I quite agree with you. It's not taught in schools. They want us to keep paying for electricity. It will be a good idea to include a solar panel and scale it up. Thanks again for sharing, waiting for your next update. Do have a good day.
Thank you for your comment. I have to agree regarding education, the problem is most of these people put a lot of effort into getting an education but little toward questioning their education. I have done some tests with the solar panel and I believe this could make the circuit even more efficient. Tomorrow I will test a better solar panel as tests to date have been with a crappy garden light solar panel and it’s extremely inefficient solar controller. I also intend to run some tests with 12 volt lights running on the transfer method with a 200 watt solar panel, I have a feeling the jump in quality might help a lot.
Thank you for your comment. I am very glad you are having success with this concept. Please feel free to discuss your experiments in the comment section as it encourages others to have a go at it.
Thank you for your comment. I am also keen to get the switching underway because the efficiency goes through the roof. A lot more technical but according to Electrodyne Corp. the switching facilitates a magnetic flux inrush of energy when the relay coils fields collapse. I will try to make a video soon demonstrating this occurs even at very low voltages.
I've followed Rick Friedrich for a long time, but even his work on Benetiz is not nearly as informative or clear as your detailed video here! I play around with a lot of experiments, but I keep forgetting how utterly simple the basic principle of the Benetiz patent is, so I tried something extremely simple today with 3 simple off the shelf parts, (2) 12 Volt / 500 Farad caps and a 12 volt 60 watt motor. One of the caps I had drained to less than 1 volt, the other cap was charged to about 14 volts. I connected the two negatives of the Supercaps together and ran the motor for a few minutes between the two Positives. At the end of the experiment the combined voltage of the caps were GREATER than when I started. I ran the experiment 3-4 times after that with the exact same result!!! Not only did the motor run 100% for free, there was actually a small increase in voltage due to the coil collapse & feedback from the motor. The voltage increase wasn't anything extreme (about 1 to 2 10th's of a volt per 2 minute run), but the motor ran for free with nothing but off the shelf caps and motor!
Thank you for your comment. Sorry for my delayed reply. I agree that is so simple and perhaps this is the illusion and I find that to be the case with most of Tesla's work also. Confusingly simple, the confusion is derived when you realise its so easy. I appreciate you supplying your test information because the more people attempting this the better. please feel free to update me if you like on any more tests you do. Have you run this multiple times to get a consistent data set? Thank you for watching.
Thank you for your comment. You can have a look at my video on the 12 volt version if you like, basically it is exactly the same. th-cam.com/video/zK7ciEFwME8/w-d-xo.htmlsi=pEwXT-rXzObhrRvW
I thought about my step up circle last night I tested 1 year ago. I almost forgot everything. As I told you I have no time now to test it further. But I try to explain you the principle. Maybe you can do something with it. I just explain the basics of the basic. There is more to it. I did it with 12/24v. But if I would have time I will do it with 1.5/6v as you do it: The foundation is your circle. Instead of the Led (plus on 6v and minus on plus of 1.5v-bank) take a step-up-converter. With my step up converter (12v -> 70v) I can limit the current at the incoming side. First I had a cheaper one with the current limit at the outgoing side. This didn't work. The converter blew up and couldn't stop the current. Why I don't know because in a normal set up it works. You connect the step up converter exactly the same as the Led. The step-up-converter will run with 4.5v as the Led does. The Led could be connected as well. It likely wouldn't affect the Led. Then you need a second battery-bank in series of 1.5v and connect it with the outgoing side of the step-up-converter. And this will charge the second 1.5v-battery-bank with 5v or 6v or whatever. 90% of the current used by the step-up-converter goes into the first 1.5v-battery-bank exactly as the Led is doing it. But additionally the step-up converter will charge the second 1.5v-bank. And there I estimate a loss of 40% to step-up the voltage. It's most probably less. At the end there is a loss of 10% and a win of 60% at the second 1.5v-bank. This is a win of 50% altogether. It's generating current and the light is on for a battery life-time without getting current from outside. The next step is to bring this current back to the 6v-bank. I was very close 1 year ago the achieve this with bistable relais, comparator and so on. In this scenario there is probably no need for a step-up-converter because the difference voltage is already higher (4.5v) than the 1.5v. But important is the current limitation. In my scenario I needed a step-up-converter to charge the other 12v-battery. The difference between the 24v and 12v is 12v (equivalent to the 4.5v in your scenario). I stepped up the 12v to 20v and charged up an other 12v-battery. I hope this makes sense.
Thank you for your comment. Sorry for my late reply. I hear you about not having time and whilst yesterday’s jobs weren’t finished there will still be today’s jobs needing attention also, something has to give. I’m pretty sure the system you describe should work, the efficiency would be debatably lower but if it is even slightly more efficient than today’s methods then it should be utilised. Please keep me up to date if you find time to work on it.
I explain here the next step of my step-up circle. I would call it the Capoeira-circle. I did it 1 year ago with my set up (12/24) and it worked. You need three 1.5v-banks and one 6v-bank. You need also a step-up-converter (for example 3-10v). Then you need a 5v-battery-charger to charge AAA or AA-Batteries. Instead of the Led you connect the step-up-converter. The input of this step-up-converter is 4.5v. And the output needs to be 6.5v or 7v. You connect the Positive (OUT) of the step-up with the Positive (IN) of the battery-charger. The Negative (OUT) of the step-up goes to the Negative of the second 1.5v-bank. And the Negative (IN) of the battery-charger goes to the Positive of the second 1.5v-bank. The battery-charger will have 5v input (6.5v - 1.5v). Then you connect the battery-charger in a conventional way with the third 1.5v-bank to charge them up. First we have a 10% loss (at most - the same as with the Led). At the end it charges up the third 1.5v-bank. I estimate a 60% gain here (it should be more). On the way back it charges up the second 1.5v-bank. Here we have a 90% of the 60% from the step-up. I take a very modest 50% gain (at least). At the end we have a 100% gain (60% + 50% - 10%) out of one circle. Example: I take 100W out of the 6v-bank. After the circle finished there should be 200W more in the three 1.5v-banks than there has been in the beginning. This means we have 100W less in the 6v-bank and 200W more in the 1.5v-banks. Altogether we have a 100W gain. With the simple circle I explained in the other comment there should be a 50W gain. With this gain it's easy to charge up the 6v-bank and there will be still a lot of current left to run a Water-heater. I hope this makes sense.
Thank you for your comment. I will have to purchase some step up converters and give that a go, thank you for supplying this information as there is only so much I can get done and my main goal is the education of others, if my channel acts as a platform for others ideas I am happy to be that host. Please feel free to keep posting your ideas here so we can help more people.
@@whatifididthis...1236 Rick Friedrich did a good Video about resistive and capacitive load 5 years ago. I think it's the same principle in our case. He generated AC-Power with inductive coils. To use this power he used a Variac (backward) to manage the output voltage and then he tested it with a resistive and capacitive load. With the resistive load he got an efficiency of 50%. He had 60 Watts of generated AC-Power and could light up an old 30-Watt-bulb. You did exactly the same experience with this 50% with all your loads you tested in your Video a couple of months ago. But with the capacitive load he (Rick Friedrich) seemed to have almost 100%. His words are: "I'm gonna say that's pretty much matching the input voltage. We're at 60 Watts worth of LED perhaps. And the input is 60 Watts." I think it's key to use capacitive loads to get a good result. And if you use a resistive load it's important to have a balanced load in compare to the batteries. But even then I think it won't have the efficiency of a capacitive load. I'm happy you will test my idea and I'm very interested in the results. I'm confident it will work because a step-up converter and a battery-charger is a capacitive load.
I found an interesting Video from you 8 months ago "Power for the People" where you showed the efficiency of the Power Transfer with different light bulbs and also a motor. It showed that the efficiency with unbalanced power is only 50%. You mentioned that a balanced load will be way more efficient. I think it would be around 90%? When I tested the 12v-Inverter with the fridge running I had the feeling it's almost 100%. I checked the voltage rise at the 12v-battery and it jumped up the same as I would have loaded it in a conventional way with the same amount of current. That's no proof but it made me think this way. That's why I took 90% in my example in the other comment with the Capoeira-cycle. Could it be the inverter running with the fridge is balanced? (I don't know what that means exactly by the way). The inverter and the Lithium-batteries I used are good quality. Maybe that makes a big difference in the efficiency? In case the efficiency would be also 50% I recalculated my example with the Capoeira-circle. I take out 100W from the 6v-bank. 50W goes into the first 1.5v-bank. After the step-up and the battery-charger I count just 50W (30% lost at step-up and 20% lost at the battery-charger) into the third 1.5v-bank. 25W (50% of 50W) goes into the second 1.5v-bank. At the end we have 125W (50W+25W+50W) in the three 1.5v-banks. This still would be a net gain of 25W. I believe this assumptions are the absolute bare minimum. I'm very eager to test it. But my wife is expecting more money.
Thank you for your comment. There is plenty of evidence that suggests this concept can access the zero point energy field when certain conditions are met. Depending on the components deployed and their function integrated into the transfer method can cause drastic changes within the circuit. When all the parameters are met the circuit can achieve a zero volt zero current status at which point loads added to a specific point within the circuit do not increase current draw from the primary battery. For this reason each individual build requires a balancing of components used and by this I am referring to a load that draws a minimal current and less current than the charge/discharge rates of all batteries in the system. As we see with the addition of the green LED, not all components are equal.
Thank you for your comment. If you are cycling the parallel side, one battery at a time instead of all 5 batteries in parallel it should be the same. In this example we have 5 x AA’s on one side and 5 x AA’s on the other side therefore the energy storage capacity is the same. In your case if all the batteries are in the parallel side are charged one by one. then there is the capacity to damage a cell by overcharge. So it should work but to protect batteries it probably shouldn’t be left unattended.
@thebigfella9095 I’m not saying you shouldn’t do it but that it just should not be left alone. I hope to make a video soon using that method to drain the last bit of power from “depleted” batteries. In your case, assuming your not draining the last amount of power, there would be little to no known benefit.
as always I love your videos, I was just thinking will arduino work if I connect it like led? Or that is different? both are DC. Im planing to make moving sensor with esp32 and light bulbs. PS: Im still hooked on your magnets track, thnks
Thank you for your comment and sorry for my late reply. I believe arduino would be a good idea and almost any DC device should work in this manner, I had only one device that died in the 12 volt version which was a low voltage cutoff which is somewhat obvious that it would have blown up, I don’t have arduino so I will have to buy some new toys! Keep at it with your version of my magnet track, it takes a great deal of patience. The small increments of adjustment is critical when finding the sweet spots because each magnet is individual it requires grouping of compatible magnets just as Howard Johnson stated. Ideally buying magnets from the same batch would be better but with small changes you can make a functional arrangement. This is one way how I fine tuned mine, I elevated the sides of the track so that the magnets drop down away from the roller magnet at which point the track magnets influence is minimal, I used two new packs of A4 paper, one on each side of the track, then I removed one piece of paper from each side of the track and rolled again. If you repeat this you will enter an area of increased propulsion, continue removing paper one page at a time from each side and you will pass through a section that bogs the roller down. Although painful this is almost a guaranteed way to find the sweet spot, record the number of pages from the sweet spot to the dead spot and make a 3D print adjustment. If you aren’t sure how to make the adjustment to the print I am more than happy to adjust my original to your researched values.
Thank you for your comment. Yes this circuit will work with all battery chemistry because it is the real movement of energy that makes this work and not the hypothetical variation we are taught. However not all batteries are suitable because of their charging requirements. For example Lithium batteries connected in series and or parallel usually require a battery management system or (BMS) which balances the voltages of the individual cells. Under charging and over charging is the main reason for lithium battery failure. Now all batteries fail in this area in their own way and the different chemistries of batteries available is extensive, lithium when under management of a good BMS is amazing delivering an intense amount of power and you can have almost 100% of that power without damaging the battery yet you try depleting a lead acid battery by more than 50% and you’ve damaged it yet the lead acid battery won’t produce a 3ft rocket flame that can’t be extinguished by anything that any of us have like lithium will. When considering safety as an absolute priority and not wanting to return home to find a fire investigator holding the remnants of your experiment in his hands declaring the source of the fire. I did this experiment with a lithium battery bank for charging a mobile phone, I bypassed the management system because it was not designed for series battery connections and the thing expanded like a balloon producing a highly poisonous gas, it even busted out of its plastic case. Safety first, if then you feel it’s worth testing it with a good BMS never leave it in operation whilst unattended(which defeats the purpose of this experiment), perform the experiment on concrete with no flammable surface nearby. I’m not over exaggerating at all, there are heaps of videos on lithium battery fires on TH-cam. I like the AA batteries as they are very fire safe and I can achieve whatever voltage I want, if I place ten AA batteries in series at 1.2 volts each I then have a 12 volt battery or as seen in my other video’s a head torch running on four AA’ in series producing 4.8 volts and in this video using 5 AA’s giving me 6 volts. This allows me to use a variety of different devices commercially available without modifying the device.
So if I'm seeing this correctly and following it right, what you're saying is essentially any of the little double a devices that I have could potentially be wired up in a manner such as this to extend the battery life considerably. If that's correct, how would I go about doing something like that for say a TV remote or something along those lines like an Xbox controller? And can this be adapted to 18650s sorry for all the questions
Thank you for your comment. Sorry for my delayed reply, you are correct, this will work with most batteries, as long as the parallel receiving battery is roughly half the voltage of the series battery. The way I set it up with AA batteries is consider the load/LED voltage, in this case 3.2 to 3.6 Volts then subtract the voltage of the parallel battery voltage of 1.2 volts. So 3.2v - 1.2v = 2 volts which would be too low for some LED’s so it would be best to use 4 AA in series. 4 AA x 1.2v = 4.8 volts 4.8 volts - 1.2v = 3.6v which is the upper limit of the LED The only other thing to consider after that is to ensure that both banks have the same number of AA’s, ie if you choose 4 x AA’s for the series bank then you need 4 x AA’ for the parallel side. So your TV remote would most likely be two AA or AAA’s and the four battery scenario we just covered would be perfect. When the battery voltages are even, say with a 12 volt version in which you have a 24 volt bank and a 12 volt bank then the load sees half the voltage of the series set, if you place your volt meter on the two positives it will read 12 volts. Both the Xbox and TV remote are going to be very bulky with this type of setup, you could perhaps miniaturise the circuit using small lithium batteries that are usually used in PCB’s for computers and other electronics but it may just be easier to charge your remotes batteries on the negative rail of this circuit, if you take a look at my latest video there is something a little weird going on along the negative rail we may be able to benefit from. Also you should never have to apologise for asking questions, questions assist in rapid learning, not asking questions means we have to individually stumble upon findings which is an incredibly slow way to research, the world would be a greater place if more people asked questions.
Thanks dear for shearing. please don't give up as you are on the right truck.
Thank you for your comment and thank you for watching.
I quite agree with you. It's not taught in schools. They want us to keep paying for electricity.
It will be a good idea to include a solar panel and scale it up.
Thanks again for sharing, waiting for your next update. Do have a good day.
Thank you for your comment.
I have to agree regarding education, the problem is most of these people put a lot of effort into getting an education but little toward questioning their education.
I have done some tests with the solar panel and I believe this could make the circuit even more efficient.
Tomorrow I will test a better solar panel as tests to date have been with a crappy garden light solar panel and it’s extremely inefficient solar controller. I also intend to run some tests with 12 volt lights running on the transfer method with a 200 watt solar panel, I have a feeling the jump in quality might help a lot.
i am doing it with 12v 7 ah, battery's and it works very well
Thank you for your comment.
I am very glad you are having success with this concept. Please feel free to discuss your experiments in the comment section as it encourages others to have a go at it.
Well done. I'm keen to see how you plan to electronically switch the batteries
Thank you for your comment.
I am also keen to get the switching underway because the efficiency goes through the roof. A lot more technical but according to Electrodyne Corp. the switching facilitates a magnetic flux inrush of energy when the relay coils fields collapse. I will try to make a video soon demonstrating this occurs even at very low voltages.
I've followed Rick Friedrich for a long time, but even his work on Benetiz is not
nearly as informative or clear as your detailed video here!
I play around with a lot of experiments, but I keep forgetting how utterly simple
the basic principle of the Benetiz patent is, so I tried something extremely simple
today with 3 simple off the shelf parts, (2) 12 Volt / 500 Farad caps and a 12 volt 60 watt motor.
One of the caps I had drained to less than 1 volt, the other cap was charged to
about 14 volts. I connected the two negatives of the Supercaps together and ran
the motor for a few minutes between the two Positives.
At the end of the experiment the combined voltage of the caps were GREATER than
when I started. I ran the experiment 3-4 times after that with the exact same result!!!
Not only did the motor run 100% for free, there was actually a small increase in voltage
due to the coil collapse & feedback from the motor. The voltage increase wasn't anything
extreme (about 1 to 2 10th's of a volt per 2 minute run), but the motor ran for free
with nothing but off the shelf caps and motor!
Thank you for your comment.
Sorry for my delayed reply. I agree that is so simple and perhaps this is the illusion and I find that to be the case with most of Tesla's work also. Confusingly simple, the confusion is derived when you realise its so easy.
I appreciate you supplying your test information because the more people attempting this the better. please feel free to update me if you like on any more tests you do.
Have you run this multiple times to get a consistent data set?
Thank you for watching.
cool video. Like you mentioned, would be cool to see this scaled up using a 12v battery
Thank you for your comment.
You can have a look at my video on the 12 volt version if you like, basically it is exactly the same.
th-cam.com/video/zK7ciEFwME8/w-d-xo.htmlsi=pEwXT-rXzObhrRvW
This video also covers the 12 volt version and different loads.
th-cam.com/video/nt3CvTvwqYA/w-d-xo.htmlsi=Wh6Wc_7dt4LtsJ-x
Have a nice day.
I thought about my step up circle last night I tested 1 year ago. I almost forgot everything. As I told you I have no time now to test it further. But I try to explain you the principle. Maybe you can do something with it. I just explain the basics of the basic. There is more to it. I did it with 12/24v. But if I would have time I will do it with 1.5/6v as you do it:
The foundation is your circle. Instead of the Led (plus on 6v and minus on plus of 1.5v-bank) take a step-up-converter. With my step up converter (12v -> 70v) I can limit the current at the incoming side. First I had a cheaper one with the current limit at the outgoing side. This didn't work. The converter blew up and couldn't stop the current. Why I don't know because in a normal set up it works. You connect the step up converter exactly the same as the Led. The step-up-converter will run with 4.5v as the Led does. The Led could be connected as well. It likely wouldn't affect the Led. Then you need a second battery-bank in series of 1.5v and connect it with the outgoing side of the step-up-converter. And this will charge the second 1.5v-battery-bank with 5v or 6v or whatever. 90% of the current used by the step-up-converter goes into the first 1.5v-battery-bank exactly as the Led is doing it. But additionally the step-up converter will charge the second 1.5v-bank. And there I estimate a loss of 40% to step-up the voltage. It's most probably less. At the end there is a loss of 10% and a win of 60% at the second 1.5v-bank. This is a win of 50% altogether. It's generating current and the light is on for a battery life-time without getting current from outside. The next step is to bring this current back to the 6v-bank. I was very close 1 year ago the achieve this with bistable relais, comparator and so on. In this scenario there is probably no need for a step-up-converter because the difference voltage is already higher (4.5v) than the 1.5v. But important is the current limitation. In my scenario I needed a step-up-converter to charge the other 12v-battery. The difference between the 24v and 12v is 12v (equivalent to the 4.5v in your scenario). I stepped up the 12v to 20v and charged up an other 12v-battery. I hope this makes sense.
Thank you for your comment.
Sorry for my late reply.
I hear you about not having time and whilst yesterday’s jobs weren’t finished there will still be today’s jobs needing attention also, something has to give.
I’m pretty sure the system you describe should work, the efficiency would be debatably lower but if it is even slightly more efficient than today’s methods then it should be utilised.
Please keep me up to date if you find time to work on it.
I explain here the next step of my step-up circle. I would call it the Capoeira-circle. I did it 1 year ago with my set up (12/24) and it worked.
You need three 1.5v-banks and one 6v-bank. You need also a step-up-converter (for example 3-10v). Then you need a 5v-battery-charger to charge AAA or AA-Batteries.
Instead of the Led you connect the step-up-converter. The input of this step-up-converter is 4.5v. And the output needs to be 6.5v or 7v. You connect the Positive (OUT) of the step-up with the Positive (IN) of the battery-charger. The Negative (OUT) of the step-up goes to the Negative of the second 1.5v-bank. And the Negative (IN) of the battery-charger goes to the Positive of the second 1.5v-bank. The battery-charger will have 5v input (6.5v - 1.5v). Then you connect the battery-charger in a conventional way with the third 1.5v-bank to charge them up.
First we have a 10% loss (at most - the same as with the Led). At the end it charges up the third 1.5v-bank. I estimate a 60% gain here (it should be more). On the way back it charges up the second 1.5v-bank. Here we have a 90% of the 60% from the step-up. I take a very modest 50% gain (at least). At the end we have a 100% gain (60% + 50% - 10%) out of one circle. Example: I take 100W out of the 6v-bank. After the circle finished there should be 200W more in the three 1.5v-banks than there has been in the beginning. This means we have 100W less in the 6v-bank and 200W more in the 1.5v-banks. Altogether we have a 100W gain. With the simple circle I explained in the other comment there should be a 50W gain.
With this gain it's easy to charge up the 6v-bank and there will be still a lot of current left to run a Water-heater. I hope this makes sense.
Thank you for your comment.
I will have to purchase some step up converters and give that a go, thank you for supplying this information as there is only so much I can get done and my main goal is the education of others, if my channel acts as a platform for others ideas I am happy to be that host.
Please feel free to keep posting your ideas here so we can help more people.
@@whatifididthis...1236 Rick Friedrich did a good Video about resistive and capacitive load 5 years ago. I think it's the same principle in our case. He generated AC-Power with inductive coils. To use this power he used a Variac (backward) to manage the output voltage and then he tested it with a resistive and capacitive load. With the resistive load he got an efficiency of 50%. He had 60 Watts of generated AC-Power and could light up an old 30-Watt-bulb. You did exactly the same experience with this 50% with all your loads you tested in your Video a couple of months ago. But with the capacitive load he (Rick Friedrich) seemed to have almost 100%. His words are: "I'm gonna say that's pretty much matching the input voltage. We're at 60 Watts worth of LED perhaps. And the input is 60 Watts." I think it's key to use capacitive loads to get a good result. And if you use a resistive load it's important to have a balanced load in compare to the batteries. But even then I think it won't have the efficiency of a capacitive load. I'm happy you will test my idea and I'm very interested in the results. I'm confident it will work because a step-up converter and a battery-charger is a capacitive load.
Would love to see a schematic of this.
Thank you for your comment.
I placed a schematic at the end of the video at 17:12.
I hope this helps
I found an interesting Video from you 8 months ago "Power for the People" where you showed the efficiency of the Power Transfer with different light bulbs and also a motor. It showed that the efficiency with unbalanced power is only 50%. You mentioned that a balanced load will be way more efficient. I think it would be around 90%? When I tested the 12v-Inverter with the fridge running I had the feeling it's almost 100%. I checked the voltage rise at the 12v-battery and it jumped up the same as I would have loaded it in a conventional way with the same amount of current. That's no proof but it made me think this way. That's why I took 90% in my example in the other comment with the Capoeira-cycle. Could it be the inverter running with the fridge is balanced? (I don't know what that means exactly by the way). The inverter and the Lithium-batteries I used are good quality. Maybe that makes a big difference in the efficiency?
In case the efficiency would be also 50% I recalculated my example with the Capoeira-circle. I take out 100W from the 6v-bank. 50W goes into the first 1.5v-bank. After the step-up and the battery-charger I count just 50W (30% lost at step-up and 20% lost at the battery-charger) into the third 1.5v-bank. 25W (50% of 50W) goes into the second 1.5v-bank. At the end we have 125W (50W+25W+50W) in the three 1.5v-banks. This still would be a net gain of 25W. I believe this assumptions are the absolute bare minimum. I'm very eager to test it. But my wife is expecting more money.
Thank you for your comment.
There is plenty of evidence that suggests this concept can access the zero point energy field when certain conditions are met. Depending on the components deployed and their function integrated into the transfer method can cause drastic changes within the circuit.
When all the parameters are met the circuit can achieve a zero volt zero current status at which point loads added to a specific point within the circuit do not increase current draw from the primary battery. For this reason each individual build requires a balancing of components used and by this I am referring to a load that draws a minimal current and less current than the charge/discharge rates of all batteries in the system. As we see with the addition of the green LED, not all components are equal.
awesome thanks again....im experimenting in trying to charge 1 battery at a time to see if they get more charge..cheers
Thank you for your comment.
If you are cycling the parallel side, one battery at a time instead of all 5 batteries in parallel it should be the same. In this example we have 5 x AA’s on one side and 5 x AA’s on the other side therefore the energy storage capacity is the same. In your case if all the batteries are in the parallel side are charged one by one. then there is the capacity to damage a cell by overcharge.
So it should work but to protect batteries it probably shouldn’t be left unattended.
ahh ok....ok i wont do it again then...cheers@@whatifididthis...1236
@thebigfella9095 I’m not saying you shouldn’t do it but that it just should not be left alone. I hope to make a video soon using that method to drain the last bit of power from “depleted” batteries. In your case, assuming your not draining the last amount of power, there would be little to no known benefit.
@@whatifididthis...1236 ohh ok cool....thankyou
as always I love your videos, I was just thinking will arduino work if I connect it like led? Or that is different? both are DC. Im planing to make moving sensor with esp32 and light bulbs.
PS: Im still hooked on your magnets track, thnks
Thank you for your comment and sorry for my late reply.
I believe arduino would be a good idea and almost any DC device should work in this manner, I had only one device that died in the 12 volt version which was a low voltage cutoff which is somewhat obvious that it would have blown up, I don’t have arduino so I will have to buy some new toys!
Keep at it with your version of my magnet track, it takes a great deal of patience. The small increments of adjustment is critical when finding the sweet spots because each magnet is individual it requires grouping of compatible magnets just as Howard Johnson stated. Ideally buying magnets from the same batch would be better but with small changes you can make a functional arrangement. This is one way how I fine tuned mine, I elevated the sides of the track so that the magnets drop down away from the roller magnet at which point the track magnets influence is minimal, I used two new packs of A4 paper, one on each side of the track, then I removed one piece of paper from each side of the track and rolled again. If you repeat this you will enter an area of increased propulsion, continue removing paper one page at a time from each side and you will pass through a section that bogs the roller down. Although painful this is almost a guaranteed way to find the sweet spot, record the number of pages from the sweet spot to the dead spot and make a 3D print adjustment. If you aren’t sure how to make the adjustment to the print I am more than happy to adjust my original to your researched values.
Funciona también para baterias de litio este cto. ??? O solo en esas condiciones ??? Con ciertas baterías recargables ???
Thank you for your comment.
Yes this circuit will work with all battery chemistry because it is the real movement of energy that makes this work and not the hypothetical variation we are taught.
However not all batteries are suitable because of their charging requirements. For example Lithium batteries connected in series and or parallel usually require a battery management system or (BMS) which balances the voltages of the individual cells. Under charging and over charging is the main reason for lithium battery failure.
Now all batteries fail in this area in their own way and the different chemistries of batteries available is extensive, lithium when under management of a good BMS is amazing delivering an intense amount of power and you can have almost 100% of that power without damaging the battery yet you try depleting a lead acid battery by more than 50% and you’ve damaged it yet the lead acid battery won’t produce a 3ft rocket flame that can’t be extinguished by anything that any of us have like lithium will.
When considering safety as an absolute priority and not wanting to return home to find a fire investigator holding the remnants of your experiment in his hands declaring the source of the fire. I did this experiment with a lithium battery bank for charging a mobile phone, I bypassed the management system because it was not designed for series battery connections and the thing expanded like a balloon producing a highly poisonous gas, it even busted out of its plastic case.
Safety first, if then you feel it’s worth testing it with a good BMS never leave it in operation whilst unattended(which defeats the purpose of this experiment), perform the experiment on concrete with no flammable surface nearby. I’m not over exaggerating at all, there are heaps of videos on lithium battery fires on TH-cam.
I like the AA batteries as they are very fire safe and I can achieve whatever voltage I want, if I place ten AA batteries in series at 1.2 volts each I then have a 12 volt battery or as seen in my other video’s a head torch running on four AA’ in series producing 4.8 volts and in this video using 5 AA’s giving me 6 volts. This allows me to use a variety of different devices commercially available without modifying the device.
So if I'm seeing this correctly and following it right, what you're saying is essentially any of the little double a devices that I have could potentially be wired up in a manner such as this to extend the battery life considerably. If that's correct, how would I go about doing something like that for say a TV remote or something along those lines like an Xbox controller? And can this be adapted to 18650s sorry for all the questions
Thank you for your comment.
Sorry for my delayed reply, you are correct, this will work with most batteries, as long as the parallel receiving battery is roughly half the voltage of the series battery. The way I set it up with AA batteries is consider the load/LED voltage, in this case 3.2 to 3.6 Volts then subtract the voltage of the parallel battery voltage of 1.2 volts. So 3.2v - 1.2v = 2 volts which would be too low for some LED’s so it would be best to use 4 AA in series.
4 AA x 1.2v = 4.8 volts
4.8 volts - 1.2v = 3.6v which is the upper limit of the LED
The only other thing to consider after that is to ensure that both banks have the same number of AA’s, ie if you choose 4 x AA’s for the series bank then you need 4 x AA’ for the parallel side.
So your TV remote would most likely be two AA or AAA’s and the four battery scenario we just covered would be perfect. When the battery voltages are even, say with a 12 volt version in which you have a 24 volt bank and a 12 volt bank then the load sees half the voltage of the series set, if you place your volt meter on the two positives it will read 12 volts.
Both the Xbox and TV remote are going to be very bulky with this type of setup, you could perhaps miniaturise the circuit using small lithium batteries that are usually used in PCB’s for computers and other electronics but it may just be easier to charge your remotes batteries on the negative rail of this circuit, if you take a look at my latest video there is something a little weird going on along the negative rail we may be able to benefit from.
Also you should never have to apologise for asking questions, questions assist in rapid learning, not asking questions means we have to individually stumble upon findings which is an incredibly slow way to research, the world would be a greater place if more people asked questions.