Back-EMF Studies

[floodrod]

Actually, there isn't even a need to answer me or reply.

I already know I could create 2.5 times the voltage as the positive terminal with just pulsing a choke.

I already know I could create so much back EMF that I could run an h bridge to run a motor over 1,000 RPM connecting everything to the negative terminals of a battery. Not even touching the positive.

As stated in the initial post, I will not be referencing conventional documented equations to explain the occurrences. 

I am looking for chain of events that cause the effects, with no interest in what current electrical understanding accepts to be true.

If you could lay out a chain of events of how I can get 27 volts direct current from the positive terminal of a 12 volt battery, I will listen.

If you were here to tell me there is no extra voltage when I could clearly show 27 volts coming from the positive side of a 12 volt battery after a diode, then your mathematics are of no interest to me.

[partzman]

Floodrod,

Take a look at a sim of your inductor/cap circuit below.  In this case, the 20 volt pulse on the input to the inductor results in an ending voltage of 38.22v on C1.  This occurs due to the fact that L1 is charged to a peak current thru D1 and then collapses or discharges this stored energy back to C1 again thru D1.  You can calculate the energies yourself to see that this process is COP<1.

F6 is giving you good advice.

Regards,
Pm

[floodrod]

Floodrod,

Take a look at a sim of your inductor/cap circuit below.  In this case, the 20 volt pulse on the input to the inductor results in an ending voltage of 38.22v on C1.  This occurs due to the fact that L1 is charged to a peak current thru D1 and then collapses or discharges this stored energy back to C1 again thru D1.  You can calculate the energies yourself to see that this process is COP<1.

F6 is giving you good advice.

Regards,
Pm

Thank you for verifying there is an increase in voltage. And thank you for breaking it down into chain of events.

I have no argument that this is not OU as I have no proof to claim such.

But no doubt I will be experimenting more with this trying to manipulate it.. 

[F6FLT]

...
I have no argument that this is not OU
...

This is blindness.  See reply#21. And anyway, the burden of proof is on you only. It's a shame to suggest that there could be OU.
There's no point in publishing your tinkerings if you don't care about the answers you get because you don't like them.

[floodrod]

This is blindness.  See reply#21. And anyway, the burden of proof is on you only. It's a shame to suggest that there could be OU.
There's no point in publishing your tinkerings if you don't care about the answers you get because you don't like them.

Apparently you feel this is not the place to discuss opposition to mainstream science. 

Questioning something that mainstream electrical engineers already decided is law, is obviously shameful.

I hang my head in shame because I have the audacity to think that there may be a possibility something was misunderstood.

(KB2RTG)

[Cadman]

I'm a stubborn old cuss. I guess I look at things from a different perspective. I think you guys (not you floodrod) are missing the point.
You want calculations so here you go.
Capacity = 100uF, Voltage = 20, charge = 0.002 C, energy = 0.02 J
Capacity = 100uF, Voltage = 10, charge = 0.001 C, energy = 0.005 J
Capacity = 100uF, Voltage = 5, charge = 0.0005 C, energy = 0.00125 J

Discharging the source cap to the load uses half the stored charge. 0.001C has been sent to the load and 0.001C remains in the source. Each cap has exactly half of the original charge. We have lost nothing but potential energy in each cap. The caps representing that source and load are for measurement purposes of one pulse only. The real load has used the energy and it has dissipated to 0. Now there is an additional  0.0005 C in the BEMF cap. These coulombs were obtained for free.
If you continue to pulse the load with 20V and collect the BEMF into that cap you know very well the voltage can rise far above the 20V source.

Say we wait until that voltage is 30V.
Capacity = 100uF, Voltage = 30, charge = 0.003 C, energy = 0.045 J
At that point in time we have 0.045 J of free energy.

Say we wait until that voltage reaches 100V.
Capacity = 100uF, Voltage = 100, charge = 0.01 C, energy = 0.5 J
Now we have 0.5 J of free energy.

Isn't that the goal we are striving for? Is that not free energy?

I mean, as an analogy, if I put 10 gallons of gas in my car and go for a long drive and while I'm driving an angel pours 5 more gallons of gas into my tank, I sure as heck would consider that free energy. And I wouldn't complain that it's not OU because I didn't get more than I started with for free.

[floodrod]

Yeah I don't even care if I'm looked at as the crazy one. So be it.

I'm continuing anyway. Attached or scope shots of what this back EMF looks like.  The yellow trace is the back EMF returning to the battery separated from diodes. The blue is the alternating DC powering the circuit.

Noticed how the BEMF is exactly sync with the input.  There is no irregular spiking or anything that resembles fly back from a collapsing field.

From my measurements, measuring bemf to hot terminal of the battery, we could get more than 100% of the voltage back, with over half the amperage back.

For instance, if I am sending in 6 volts at 1 amp. My back EMF will be measuring somewhere about 6.5 volts at 0.55 amps

But now if I measure the 6 volt battery back EMF to ground, I can easily get 13 to 14 volts. Essentially I could charge a 12 volt battery by pulsing a 6 volt battery through a choke.

[F6FLT]

Apparently you feel this is not the place to discuss opposition to mainstream science. 

Questioning something that mainstream electrical engineers already decided is law, is obviously shameful.

I hang my head in shame because I have the audacity to think that there may be a possibility something was misunderstood.

(KB2RTG)

If I am here, it is no more to admit anything from academics, than to admit anything from physics beginners.

Apparently you feel that this is the place to take others for morons by accusing them of conspiracy against ideas challenging mainstream science or suggesting that there could be OU in your setups, when you have not presented any coherent idea why there would be nor made any energy balance from measurements, which I did for you. And I explained why there was no OU there.
Anyone can challenge mainstream engineering, but if you do so without providing supporting quantified facts but only empty rhetoric around basic common setups, you should expect objections.

[floodrod]

Here is a video of me running a motor off the negative terminal of a battery. The positive and the negative motor feeds are both connected to the negative of the battery, using current coming out of the negative battery terminal and grounding it into the circuit.

https://youtu.be/rKpx0bT_14s

I could also make it run by connecting both leads to the positive of a battery. And using the battery positive as a ground.

Sending alternating current through a choke creates enough back EMF that this becomes possible.

[Grumpy]

Some necessary definitions:

Voltage: also known as electric pressure, electric tension, or (electric) potential difference, is the difference in electric potential between two points.

Watt: the SI unit of power, equivalent to one joule per second, corresponding to the power in an electric circuit in which the potential difference is one volt and the current one ampere.

[floodrod]

Here's a cool little video. I have a motors prime mover ran in series through a choke. Separating the back EMF.

I am showing current measurements of the driving current and the back EMF current in two separate multimeters at the same time.

The back EMF multimeter is grounding to the positive terminal of the battery.

This gives a glimpse of the power available in the back EMF as opposed to the driving current. And keep in mind the impedance the back EMF is facing from the battery positive terminal, yet still pushing that much amperage through.

https://youtu.be/C_cmqwZcGZE

[floodrod]

This was posted on my other thread elsewhere and he clearly explains the flaws in Maxwell's and Faraday's theories..

The Classical theory is not correct and pretty much useless.. 

This is a teaching of the highest order of how inductors really work
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhfSU7x5YT8

[unimmortal]

Looks like i'm resurrecting a few threads today....

Has anyone had any success putting capacitors in front of a switched coil with a capacitor collecting from the (-) side of the coil? A CLC tank if you will. I'm envisaging a pumping system that starts before the coil.

[AlienGrey]

This is a teaching of the highest order of how inductors really work
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhfSU7x5YT8
[/quote]You think this guy's analogy is of some use  I don't think so! he ignores the most useful part, you need to know!
When i was a school kid our old science tutor use to show us with a compass this strange phenomena of a magnetic field
Don't ignore it!

Sil

[AlienGrey]

Looks like i'm resurrecting a few threads today....

Has anyone had any success putting capacitors in front of a switched coil with a capacitor collecting from the (-) side of the coil? A CLC tank if you will. I'm envisaging a pumping system that starts before the coil.

What do you mean by that question (it's a Variable that gives different results that depends on Frequency and inductance / Capacitance.

here is some views of a test rig i built around a TL494 and a HV Mos-Fet lighting a neon it draws 90 ma at 12 v nothing  free about it in this mode. 

Sil