Not free Energy

I had a look.

The answer is very simple. Without any sort of technical explanation people will not believe it.

The knack is to explain the principle without giving away the exact implementation.

if you have a patent to protect you maybe you can give more info.

I have designed a battery operated doing pump and am familiar with the limitations of alkaline batteries . Many poor designs expect them to produce 1.5 volts per cell, doubtless most of us here realise you need to run them down to below 1v per cell to get decent life.

I do sympathise, but unless you give me a clue I don't really see that you can do much that I couldn't.... I could add a switched mode supply that steps up even the lowest voltage and charges a big capacitor up to say 1.2v.....

Anyhow, I hope this explains the reluctance.

Good luck

Del

Welcome to the club! Sometimes the invention itself is the easy part. Building a market is another.

Start looking at trade shows. You just need to keep plugging and root out the right people to get the shoe in the door, but little by little you will crack open the door of opportunity.

Keep networking…

Yes it is patented. Again, I am offering 15% of what could be a massive payoff if anyone of you can arrange a deal or licensure (15% of any money I get related to your efforts).

In terms of increased life time, how does your device compare with the use of a DC to DC converter to suck all the juice out of a battery. Since that is the most common circuit today, it is your main competition, and perhaps where you should focus your efforts.

uh.. well actually I guess I do because there in one i use in the car. But the patent does not use a converter of any kind.

Comparing: I'm unable to compare because its not used for this method although I would presume you might, if you worked at it, get some results ok.. but the question is if you are going to run a torch with a dc dc converter, how will you run the same lightbulb without destroying it.

Also the parts count 'might' be higher for dc dc converter even if you overcome that destructon of the bulb problem.

Also it would take a heck of an expensive dc dc converter to run a car also. But the patent is cheap on parts and construction.

Also with the patent you are not tasked with changing any batteries until all are zeroed out. (women like this alot)

Also converters tend to chew up energy which in a battery operated device is undesirable. The patented system was fined tuned to not use much energy for operations at all . In fact is almost zero (940 nanowatts) when it monitor mode which is the normal operations mode. In another mode it only uses 10 ma at whatever voltage you are running.

Sounds like your device is mostly for larger devices such as cars and golf carts. I was thinking smaller devices like mp3 players and other electronics. In your post you talk about flashlights and toy trains for which a dc to dc converter would work fine. I didn't mean to compare how it functions, I meant to compare the market. In small electronics its common to use a dc to dc converter so that the device can operate until the battery voltage is drained to well below where the device would operate otherwise. Sounds like your invention is meant for a different market, so this may not be a valid comparison.

In the primary battery industry (mostly AA and AAA's) lots of research has gone into engineering the batteries to enable you to get all the power out of them. The more you can make your output curve like a square wave the better. If your device can do this, then you might want to talk to a battery company. Often when a company is looking to incorporate charging or power saving technology into a device, they will ask a battery company for help.

Thanks frank, actually I was thinking it would be good for all types of devices. I have tested it extensively with alkaline both D and AA sizes. It works very well getting the nth degree of energy out of them. It does NOT use a Dc to DC converter. In my opinion I would think that a DcDC converter would actually cost more parts and also use more energy as waste heat. A simple resistive 'tree' circuit would function as dc dc convertiing.. but waste energy as heat across at least one resistor (assuming high dc to lower dc conversion). Also the decision of which voltage to use is an issue with a simple resistive tree . And to speed up and slow down (throttling) , how with resistive tree?

The patent circumvents all this as a method by which there is little if any waste energy. I go so far as to say the waste energy is in the nanowatt range (~0) when the device is in normal operations mode (on). Throttling is easy and is how the golf cart has been clocked at 20mph when needed but normally cruises at 12mph (this is great speed for old ez go 3 wheeler golf cart) and at 12mph gets 45 miles distance.

This method can be used with mp3 and cell phone battery systems. Also envision an micro version for use in hearing aids (they devour batteries as you know and this would be good for that too). Of course a higher wattage version is used in the golf cart and also works well at 2+ normal miles driven between charges as normal. Charging time seems to be about the same as normal (higher amps yes).

You tell Shontelle that I wan't my advancements kept bleepin private! As per the conditions under which I made the bleepin disclosure. I don't need these guys help in any way.

Who exactly is your target market? You should pick one segment and then grow later once you have established the brand name and manufacturing process.

I know a guy that works for Club Car. Have you tried approaching the golf car companies directly?

You will need to be willing to go to the people you are marketing this to. It is a hard sell to get them to come to you and see a demonstration. You will find a few willing to listen, but they won't invest in a trip based on anecdotal evidence and web movies.

Good luck.