If it is possible to simultaneously charge a battery with an inverter that has a relay to control and delay overcharge while it discharges what would be the power rating the inverter that would drive a 24v 180A dc motor

 

Inverters produce AC from DC, so inverters discharge batteries, they don’t charge them.

If you are thinking of a combined charger and inverter such as a Victron Quattro, then it can either charge or invert, not both.

 

It is not really clear to me what the TS is actually asking for.
My impression is that the TS seeks to use an inverter, that also provides a battery charging function, to charge the battery that it is operating from.
If that is the question, can that be done, the answer is NO.
And, a 24 volt motor that draws 180 amps at full load (8640Watts) is either the starter motor for a large diesel engine or the drive motor for an EV car.
Is this a request for a system with much greater than 100% efficiency??

 

The TS’s previous post was entitled “fuel-less generator” and asked much the same question. Unfortunately, no-one has discovered the secret to perpetual motion since lunchtime yesterday.

 

Do you mean a UPS system?

 

A battery can't be charged and discharged simultaneously, if that's what you're asking?

 

The TS’s previous post was entitled “fuel-less generator” and asked much the same question. Unfortunately, no-one has discovered the secret to perpetual motion since lunchtime yesterday.

Thanks Ian0 for your insight.
What I am envisaging is running or driving a dc motor using a battery/battries and the technology to give that motor a perpetual motion through a generator. Example : we can share opinions/analyse the possibilities of a 24-48v 180A dc motor using direct coupling to generate electricity. How do we recharge the source energy to give a perpetual motion that would generate electricity.

 

There‘s a conspiracy more powerful than Q-Anon that says it’s not going to happen.
it’s called ΔS>0

 

What I am envisaging is running or driving a dc motor using a battery/battries and the technology to give that motor a perpetual motion through a generator.

Lots of people have envisaged that, but it will never be achieved. It's contrary to the Laws of Physics.

 

Thanks Ian0 for your insight.
What I am envisaging is running or driving a dc motor using a battery/battries and the technology to give that motor a perpetual motion through a generator. Example : we can share opinions/analyse the possibilities of a 24-48v 180A dc motor using direct coupling to generate electricity. How do we recharge the source energy to give a perpetual motion that would generate electricity.

There are only two obstacles in the way of being able to implement this sort of system.
The first barrier is that even the most efficiently designed motors, under the optimum conditions, deliver over 93% efficiency. That means that 7% of the power supplied to the motor is wasted as heat and not available for driving a load.
The second obstacle is that the very best generation scheme, using a permanent magnet rotating field alternator and low loss rectification diodes, is not likely to deliver more than 90% of the shaft input energy as an electrical output. That means that a full ten percent of the mechanical input energy is wasted as heat in several areas of the alternator.

So the energy conversion scheme using the very best possible components and connecting cables with resistance so low that it can be ignored, is still converting 17% of the power it started with into heat.

PLEASE reference my comment in post #3 as to why I am not going to explain the means of achieving the stated goal.

 

Thanks Ian0 for your insight.
What I am envisaging is running or driving a dc motor using a battery/battries and the technology to give that motor a perpetual motion through a generator. Example : we can share opinions/analyse the possibilities of a 24-48v 180A dc motor using direct coupling to generate electricity. How do we recharge the source energy to give a perpetual motion that would generate electricity.

MODERATION: Unfortunately discussions of getting more out of something than you put in, or even as much, are not permitted on AAC. The general topic is called over-unity which refers to a situation where the sum of all inputs after subtracting all outputs is >1 (unity).

In fact, even a version where the result is 1.0 would be a violation of the rules because there are always losses in systems that do work producing heat which is seen as waste (inefficiency). So, the bottom line is that if you want to waste time “investigating” perpetual motion, “free energy”, and allied fields that’s your choice.

But, AAC has decided that you are not permitted to waste the community’s time. To you this may be a novel, exciting idea—to us it is the same thing over and over and it rarely ends well. It is my sincere hope that you will consider the idea of learning electronics in the orthodox mode before trying to find reasons why hundreds of years of study by brilliant people is wrong when it concluded that the direction you are hoping to go is a dead end.

And, no, Tesla didn’t make free energy machines, there are no perpetual motion devices that aren’t frauds, and there are no conspiracies keeping magical free energy from the public. Don’t confuse bad actions by people hoping to preserve a market by supressing higher efficiency or lower cost technologies that actually exist and comport with science, with such actions to supress non-existent magic.

“Question authority” is good advice for people who unquestioningly accept things about which they have, or could easily have, cogent questions. But if you don’t even know the questions, yet try to invent them out of thin air, something is wrong. In those cases, I would give the same advice, but point you at the “authority” that convinced you impossible things are possible while, unlike the authorities that would have to question, can’t survive the investigations by actual subject matter experts into their claims.

So, I don’t think you are discussing these things with evil intentions or any insincerity. I don’t think you are “stupid” or any version of that. I think your native curiosity is a great thing, but again, I strongly encourage to point it at learning the fundamentals of real physics—partcualrly in the area of thermodynamics, and of circuits and the simple equations that characterize the voltage, current, and power that will show you why the nature of things doesn’t accomodate what you are trying to do.

Please don’t post about proscribed topics again, your posts will be deleted and you risk a ban. On the other hand you are more than welcome to post about permitted things and learn from the many, many years of experience-informed knowledge available to you here on AAC, freely given, and with the hope you will learn and grow in electronics.

[EDITED: paragraphy 3, for clarity]

 

If you want free energy, buy a solar panel. For £100 capital outlay (which is less than an inverter and a motor) you can get a 400W solar panel, which will give you, on average, about 800Wh per day for the next 25 years.
What’s not to like?

 

To the TS, please go back to post #10 and then read and understand the specifications of whatever motor and generator you are considering. Pay attention to the efficiency specification, and you will see that in all honest specifications the efficiency is less than 100%. For any net gain in power the efficiency will need to be greater than 100%. Hence the goal can not be achieved by these means.

 

MODERATION: Unfortunately discussions of getting more out of something than you put in, or even as much, are not permitted on AAC. The general topic is called over-unity which refers to a situation where the sum of all inputs after subtracting all outputs is >1 (unity).

In fact, even a version where the result is 1.0 would be a violation of the rules because there are always losses in systems that do work producing heat which is seen as waste (inefficiency). So, the bottom line is that if you want to waste time “investigating” perpetual motion, “free energy”, and allied fields that’s your choice.

But, AAC has decided that you are not permitted to waste the community’s time. To you this may be a novel, exciting idea—to us it is the same thing over and over and it rarely ends well. It is my sincere hope that you will consider the idea of learning electronics in the orthodox mode before trying to find reasons why hundreds of years of study by brilliant people has concluded that the direction you are hoping to go is a dead end.

And, no, Tesla didn’t make free energy machines, there are no perpetual motion devices that aren’t frauds, and there are no conspiracies keeping magical free energy from the public. Don’t confuse bad actions by people hoping to preserve a market by supressing higher efficiency or lower cost technologies that actually exist and comport with science, with such actions to supress non-existent magic.

“Question authority” is good advice for people who unquestioningly accept things about which they have, or could easily have, cogent questions. But if you don’t even know the questions, yet try to invent them out of thin air, something is wrong. In those cases, I would give the same advice, but point you at the “authority” that convinced you impossible things are possible while, unlike the authorities that would have to question, can’t survive the investigations by actual subject matter experts into their claims.

So, I don’t think you are discussing these things with evil intentions or any insincerity. I don’t think you are “stupid” or any version of that. I think your native curiosity is a great thing, but again, I strongly encourage to point it at learning the fundamentals of real physics—partcualrly in the area of thermodynamics, and of circuits and the simple equations that characterize the voltage, current, and power that will show you why the nature of things doesn’t accomodate what you are trying to do.

Please don’t post about proscribed topics again, your posts will be deleted and you risk a ban. On the other hand you are more than welcome to post about permitted things and learn from the many, many years of experience-informed knowledge available to you here on AAC, freely given, and with the hope you will learn and grow in electronics.

Thanks for thoughtful advice!

 

My comments on efficiency certainly were explaining why it is not possible in the real world. Providing the actual numbers is the rational approach to such a discussion.