When is a D/C rotary device wired for OverUnity? |
---|
When its brush contacts are wired in such a way that they sit between the commutator and the rotor. This wiring is advantageous as an alternator. If they are positioned on the side of the commutator opposite the rotor coils, then they are NOT an overunity device. This latter wiring is advantageous as a motor.
Standard approach to the recharging of batteries requires a slight voltage higher than what the battery measures and in reverse polarity to it. So, if a battery is reading +6 (positive six) volts, then I need to provide -7 (negative seven) volts in order to overcome the battery's 6V. Otherwise, current won't flow into that battery. And if current won't flow, then the battery won't recharge. But what if I don't want to take the direct approach (which can be dynamically metered as it is taking place in real time with a fancy display on the EV's console)? What if, instead, I take the indirect approach: one which cannot be metered, but requires rules of thumb to help me negotiate through it? Such is the case with what I am proposing based on John Bedini's work and that of one of his many followers and admirers: Dave Bowling. What I am proposing is nothing short of heresy to our common sense. It is this... Suppose we don't try to force current into a battery by fighting its voltage with a greater voltage of our own (and in reverse polarity to the battery's voltage orientation)? Ergo, what if we lay down our weapons and give up war? What if we simply want to spike low voltage, moderate amperage uni-directional current at the battery and then test it afterwards using standard procedure of a known load across its terminals, say: a one Ohm resistor, and then measure in parallel across that small load to see if its voltage has changed any? By trial and error, a vague general understanding may arise of what it takes to regenerate a dead battery without attempting to recharge it, yet end up with a battery more likely to want to allow itself to be recharged since we were so gentle with it. It's worth a try... Dave Bowling's setup – at its core essential nature – is a modified improvement of John Bedini's three battery rotation scheme and similar to 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. 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... Newman's device simulated in LTSpice – https://josephnewman.info/schematics![]() Although Newman's massive coil provids positive resistance against current flowing from its battery pack, it is 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 provide for his 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 Dave Bowling's setup, sparking brush contacts on the commutator don't deplete the energy provided to recharge the battery pack as in the Joseph Newman device. Instead, they replace Newman's massive coil as a negative resistant, suction for A/C current to recharge Dave Bowling's batteries if it is wired with its brush contacts on the side of its commutator facing towards its rotor coils. OverUnity, Magneto Charger – http://is.gd/magnetocharger![]() But if wired such that its brush contacts are on the side (of its commutator) opposite its rotor coils facing towards its surrounding circuit to which it is attached, then this makes a great motor since its waveforms are modified A/C sinewaves and sinewaves are helical, namely: they are screw-shaped to help rotate the motor's axle. D/C Motor Charging Batteries – http://is.gd/dcrotarycharger![]() The diode in a simple, crystal radio modifies radio waves in a similar manner to make them audible. To describe how I model the rotating magnetic field of a D/C rotary device: 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![]()
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. For the OverUnity Magneto Charger (with its brush contacts on the side of its commutator facing towards its rotor coils) it matters how many good batteries are strung in series. Any quantity of batteries greater than, or equal to two, will result in higher or lower amperage spikes across all of them, respectively. 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 (acting analogous to a dead battery) is optional. You know you must be in negative resistance heaven when the current draw (at the source) goes down while the secondary source current (at the sparking brush contacts) continues to match the load's increase in demand for more current (by the addition of more batteries)! The secret lies in the spark gaps literally giving up unlimited current on demand from out of (seemingly) nowhere. Enlarged current only begins to appear after battery #1 at battery #2 and continuing onward past battery #3 and #4, etc. This is why two batteries are the minimum requirement to see maximum gain. The capacitor (in this situation) is optional. Yet, it is useful since it accelerates the amplification of spiking current. Most of these spikes point in the negative direction indicating a hint at recharging our battery had the voltage level of these spikes been at war with the battery's voltage! Massive Charge – http://is.gd/massivecharge![]() |