Gary's "Complete Advanced" SSG Build

[Gary Hammond]

Hi Rodolphe,

I used no fans and, even though the generator coils were still installed, I had the output to the LEDs switched off. So no added drag there.

My wheel measures 22.75" in diameter at the steel rim. The magnets are glued to the outside of that. The grade C8 ceramic magnets are .375" thick by 1.875" long by .875" wide. Here's a link to the magnets. https://www.magnet4less.com/ceramic-magnets-1.875-in-x-7-8-in-x-3-8-in-block

I figured that two 5.5AH batteries in parallel is the same as one 11AH battery and close enough to the 12AH batteries you are using to give us meaningful data. I used 11AH for the run battery and 11 AH for the charge battery. So the sizes would be equal for each position.

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 know you said your wheel has a long rundown time, but you never did state the exact time it takes. The coil has to be removed to check this without any drag. Mine takes a little over 13 minutes to run down from a fast spin. 11 minutes is about the least acceptable to get good performance from the machine. Any excess bearing friction, wheel imbalance, or out of round will reduce performance.

I bought my coil, electronics, and circuit board from Teslagenx. The transistors and resistors were all matched by them. I listed the magnets I used above. And my potmeter and base circuit wiring is all AWG 20 as well. This size is OK for the base circuits.

Did you buy matched transistors and resistors from Teslagenx, or did you source them somewhere else and match them yourself?

Your battery B appears to be sulfated or damaged in some way. The glass mats may be partially dried out. Plus, not all batteries are created equal. Not even if from the same batch. Some of your early testing may have affected it adversely.

The SSG machine is no better than the batteries you use. A large part of the performance always depends on the batteries used.

[pearldragon]

Hi Gary,
Thanks for your quick response! I'll be away for a couple of day(s) but will respond once I come back.

Best regards,
Rodolphe

[pearldragon]

Hi Gary,

Rim & magnets
Thanks again for all the specs of your machine. I put your/mine specs regarding rim and magnets in a table, see attachment. Although our specs are different, I cannot say if any of them is so important that it would make a big difference in performance, maybe you can tell. Main thing to note is maybe the grade of our magnets: you have C8, I have Y35, which is a different grading system. My grade is a little higher, see https://www.supermagnete.nl/eng/faq/...-Y35-stand-for. Furthermore mines are a bit bigger, see attachment.

Free running time rim
I just tested it by putting the rim wit magnets in a wooding jig. “Fast spin” I a bit hard to quantify, but after the first spin I gave it, it ran 9min 45sec. The second spin I tried a bit harden, it ran 10min. Lubed the bearings with WD40 and gave it a third spin: 4min 20sec. Fourth spin 4min 18 sec.
This lubing was not an improvement… will clean the bearings with a degreaser and try again… but not tonight anymore .

Trigger circuit wire
I realized later on that the potmeter is located in the trigger circuit and not in the main coil(s) circuit so that indeed the 20AWG wire there probably is not an issue.

Matched Transistors/resistors
I did the matching of the 100Ohm resistors myself. They had an accuracy class of 0.5% to start with, so already pretty accurate, and used my Fluke 115 to measure resistance. I selected 8 transistors which showed the same value on my Fluke (e.g. 8 resistors that showed 100.1-Ohm).
For the transistor matching I built the device as shown on page 11/12 of the Intermediate Handbook.
Using the procedure as described there, with the device calibrated at 100mA with the transistor that conducted the least amount of current, I matched/selected my 8 transistors. Seven have a value of 110mA, one has a value of 109mA.
I’ll ask TeslaGenX about their transistor/resistor matching range too to compare.

Batteries
Sulfation on Battery A or B could be, but not sure how likely that would be: pretty new batteries 2019 and have been charged in radiant mode quite a bit.
The thought crossed my mind too that I might have damaged the batteries, but if that would be the case I would have expected to see a bigger difference in the voltage level after being charged (in CG mode), but they are within a very tight range, see measurement sheet of the previous post.
However, I did had a look at the measuring data I did in those runs months ago, where the voltage levels of the batteries where sitting at before starting a discharge cycle (after being charged radiantly): 13.29V-13.31V (but as mentioned that was radiant charged, not CG). So the oddball measurement of my previous post, in my recent cycles was cycle ID 12.1.2, with bat. A as input and bat B as output… maybe I should do another cycle with bat B. as input and bat. A as output… see if that give some more information, regarding if one of the batteries is damaged. But then first I need to get the wheel at least to the same free spinning level it was before…

It’s late here now. I’ll write a short email to TeslaGenX and then go bedwards.

Best regards,
Rodolphe
2020-06-21 - attachment.pdf

[Gary Hammond]

Hi Rodolphe,

Lubed the bearings with WD40 and gave it a third spin: 4min 20sec. Fourth spin 4min 18 sec.
This lubing was not an improvement… will clean the bearings with a degreaser and try again… but not tonight anymore .

WD40 is the wrong thing to use. It is a poor lubricant made from solvent and fish oil. It works great as a water displacement, however, and is where the WD in it's name comes from.

The best lubricant I have found is Triflow. Are you using the original bicycle wheel bearings, or are you using ball bearings? If you are using the bicycle bearings, set them up a little loose. I am using precision ball bearings on a 3/8" precision shaft with the outer dust seals removed. The bearings are degreased and then lubed with Triflow.

Regarding the magnets ............ The number of magnets on any given size wheel will affect both the RPM and the duty cycle. The size wheel we are both using will run the fastest with 18 magnets, next fastest with 21 magnets, and slowest with 24 magnets. The closer together the magnets are the longer the on time of the duty cycle. Longer on time means higher current draw. A steel wheel also has more mass which gives more rotational momentum, which is also desirable. I have an aluminum wheel with 18 magnets, an aluminum wheel with 24 magnets, and a steel wheel with 21 magnets. They all work, but the steel wheel with 21 magnets has the longest spin time and outperforms the other two wheels in electrical efficiency on the machine as well.

John Bedini recommended using a steel wheel with 21 magnets, so that's what I ended up using with good results.

Tuning can be tricky and time consuming, as all the little things add up to make a significant difference in total outcome.

Gary Hammond,

[pearldragon]

Hi Gary,

Lubricant
Thanks for your recommendations/pointers. Triflow is not so easy to get here, but I see that it is a PTFE based lubricant, I assume that an equivalent that I can get here would do. WD40 PTFE drylube i can get around the corner https://www.wd40.com/products/dry-lube/. Would that do? Or is there another thing in the Triflow I should look for in a lubricator?

Nr of Magnets and weight of the wheel
I understand that the duty time goes down when the nr of magnets decreases, but I expect that the output would go down at the same (or similar) rate as well?
I would think that the duty time becomes an issue, when the “off” time is not long enough anymore for the coil collapse/charging of the secondary battery. Or if not all the energy used during the duty time can be re-used effectively. Dave Wing stated that it should be 50-50 in another* post.
In that same post he mentioned as well that the wheel should have more mass. So far I didn’t do anything with it since I didn’t read in in the handbook and neither saw the real advantage of it. But now you mention it too.
Although a steel wheel will be heavier, it will not be 10 pounds that Dave is mentioning. Had a quick look for them anyways, but in 22” the majority here is Alu.
So what I thought about doing now is the following:
-clean out lubrication I used yesterday (the standard WD40)
-relube with PTFE lubricant
-design some flywheel mass that I can attach to my current wheel (not sure if I’ll get 20 pounds attached though).
And then see what that yields.
A next step could be buying a new Alu rim with 21 magnets (and the added weight). (The handbook stated 24 magnets, so I went for that initially).
Does this approach sound reasonable to you too?

* post #212
http://www.energyscienceforum.com/fo...?t=399&page=22

Best regards,
Rodolphe

[Gary Hammond]

Hi Rodolphe,

The WD40 PTFE drylube may work fine. I've never tried it myself, so can't recommend one way or the other. Check with your local bicycle shop to see what they recommend.

Duty cycle .......................I've had the best results with the Teslagenx coils and circuits when using a 20% on time, 80% off duty cycle.

When Dave recommended a 50% duty cycle, he also specified a much different coil with several more winds of much smaller wire. That coil would be at a much higher impedance and require a longer on time duty cycle. This is more like the 1984 Bedini free energy generator, as Dave pointed out. John later developed the SSG machine to be easier to replicate and also to use a two battery system. I was basically trying to replicate John's SSG and follow his recommendations in EFTV videos #33 and #34.

Gary Hammond,

[pearldragon]

Hi Gary,

Some updates from my side:

Transistors, TeslaGenX
I’ve been in contact with TeslaGenX regarding the transistor matching, although they match more accurately (0.5%-0.1%), they consider my accuracy (+/-0.9%) matched too, and didn’t think with that accuracy the transistors would be the issue of my performance. Briefly explained the whole situation to them as we discussed here, if they come back with something we haven’t covered yet, or have a good insight, I’ll let you know.

Freewheel spin / flywheel
I re-assembled my wheel, this time lubed with PTFE spray. First spin 15min 30sec (it’s a new record haha). Second spin 14min, 45sec. That’s an improvement of 50% more spinning time! That is with the nuts so loose I can hear the balls of the balls of the bearings “fall” when the wheel gets to the end of its spinning time, although when I horizontally pull/push the shaft it is less than 0.5mm that I can move it…. Yaro however noted in #14 here on this thread, that he had better results with his wheel that “dragged” a bit more. I have to put my one to the test again to see what it yields for me.
Also I designed some pieces of steel that I can mount to the wheel, to gain more “flywheel effect”. The pieces are +/-500g each, ordered 16, so I can stack up to 8kg extra weight. They will come in at the end of next week, so have to wait for that to see how that affects my free wheel spin/performance.

Duty cycle
With all the components being specified in the handbook, and the coil a bought component from TeslaGenX, the duty cycle and rpm are directly linked I would think? So can only be influenced with the gap and base resistor? And so the duty cycle tuning, is in this case one and the same as the gap/base resistor tuning, correct?

Plan to do some charge/discharge cycles with this wheel that runs smoother now. Will also see if some more tests will yield some results regarding if any battery is damaged. And then next week test again with some extra weights on. Will update/post here once I have the first results.

Best regards,
Rodolphe

[Gary Hammond]

Hi Rodolphe,

Duty cycle
With all the components being specified in the handbook, and the coil a bought component from TeslaGenX, the duty cycle and rpm are directly linked I would think? So can only be influenced with the gap and base resistor? And so the duty cycle tuning, is in this case one and the same as the gap/base resistor tuning, correct?

No. The duty cycle is directly proportional to the magnet width/distance between the same edge on adjacent magnets. For any given wheel and magnet size the greater the number of magnets, the greater the duty cycle on time.

Your wheel is 570mm in diameter and the magnets are 15mm thick. So the total effective diameter is 570+15+15 = 600mm at the outside face of the magnets. The effective circumference is 3.14x600 = 1884mm. Dividing this by the # of magnets gives the total circumferential distance of one complete cycle which is 1884/24 = 78.5mm. Then dividing the magnet width by the cycle length gives the % on time. So 20/78.5 gives a 25.48% on time.

The same wheel and 21 magnets give a shorter on time. The total circumference is still 1884, but now one complete cycle is 1884/21 = 89.71mm. So dividing the width by the total cycle length gives 20/89.71 = 22.29% on time.

The RPM is also affected by the number of magnets. The machine will tune to about the same frequency for any given coil, magnet to coil gap, and pot setting. So assuming it is tuned to 80 hertz, the wheel with 24 magnets will be rotating at 80/24 x 60 = 200 RPM. The same frequency with 21 magnets will spin the wheel at 80/21 x 60 = 228.6 RPM

Going to 18 magnets will give an even smaller on time and faster rotational speed than the 21 magnets. I have three wheels I can use . One with 18 magnets, one with 21 magnets, and one with 24 magnets. The steel one with 21 magnets works the best for me.

Gary Hammond,

[pearldragon]

Hi Gary,

Duty Time
Thanks for your explanation! You’re completely right, makes sense. You mentioned about the duty cycle already in a way earlier post*, mentioning it should be between 18%-23%, it didn’t register at that point/I was still struggling with the very basics. Moreover I was just going by the handbook specs.
If I compare duty time % of your 21 magnets wheel to mine with 24 magnets, I come to more or less the same duty time %: yours 24.9%, mine 25.2%. see attachment for (your) calculation.
Still does not mean of course that I should not try a different setup. So I ordered a new wheel (exactly the same one I have now), and more magnets. If I should aim for 20% on time, that would bring the number of magnets for me to 20. That’s what I plan to go with, 20 magnets, unless you recommend me differently.
* #200 http://www.energyscienceforum.com/fo...?t=399&page=22

Response from TeslaGenX
Main pointer was that they too mentioned that I probably have too many magnets with my current setup, advising to use less.

Test cycles with relubed current 24 magnet wheel
I did some more test cycles; the increased free spinning time didn’t seem to have a very noticeable impact, but what bothers me more is the current inconsistent results I get when using the same initial parameters… will test some more to see if it stays that way, might be the batteries…
The discs I designed/ordered to increase the wheel weight came in early, might do a test run with those too this weekend.

Best regards,
Rodolphe
2020-06-27 - Attachment.pdf

[pearldragon]

Hi Gary,

I would like to buy a new battery since I think that 2 of my 3 AGM batteries are damaged*. Now I cannot find a lead-acid here, with openable cells, that is a traction battery, I can only find them as “starter-batteries”. So they should not be discharged more than 20%... Now in theory this should not be an issue, since even if I would buy a similar size to what I have now (12Ah), and only discharge 1Ah with the CBA, that is still only 8.3%.

For semi-traction batteries: almost all of them are AGM or GEL. So buying an AGM battery again would be an option too. But since I do not plan to discharge them as far as I did in the beginning of my tests last year, a lead-acid might suffice, and from what I understood is less easy to damage.

What would you advise?

Thanks,

Best regards,
Rodolphe

*The two batteries I use as output I have named “A” and “B”. After running 2 charge/discharge cycles with battery B with very different results, I tried to discharge battery “B” to start a third charge run, but got a very distorted signal on the CBA graph. I unhooked the battery and tried again a couple of minutes later with the same result, see attachment.
Then I measured battery “A” to see how charged that one was, it was sitting at 12.68V, which normally is the voltage after a discharge with the CBA. So I hooked it up to the SG, but it went to 16V really fast. Let it rest for an hour and measured the resting voltage again: 12.68V, see attachment. After letting it rest for another hour I discharged it with the CBA anyhow (1Ah), and will try to charge it with the SG tomorrow, but to me it looks like both batteries are done….
2020-08-04 - attachment.pdf

[Gary Hammond]

Hi Rodolphe,

I'm a little confused by your terminology. By “star-batteries” do you mean automotive starting batteries? And by "traction" batteries are you referring to the deep cycle type used to power trolling motors and electric vehicles?

A lot of people use 13 AH lawn mower starter batteries, which are flooded lead acid. These are the type John Bedini shows in his videos. They are usually rated from 230 to 350 CCA (cold cranking amps) depending on the number of plates and brand name. I've used these and also several different car starter batteries ranging from 500 to 750 CCA. I even have some 105 AH deep cycle marine batteries which are too large for this machine. All of these are flooded lead acid types.

According to Teslagenx http://teslagenx.com/reference/c20.html if you divide the CCA rate by 20 it will give the approximate AH capacity of the battery. So a 500 CCA / 20 would be approximately a 25 AH battery with a c20 rate of 1.25 amps. This is a good size to use for this machine.

Gary Hammond,

[pearldragon]

Hi Gary,
Yes, it was a typo, I corrected it in my previous post: "Starter-batteries", which are normally used in cars and motorcycles, and (semi)-traction batteries are deep(er) cycle batteries, indeed used in electric vehicles etc.

I ordered 2x VMF 52805, 12V / 24Ah / 293CCA, lead-acid with openable cells.
Thanks for your input.

Hope to get some proper AND consistent results with those....

Regards,
Rodolphe

[pearldragon]

Hi Gary,

I would like to buy a new battery since I think that 2 of my 3 AGM batteries are damaged.

Seems like I jumped the gun a bit with my conclusion that (all) of my AGM batteries are damaged based on the CBA distorted graphs. I emailed the WestMountainRadio, and they said this was a typical sign for connection/wires/terminal problems. Not that they looked bad (I only have my CBA since april), but I cleaned them up anyhow, and the discharge graph looked way better again... but now I already ordered and received my new batteries too...
I'm going to test some more with my two of the three AGMs I trust most, and if i don't get consistent results than it is good to swamp to my new batteries and see what they do.

Regards,
Rodolphe

[Gary Hammond]

Hi Rodolphe,

I was going to mention to you that I've also seen that erratic trace on my CBA as well, and it turned out to be a bad connection where the cable plugs into the CBA unit. It looked ok but even after cleaning the contacts it would still do the same thing. So I opened up the unit and then removed the connectors from the cable and hard wired (soldered) it to the output. This solved the problem for me.

A bad connection between the battery and cable clamps can cause this as well.

Also, a battery that has unresolved pockets of sulfate buried in the plates can give an erratic trace as the pockets are exposed to the electrolyte. Usually you will see this during charging, but it can also show up occasionally during discharge. This doesn't mean the battery is bad, only that it is sulfated and needs to be rejuvenated.

Gary Hammond,

[pearldragon]

Hi Gary,

Thanks for your input.

Also, a battery that has unresolved pockets of sulfate buried in the plates can give an erratic trace as the pockets are exposed to the electrolyte. Usually you will see this during charging, but it can also show up occasionally during discharge. This doesn't mean the battery is bad, only that it is sulfated and needs to be rejuvenated.

Although I haven't done logging of the charging process; since my output battery has been charged most of the time in CG and occasionally Radiant mode, it would not be likely to be sulfates, correct?

Regards,
Rodolphe