Conditioning a Dead Battery to Accept a Charge using Dave Bowling's Three Battery Generator |
The key to conditioning a dead battery, or charging one, is not to try and charge it (the conventional way with a constant flow of D/C current or with smooth sinewaves). Instead, it's best to shock it with spikes arising from sparking contacts on a commutator's brush.
Dave Bowling's setup is a blend between John Bedini's three battery rotation scheme and a Joseph Newman device. The clue to the latter analogy is given by Dave and other bloggers on the EnergeticForum thread (devoted to this topic) in which they suggest that if the motor doesn't turn by itself in five minutes, then try hand turning it a bit to get it to start. That's exactly how Newman started up his motor: by hand turning it – very vigorously (since he was a body builder and his motor required it). This tells me what I need to know to simulate Dave's setup. It tells me that (at least) one secret lies in the little appreciated fact that a spinning rotor produces an A/C rotating magnetic field in a D/C motor while the rotor inside an A/C motor is spun by a rotating magnetic field surrounding it. Otherwise, they're both the same concept. Normally, we provide a positive resistance whenever we use a pileup of voltage as our source of current. This is a positively resistive model since the voltage pushes the current from behind creating eddy currents in the form of back EMF. We also have to pay a considerable energy cost to continually provide for this voltage source since we are simulataneously draining from it. But there is an alternative... What if, instead of pushing from behind, we pull from ahead? This will happen if we use negative resistance. And we can achieve negative resistance through multiple agencies. Newman used a massive coil. Although that provided positive resistance against current flowing from its battery pack, it was also a negative resistor for the magnetic field rotating in the center of that massive coil emanating from its spinning permanent magnets. All I had to do to recognize this fact was provide a miniscule voltage source on the order of micro volts to my simulation of the rotating field of magnetism surrounding the spinning bar magnets in the Newman motor to witness a gargantuan quantity of current arising from where? From that tiny voltage source prompted by the massive coil's pressure of resistance acting against the battery pack. It's a question of perspective... What constitutes positive resistance for the battery pack (in the Newman device) is negative resistance for its rotating magnetic field surrounding its spinning permenent bar magnets. The massive coil of Newman's device actually draws current from out of the rotating magnetic field of the spinning permanent magnets at the center of his machine. And that massive outpouring of current is for free (since we don't have to pay for it other than providing for this setup) and will top off his machine's battery pack with sufficient recharge to keep them fully charged at all times (since they're not expending much current as it is, anyway!). In the case of Dave Bowling's device, the dead battery is turned around from the correct orientation provided by the two good batteries which are exercising a dominating precedence of polarity among all three batteries based on the two good batteries' 24 volts is double that of the dead battery's 12 volts. Furthermore, this third battery is dead. It's lack of voltage – due to its lack of capacity to store any amp-hours – is the vacuum which Nature abhors. This vacuum of deadness literally sucks current towards itself from the spinning magnetic field surrounding the D/C brush motor's rotor, because this dead battery wants to desperately come alive with chargeability by returning to its prior state of good health. It remembers the way it was when it used to be brand new (hysteresis equals memory). Due to these similarities inherent in both the Newman device and Dave Bowling's, they are both simulated (simply) using the same electronic model of negative resistance drawing current from a voltage source. The difference lies in their respective methods of achieving this feat as noted, above. To describe how I model their rotating magnetic fields: using a transformer and an A/C voltage source, I'd like to make a comparison between an A/C rotor and its D/C equivalent. The primary of a transformer (on the left-hand side of this simulated model) is the rotor inside both motors while the magnetic fields of either rotor is represented by the secondary of the simulator's transformer (on the right-hand side of this simulated model). In the case of an A/C rotor, the squirrel cage rotor (inside the A/C motor) spins around immersed in the A/C armature's magnetic field. In contrast, the D/C rotor spins around inside the magnetic field which it creates. Both A/C and D/C magnetic fields drag their respective rotors along. A D/C motor's commutator translates its rotating magnetic field into a D/C flow-pattern prior to allowing this electrical flow to exit the D/C rotor coils and enter the circuit to which the motor is attached. This is modeled, here in these simulations, by a full bridge rectifier consisting of four diodes in a square formation on the far left of the image, below. Transformer Model of a D/C Rotor's Magnetic Field![]()
Magneto Charger – http://is.gd/magnetocharger![]() OK... That's all very well and good as far as philosophical rambling goes when I'm groping for answers. But what about an entirely new situation? When we add sparking brush contacts to this model, everything changes... The commutator's sparking brush contacts separate the A/C power source on the right-hand side (arising from the spinning magnetic field of the magneto's rotor coils) from the batteries on the left. Their relation is governed by the inductance of the rotor's coils simulated, here, by the transformer coils plus the coupling coefficient between the transformer's primary and secondary coils on the left and right, respectively, which represents how efficient does the rotating magnetic field (on the right) transfer its power to the rotor's coils (on the left)? A ghost of an A/C shaped waveform remains on the left after the sparking brush contacts finish chopping them up into spikes due to pressure buildup across their gaps suddenly releasing their pent up pressure in the form of spikes. It matters how many good batteries are strung in series. Any amount greater than, or equal to two, will result in higher or lower amperage spikes across all of them. Less than two good batteries shuts this circuit down. Kaput! Nada... No results unless a minimum of two good batteries are in series. The capacitor (dead battery) is optional. You know you must be in negative resistance heaven when the current draw goes up whenever the load (more batteries) also goes up! The secret lies in the spark gaps literally giving up unlimited current on demand from out of nowhere. Enlarged current only begins to appear after battery #1 at battery #2. This is why two batteries are the minimum requirement to see maximum gain. The capacitor gives all of them a slight boost in amperage. Massive Charge – http://is.gd/massivecharge![]() |