (part of) the difference in COP between you and me if you have 2 batteries in parallel. How much Ah are your batteries? (My batteries do not specify a CCA value).
Looking forward to hear back from you on your AGM battery tests; if your Ah COP values drop down towards my values, we might have found the reason and I then need to by different batteries, or put some more in parallel. (now that I mention it, I do have three of them, so I could put 2 in parallel at the input, but I think I’ll await your results first).
I’ve got a radiant charger on my wish list, but not sure when I'll order it, when I order some more DVD/other stuff from the US as well I guess.
Best regards,
Rodolphe
Comment
-
Hi Gary,
Got curious and ran 2 more tests, both with 2x 12V AGM in parallel at the input, on test at 8mm gap, one test at 12mm gap, yielded the same result: 1.23Ah at input.
(1 of the input batteries was charged with a regular charger, one was charged with the SG).
See updated measuring sheet below.
One of these days I might do a 8mm and 12mm test with the comparator in SG and/or radiant mode while awaiting what your AGM tests yield.
Best regards,
Rodolphe
2020-06-16 measurements V2.pdf
Comment
-
Hi Rodolphe,
I just finished a run in CG mode with my machine with no added mechanical load. I used two 5.5AH AGM batteries in parallel for both the run battery and the charge battery. This equals 11AH in each position. All the batteries were fully charged about two weeks ago and the run batteries were still sitting at 13.10 volts. The charge batteries were sitting at 13.04 volts.
I took 1 amp for 1 hour (1AH) out of the charge batteries with my CBA and let them recover for another hour. They came back up to 12.92 volts in that hour. Then I started the run and graphed the charge with my CBA. The run started from a dead stop and the first measurements were taken after 3 minutes so everything could stabilize. The RPM was 230, current draw was 1.6 amps, and primary voltage under load was 12.51. It took a total of 35 minutes for the charge batteries to reach 15.3 volts. The run current varied between 1.65 and 1.7 amps so I just used 1.7 for calculations. The RPM was 276 at the end of the test, and the run batteries were reading 12.48 volts under load. I did slightly reduce the pot setting part way thru the test raising the current draw from 1.6 to 1.7 amps and slightly increasing both RPM and charge rate.
So 1.7 amps for 35 minutes is .99 AH. (35/60 x 1.7 = .99)
I didn't make any changes to the machine since I last tuned it for running some battery swapping tests. So when I finished this test I checked the pot setting which was 26 ohms, and the coil gap setting which was .310". I also used a different ammeter than I used in the previous tests 6 years ago. The resistor was 12 ohms and the gap was .350" back then (2014). This wasn't tuned to perfection for this test, but indicates that you should be able to get a COP of 1 in AH from your machine using 2 12AH AGM batteries.
It's been one hour since the end of the test and the charge batteries are sitting at 13.15 volts, and the run batteries are sitting at 12 92 volts.
Gary Hammond,
Comment
-
Hi Gary,
Much appreciate you took the time to do this measurement with the AGM batteries! This gives some ground for a more proper comparison between your machine and mine/how my machine performs Thanks a lot!
Just to check if I understand you correctly regarding some things:
-When you say no mechanical load you mean no generator coils and no fans?
-You took 1Ah out with the CBA in 1H, so that is faster than the C20 rate (doesn’t really matter I suppose).
Looking at the results/specs you’re giving me comparing them with my results, especially my the latest ones with 2 AGMs at the input, I can only say that your machine WAY outperforms my one…
You recharge 1Ah / battery in 35min @ +/-1.7A.
The fastest I’ve recharged 1Ah is in 30minutes, but that was with at least 2.6A at the start (or more). I do have 8 coiler and you have 7, but that doesn’t justify a whole amp more to be able to recharge in 30 minutes.
Furthermore I notice that your current draw doesn’t go down as much as mine comparing the beginning and the end of the run.
Your RPMs, are much higher than mine. You have a different size wheel I think, and a different amount of magnets, but you still are 36rpm higher than me at the end (and that is when I have an input of 2.6A, gap size 8mm).
Another difference is that you used 2 batteries at the output and input, where in my latest measurements I only had 2 batteries at the input and 1 at the output, but I would be a bit surprised that putting two at the output would suddenly make all the difference, or could it?
Now the measurements I’ve been taken where done pretty roughly, meaning that I just logged the time to recharge with the SG in minutes, rather than a stopwatch and measuring seconds (could make 1 minute of difference). Also I took only 2 amp readings:
-one at the beginning (after the amp meter stopped climbing, and stayed stable)
-one at the end just before the output battery got to 15.3V.
But even if I take my best charge cycle and deduct 1 minute from the time, and calculate only with the amp reading at the end of the cycle (so the lowest value) then I still are stuck with an input of +/-1.1Ah. And calculating only with the (low) amp reading at the end is incorrect off course.
As you can see in the measurement, I scanned the 12mm to 8mm gap area, yesterday did another run at 12mm (with 2 batteries at the input), starting out with a 1.8A input current, but that measurement failed more or less, at the end the current draw was to low it seemed for proper charging, the RPMs started to decrease at the end (rather than increasing), and the charge time was already over 1 hour. I Updated it in the measurement sheet anyhow, and included the latest version here at the bottom.
Any suggestions in which direction I should look to get a better COP Ah wise??
Did you make your own coil, or bought it from TeslaGenX?
Should we compare our magnets maybe a bit close?
I was considering to run some more tests at 6mm and 4mm, but would be surprised if it suddenly jumps to your specs…
Update 13:34 (time in the netherlands)
Another thing I realized is that the wires from/to my potmeter are AWG 20... maybe that could be a bottle neck?
Update 15:45 (time in the netherlands)
I just ran another test of which the results confuse me even more. I need to do a little introduction about the batteries I’ve been using to explain my confusion.
I have 3 AGM batteries:
Battery A: 12V AGM, 12Ah, RS-PRO (for these tests only charged with SG, discharged with CBA)
Battery B: 12V AGM, 12Ah, RS-PRO (for these tests only charged with SG, discharged with CBA)
Battery X1: 12V AGM, 12Ah, Xtreme (only charged with “hot”/regular charger)
(A, B, X1 are just names I’ve given them/marked them that way)
When I was doing my initial tests, using 1 battery at the input and 1 at the output, Battery X1 was always my input battery and Battery B was always my output battery.
When I recently ran a couple of tests with 2 batteries on the input, X1 and A where my input batteries, and B was always the output.
Because of the many tests I ran with B as an output, I know more or less where its voltages are at any stage (before charging, after charging, before CBA discharge, after). Because of that knowledge, in my latest test I put B at the input and A at the output with the following thought:
-If for some strange reason my amp-meter is completely off, I can say something by looking at the voltage of Battery B after the run is done (I realize that the radiant spike that comes back to the input has effect too on the voltage level). Expecting that my amp-meter is working correctly, I did not expect anything out of the ordinary compared to having X1 at the input and B at the output….
However it made a big difference (not in a good sense). I updated the measuring sheet again and inserted it anew, now showing which battery I used at input/output, their voltages, and I gave the cycles IDs, so it is easier to reference to.
So in this version of the measurements, V4, if you compare cycle IDs 12.1.1 / 12.1.2 / 12.1.3, you see that this last test (12.1.2) performed extremely poor. X1 was always sitting a bit higher in voltages, (sometimes over V0.20 before the cycle started) than A and B, but if that accounts for such a big differences, than it comes down to finding a battery which has a very high resting voltage. But that would not explain the whole story I guess since your run batteries where at 13.10V before the start, so my X1 is sitting even higher most of the time.
Best Regards,
Rodolphe
2020-06-18 measurements V4.pdf
Wires to potmeter.pdfComment
Comment