# Perpetual motion ...



## NaeKid (Oct 17, 2008)

I know, it isn't supposed to be possible. Years ago I built a little "contraption" that consisted of a small 12-volt motor, a car battery, an alternator. I used the battery to run the motor, the motor to run the alternator and the alternator to charge the battery.

I ran it for about a week before shutting it down. I considered it a sucess and left it at that. FastForward a few years and I am told that it is impossible for it to run and work as I designed it. :scratch

I just found a video of someone who did something very similar to what I did, except that the battery is not in the equation ...






Tell me what you think


----------



## TheAnt (Jun 7, 2011)

If you created a perpetual motion machine then you are in the wrong business and you need to mass market the thing and become rich. If you created a highly efficient machine that still has a net energy loss then good for you but thats not the same.


----------



## Prepper_Action (Feb 20, 2012)

That's pretty cool. Unfortunately there will always be a loss of energy, even in just the form of heat. You know what? Forget all that! Great things were done by men who tried something that wasn't possible.


----------



## The_Blob (Dec 24, 2008)

didn't I already answer this? :scratch


----------



## partdeux (Aug 3, 2011)

NaeKid said:


> Tell me what you think


LOL... and how does the fuel source get replenished?


----------



## NaeKid (Oct 17, 2008)

If I was to build my experiment again, I would probably do a few things differently.

#1 - the battery was used as a buffer for the power. The vehicle alternator requires a bit of a charge for it to do its job. The alternator pumps-out a little more voltage and amperage than what is required to run the 12-volt motor, so, the alternator is capable of keeping the battery topped-up naturally. Instead of using a wrecker-battery, I would use a high-quality gell-cell.

#2 - I would probably wire-in a 1-farad capacitator, similar to what is used in high-end car stereos in order to smooth-out the power.

#3 - I would wire it with good welding-cable instead of just scrap battery-wire from the wreckers

#4 - I would build it on a metal base where the base is the grounding system instead of bolting it all to a wooden board

#5 - I would probably use motorcycle chain and sprockets for the power-transfer between the alternator and the motor instead of a V-belt from the wreckers as I used the first time around.


I totally agree that there is no such thing as a true perpetual motion machine, but, if the power output exceeds the power use, it should run for a very long time as long as the power-buffers and mechanical parts are kept in good working condition. My first experiment lasted 1-week before I shut it down calling it a success .. next time I might see if I can pull a month out of it ... and then try to pull a year out of it ... 


:beercheer:


----------



## md1911 (Feb 9, 2012)

When I was in hi school I tried to make about the same thing your describing. I used a generator off of a old tractor. Mine ran for about 7 weeks I used a v belt and a cheap car battery. All my wiring was small gauge. The motor I powered was out of a a old cordless drill. My wiring got very warm.


----------



## TheAnt (Jun 7, 2011)

NaeKid said:


> I totally agree that there is no such thing as a true perpetual motion machine, but, if the power output exceeds the power use, it should run for a very long time as long as the power-buffers and mechanical parts are kept in good working condition. My first experiment lasted 1-week before I shut it down calling it a success .. next time I might see if I can pull a month out of it ... and then try to pull a year out of it ...
> 
> :beercheer:


What would be really interesting is to see if you could start it with a dead battery. It would require you to start it by hand and keep it going by hand for a time but then if it is truly creating enough energy to keep it going then it should stay going. Otherwise its just a matter of time before the battery goes dead. It may be efficient but is it truly creating more energy than it is using? I agree, I dont think its possible.


----------



## NaeKid (Oct 17, 2008)

TheAnt said:


> What would be really interesting is to see if you could start it with a dead battery. It would require you to start it by hand and keep it going by hand for a time but then if it is truly creating enough energy to keep it going then it should stay going. Otherwise its just a matter of time before the battery goes dead. It may be efficient but is it truly creating more energy than it is using? I agree, I dont think its possible.


The issue is that an alternator requires some kind of voltage before it can create a charge. An alternator is capable of putting out 300amp of power at 14(+) volts. The motor that I used pulled power at 12-volts and probably 30-watt draw .. most Chevy alternators put out 90 to 130watt, but, MeanGreen has some high-amperage models....

Based on Ohm's Law, the 300amp MeanGreen alternator at 12-volt produces enough wattage for 3600 watts worth of draw. All that excess power then can be pushed into the battery to keep it charged. As long as the battery does not over-charge, it will not boil-over, as long as the bearings in the motor and alternator run smooth, they will not burn-out, as long as the belt (or chain) holds true, things will continue to run properly, as long as the fuses don't blow ... etc - it should continue to run.

You can "pull" power out of the circuit to run lights or to charge small battery appliances (laptop, cell-phone, etc) as long as the power-draw does not over-work the alternator.

Remember, when I did this original experiment, I didn't really know what I was doing - this was before the days of the internet (I was a FidoNET operator at the time). I had no-one telling me that I couldn't do what I was attempting, I hacked-n-bashed my way through it, I had very little for "testing equipment" - in fact, I didn't even think of putting fuses into the system. Ya, things could have gone bad quickly, but, they didn't - I still have all my fingers. :2thumb:

*md1911* - I totally understand what you are saying. I used basic battery wire from the wreckers with standard battery-connectors - maybe a 4-guage wire if that. If you used 10-guage wiring (fairly common), there could have been a melt-down from the heat ...


----------



## md1911 (Feb 9, 2012)

Naekid. Larger wire is a must. You mentioned a fuse. Why not a circuit breaker so you could get the same protection as a fuse and it could also be used as a switch. Never tried it again but a hi-output alternator would be good. With a better battary ofcourse. It might not be perpetual but it could de very usefull.


----------



## Tex (Oct 31, 2008)

NaeKid said:


> If I was to build my experiment again, I would probably do a few things differently.
> 
> #1 - the battery was used as a buffer for the power. The vehicle alternator requires a bit of a charge for it to do its job. The alternator pumps-out a little more voltage and amperage than what is required to run the 12-volt motor, so, the alternator is capable of keeping the battery topped-up naturally. Instead of using a wrecker-battery, I would use a high-quality gell-cell.
> 
> ...


I don't think perpetual motion is possible, but it doesn't hurt to try. Here are my suggestions.

1. I agree with using a metal frame as a ground reference. I'd isolate it from earth ground to minimize external forces.

2. Use the heaviest stranded cable you can find. Heavily crimp and solder all connections to minimize line losses. Even multiple cables per connection if possible.

3. You might want to start it with a battery and then remove the battery with only a large capacitor in it's place. You may be wasting your energy to maintain the battery charge. This would at least shorten the run time to help you study and improve efficiency between attempts.

4. I think a chain would be too heavy and use your energy up. I'd stick with a rubber belt and use as light of a belt as possible with just barely enough tension so that it won't slip.

5. If you want to cheat, add a small solar panel to the mix and sit it in the sunlight.

6. Make sure you grease the snot out of everything but the belt. Roughen the pulley surface with a grinder or sandpaper to encourage friction with the belt.


----------



## Davarm (Oct 22, 2011)

NaeKid said:


> I was a FidoNET operator at the time


I haven't heard of that in a while(long while), I played around with perpetual motion for a while, I didn't have enough mechanical skills to build what I dreamed up so following this thread is pretty interesting.


----------



## Tirediron (Jul 12, 2010)

A couple of thoughts, flat multigroove belts are more efficient than V belts, direct coupling should be even more efficient and a perminent magnet motor might be the most efficient generator. If you count the heat produced you may well aproach 100%


----------



## rockbear777 (Apr 9, 2012)

I would love to see a schematic or a drawing of your original project. I love the possibility of free energy and perpetual motion. I believe it is possible to achieve something close to 100%. Even something simple that last a decade or more would be outstanding.


----------



## NaeKid (Oct 17, 2008)

rockbear777 said:


> I would love to see a schematic or a drawing of your original project. I love the possibility of free energy and perpetual motion. I believe it is possible to achieve something close to 100%. Even something simple that last a decade or more would be outstanding.


You can see the video above - my build was very similar to that. Schematic?? Just a couple of junk-yard wires between the junk-yard motor, average car battery and stock junk-yard alternator.

:dunno: Nothin' spectacular :dunno:


----------



## labotomi (Feb 14, 2010)

Tirediron said:


> A couple of thoughts, flat multigroove belts are more efficient than V belts, direct coupling should be even more efficient and a perminent magnet motor might be the most efficient generator. If you count the heat produced you may well aproach 100%


The power going to the battery plus the heat generated in the wiring/bearings/belt friction plus losses due to windage resistance plus eddy current losses in the alternator and motor windings and a few other things will add up to 100%

That's the problem. If you subtract those losses, you no longer have 100% and are losing useful energy just by running the contraption. You need wiring with zero resistance, frictionless bearings and even then you will have to deal with the eddy current losses which to my knowledge, can be reduced but never eliminated.

Motor efficiency is somewhere between 80 to 95% depending on the size (larger is better) and design. The best generators have about a 95% efficiency.

Anytime you convert energy from one form to another (mechanical to electrical to chemical back to electrical and again to mechanical) you are never going to achieve 100% conversion. This type of system is starting in the hole from the beginning.

I admire your persistence, but do some research into the individual topics such as generator and motor theory in addition to looking at topics that proclaim to have developed perpetual motion devices. You'll gain an understanding that they leave out of these videos.

The Navy NEETS modules are a good source of information.
http://jricher.com/NEETS/


----------



## Jimmy24 (Apr 20, 2011)

Tex said:


> I don't think perpetual motion is possible, but it doesn't hurt to try. Here are my suggestions.
> 
> 1. I agree with using a metal frame as a ground reference. I'd isolate it from earth ground to minimize external forces.
> 
> ...


I agree, it won't happen. If perpetual motion was that easy, it would have been covered a long time ago.

The chain is too heavy and too much friction/weight to overcome.

I agree, get the battery out of the loop, BUT be careful. The altenator is a 3ph rig. If it's a hi-cap model it will be delta wound (72-100 amp). Y wound if regular amp (35-60 amp) When you remove the load, the voltage can go very high (165v) not sure the capacitor will take the load like the altenator wants to give it. 
Use an external regulator, perferably an old 2 termial Chrsyler style. 
Also use oil, not grease. Oil is has less friction and for the two bearings, it won't take much. The rear bearing if a Delco altenator has a VERY lite grease from the factory. Oil will work fine as long as you don't over tighten the belt.
Also use at least 10-12:1 ratio on pulleys. Little biddy on alt, big on motor.

I worked on and rebuilt about every brand of altenator, generator and starter known to man, up to about 1982.

But even with using all the tricks I told you, it won't happen...you might get fairly close....but sorry just stating facts....fun to try though...

Jimmy


----------



## Jimmy24 (Apr 20, 2011)

labotomi said:


> The power going to the battery plus the heat generated in the wiring/bearings/belt friction plus losses due to windage resistance plus eddy current losses in the alternator and motor windings and a few other things will add up to 100%
> 
> That's the problem. If you subtract those losses, you no longer have 100% and are losing useful energy just by running the contraption. You need wiring with zero resistance, frictionless bearings and even then you will have to deal with the eddy current losses which to my knowledge, can be reduced but never eliminated.
> 
> ...


+1

Jimmy


----------



## ContinualHarvest (Feb 19, 2012)

Don't forget you'd have to run it in a complete vacuum chamber. Air friction and all.


----------



## The_Blob (Dec 24, 2008)

Jimmy24 said:


> I agree, get the battery out of the loop, BUT be careful. The altenator is a 3ph rig. If it's a hi-cap model it will be delta wound (72-100 amp). Y wound if regular amp (35-60 amp) When you remove the load, the voltage can go very high (165v) not sure the capacitor will take the load like the altenator wants to give it.


oh, just go 3-phase and have twice the fun :2thumb:


----------



## viper63 (Apr 13, 2012)

*Not perpetual. Effecient*

If it was perpetual then you could take the battery out of the circuit and it would run forever. What you made was an effecient system that regenerated most of what it used. Still very cool but not perpetual.


----------



## TopTop (Nov 11, 2011)

NaeKid said:


> The motor that I used pulled power at 12-volts and probably 30-watt draw ..
> 
> Based on Ohm's Law, the 300amp MeanGreen alternator at 12-volt produces enough wattage for 3600 watts worth of draw. All that excess power ----
> 
> ...


You are confusing the fact that your alternator is CAPABLE of producing 3,600 watts with what it is ACTUALLY producing. If you power the alternator with a 360 watt motor it will produce something less than 360 watts output. Think about a portable gasoline generator. Mine is 7,000 watts & powered by a 14hp engine. If I am powering only a couple lights say 200 watts total load, the engine is loafing & not burning much gas. Then a heavy load kicks in, say a 5hp air compressor, or I strike an arc with a welder, the throttle automatically opens & the engine barks & she is consuming a lot more gasoline. Another way to look at it is to check the ratings on a multi fuel standby genny, like this one.

FREE SHIPPING - Generac GUARDIAN Series Air-Cooled Automatic Standby Generator - 17 kW (LP)/16 kW (NG), Steel, Model# 5873

You will notice that the exact same generator with the exact same engine will produce 17 kw on propane but only 16kw on natural gas. The generator is capable of 17kw but the engine can not produce enough power to drive it on NG.

To reiterate, your project will not & can not produce more power than you are putting in. It will just slowly draw down the battery. The more efficient you make, i.e. smoother belt drive, operating in a vacuum, etc, the longer it will take to kill the battery. But be assured, it WILL kill the battery. There is no excess current that could be drawn off for another purpose. If you really want to prove this just put a load on the battery & time how long it takes to kill the battery. Recharge it & just put the load on the battery without your machine & time it again. It will always last longer without your machine trying to recharge it. Of course you must control the variables, like state of charge, temperature, etc & use a static load like a light bulb or resistor.

Or just hook up a decent meter & measure the draw on the motor & compare it to the output of your alternator.

Now on the other hand, *I* have designed this perpetual motion machine using shaped magnets, springs, & ------. lol


----------



## labotomi (Feb 14, 2010)

Why do you think that the generator output ratings are always less than the prime mover (source of motion)? For example. Take the 5KW Honda generator and look up the motor specs. it's powered by an 8KW motor (10.7hp). Where's the extra 3KW going?

Heat, bearing friction, electrical losses, motor action in a generator (counter torque), windage losses. Even the sound it makes takes energy to produce and thus is wasted.


----------

