1. Regenerative Acceleration Generator Technology Evaluation
KERS to KEGS Innovation
A white paper prepared by:
Mark G. Anderson, PE & Thane Heins
ReTechnology Power and Water Engineering
April 10, 20

2. Regenerative Acceleration Technology Evaluation
Summary: Electric regenerative braking systems convert dynamic motion into electricity to charge batteries
while slowing vehicles. Resistant generator induced torque slows rotating motor-generators resulting in current
flow back to a battery system thereby transferring momentum reducing kinetic energy and storing electrical
energy in the EV’s batteries. This concept may be intuitively obvious to most casual technicians. Regenerative
acceleration is a more difficult notion to merely accept or grasp partly because the exciting results appear to
break traditional laws of physics. Impressive, well-documented demonstrations provide astonishing empirical
results but overreach foundational academics challenging learned professionals to theorize and document why
regenerative acceleration works. Endorsement from recognized university labs such as MIT, Ottawa University,
Condordia University has helped to embolden regenerative acceleration toward widespread commercial
application.
The purpose of this evaluation is to test the argument and empirical results presented by Potential Difference
regarding Regenerative Acceleration, to identify weaknesses in the premises and structure of the argument and
use results to either improve or abandon the position that regenerative acceleration technology is viable. This
paper also offers recommendations to complete the evaluation cycle through hypothetical analysis, additional
testing and performance verification to support a marketing plan for widespread commercial application.
Background: Mark G. Anderson, PE and others were invited to learn about, observe, witness, and evaluate the
viability and application potential for regenerative acceleration technology as developed by Potential
Differences, Inc. on March 11 – 12, 2012 near Toronto, Canada. Several demonstrations were presented and
examined. The final comprehensive operating test was recorded by professional videographer ending with a
panel discussion including the inventor, unbiased professional engineers, commercially interested parties and
witnesses.
Regenerative brakes are most commonly seen in electric or hybrid vehicles. Electric regenerative brakes
descended from dynamic (rheostatic) brakes which have been used on electric and diesel-electric locomotives
and streetcars since the mid-20th century. In either of those systems, braking is accomplished by switching
electric motors to act as generators that convert motion into electricity instead of electricity into motion. Of
course, traditional friction-based brakes are also required for full braking of moving vehicles.
Instead of losing the potential energy developed in a moving vehicle to heat loss through traditional braking, the
potential energy of the back electro-motive force (EMF) can be used to recharge the battery system to improve
efficiency and increase range.
Electric regenerative braking systems are estimated to operate effectively at a wide efficiency range depending
on momentary factors such as deceleration rate, speed, direction (uphill vs. downhill), topography and state of
battery system charge, as well as design factors specific to each vehicle such as torque, number of drive wheels
and whether they are connected in series or parallel. The main disadvantage of regenerative (vs. dynamic)
brakes is the need to closely match the electricity generated with the supply. DC power requires voltage to be
closely controlled and monitored. Regenerative braking primarily works with moving vehicles.
Potential Difference has taken a polar opposite approach with the technological development of regenerative
acceleration. Engineer and inventor Thane Heins reports that unlike a conventional coil that stores its energy in
an external magnetic field (thereby inducing counter-electromotive-torque), the Regenerative Acceleration Coil
stores potential energy as voltage inside the coil when a magnetic field approaches the coil (thereby eliminating

3. counter-torque), and releases this energy as the magnet moves away as a complementary-electromotive-
torque. The potential energy is dissipated through the coils via current flow which creates a delayed magnetic
field having the same polarity as the receding magnetic field.
The net effect is fourfold:
1) The receding magnetic field is accelerated away from the coil faster than it otherwise would be;
2) The next opposite magnetic pole on the rotor is attracted toward the coil with additional force; and,
3) Electric current delivers power to the system’s batteries.
4) The prime mover input power is reduced by up to 62% in the demonstration prototype.
KERS CONVENTIONAL COIL OPERATION WITH REGARDS TO GENERATOR COIL
INDUCED COUNTER-ELECTROMOTIVE ARMATURE REACTION
/EV REGENERATIVE BRAKING
CONVENTIONAL COIL OPERATION SUMMARY
1) (FIG1) WHEN A ROTATING MAGNETIC FIELD APPROACHES A CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR COIL WHICH IS
CONNECTED TO A LOAD, A VOLTAGE IS INDUCED IN THE COIL ACCORDING TO FARADAY’S LAW OF INDUCTION
CURRENT FLOWS IN THE COIL ACCORDING TO OHM’S LAW AND IT PRODUCES A REPELLING MAGNETIC FIELD
BECAUSE THE COIL OPERATES AS AN ELECTROMAGNET AND PRODUCES THE SAME MAGNETIC POLARITY AS THE
APPROACHING ROTOR MAGNET ACCORDING TO LENZ’S LAW.
2) ADDITIONAL EXTERNAL FORCE MUST BE APPLIED TO T HE ROTOR TO OVERCOME THE COIL’S INTERNALLY
INDUCED REPELLING MAGNETIC FIELD.
3) (FIG 2) WHEN THE ROTOR MAGNET MOVES AWAY FROM THE COIL THE CURRENT FLOW IN THE COIL CHANGES
DIRECTION AND THE COIL NOW ATTRACTS THE ROTOR MAGNET AS IT TRIES TO MOVE AWAY.
4) (FIG 2A) THE CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR COIL IS ALWAYS PRODUCING COUNTER-ELECTROMOTIVE-FORCES
WHICH WORK AGAINST THE ROTATION OF THE ROTOR AND ADDITIONAL ENERGY MUST BE SUPPLIED FROM THE
EXTERNAL SOURCE TO OVERCOME THESE FORCES TO AVOID SYSTEM DECELERATION AND LOSS O F POWER TO
THE LOAD.
5) THE MORE POWER DELIVERED TO THE LOAD THE GREATER THESE COUNTER FORCES ARE AND THE MORE POWER
MUST BE SUPPLIED TO OVERCOME THEM.

4. KERS CONVENTIONAL COIL OPERATION WITH REGARDS TO GENERATOR COIL
INDUCED COUNTER-ELECTROMOTIVE ARMATURE REACTION
/EV REGENERATIVE BRAKING
THE CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR COIL
REPELLS THE APPROACHING SOUTH POLE
ROTOR MAGNETIC FIELD (F3) WHILE
SIMULTANEOUSLY ATTRACTING AND
PREVENTING THE NORTH POLE
MAGNETIC FIELD’S DEPARTURE (F2) AS IT
TRIES TO MOVE AWAY.

5. KEGS ReGen-X COIL OPERATION WITH REGARDS TO GENERATOR COIL INDUCED
COMPLEMENTARY-ELECTROMOTIVE ARMATURE REACTION
/EV REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION
ReGen-X COIL OPERATION SUMMARY
1) (FIG 3) WHEN A ROTATING MAGNETIC FIELD APPROACHES A ReGen-X GENERATOR
COIL ABOVE A CRITICAL MINIMUM FREQUENCY WHICH IS CONNECTED TO A LOAD,
CURRENT DOES NOT FLOW IN THE COIL AT T=1 BECAUSE THE COIL IMPEDANCE
PREVENTS IT AS DICTATED BY THE EQUATION: Zt = 2 pi F L + Rdc + Xc
2) THIS ACTION PRODUCES NO MAGNETIC FIELD BECAUSE CURRENT MUST FLOW IN
THE COIL FOR A MAGNETIC FIELD TO BE PRODUCED.
3) NO ADDITIONAL FORCE MUST BE APPLIED TO THE ROTOR TO OVERCOME THE
COIL’S INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELD BECAUSE NONE EXISTS.
4) (FIG 4) WHEN THE ROTOR MAGNET REACHES TOP DEAD CENTRE (TDC) THE
INDUCED VOLTAGE IN THE COIL IS MAXIMUM WHILE THE COIL IMPEDANCE IS
MINIMUM AND THE COIL’S MAXIMUM INDUCED VOLTAGE CAN NOW BE DISSIPATED
THROUGH THE LOW DC RESISTANCE OF THE COIL AND THE LOAD.
5) THIS PRODUCES A MAXIMUM MAGNITUDE REPELLING MAGNETIC FIELD WHICH
APPLIES ADDITIONAL FORCE AND KINETIC ENERGY TO THE ROTOR MAGNET AND
ACCELERATES ITS DEPARTURE AS IT IS ALREADY MOVING AWAY FROM THE COIL.
6) (FIG 5) THE DELAYED REPELLING MAGNETIC FIELD ALSO ATTRACTS THE
APPROACHING OPPOSITE ROTOR POLE MAGNET ON THE ROTOR WHICH IS NOW
COMING INTO POSITION.
7) THE MORE POWER DELIVERED TO THE LOAD THE GREATER THESE
COMPLEMENTARY FORCES ARE AND THE LESS POWER MUST BE SUPPLIED BY THE
EXTERNAL SOURCE.
INITIALLY WHEN THE FIRST ROTOR
MAGNET APPROACHES THE ReGen-
X COIL WHICH IS CONNECTED TO
THE LOAD, NO CURRENT FLOWS IN
THE COIL BECAUSE THE HIGH COIL
IMPEDANCE PREVENTS IT. THE
GENERATOR COIL IS NEUTRAL AND
DOES NOT PRODUCE EITHER A
REPELLING MAGNETIC FIELD OR AN
ATTRACTING ONE.

6. KEGS ReGen-X COIL OPERATION WITH REGARDS TO GENERATOR COIL INDUCED
COMPLEMENTARY-ELECTROMOTIVE ARMATURE REACTION
/EV REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION
THE ReGen-X GENERATOR COIL ATTRACTS THE
APPROACHING SOUTH POLE ROTOR
MAGNETIC FIELD WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY
REPELLING THE NORTH POLE MAGNETIC FIELD
AS IT MOVES AWAY FROM TDC.
ALL FORCES IN THE ReGen-X SYSTEM PROVIDE
KINETIC ENERGY IN THE SAME DIRECTION
AND ARE CUMULATIVE.

7. Regenerative acceleration has much broader application possibilities because it can be applied to all electric
motors – including those that are not part of a moving vehicle requiring braking. This technology development is
currently being evaluated, tested, scrutinized and considered for wide scale deployment in numerous sectors
including electric motors mounted in stationary applications including, but not limited to those such as hydro-
power plant generators, large industrial motors in process and manufacturing plants, small motors in
compressors and refrigeration, wind and diesel generators, and even solar power systems.
Premise: Thane Heins has developed a series of electro-mechanical prototypes to demonstrate the electro-
magnetic characteristics of regenerative acceleration to prove a stance that is seen as virtually impossible,
because the process, as represented, appears to violate basic laws of energy or thermodynamics, and motion.
rd
This paper attempts to explain the counter-intuitive results that have been gathered (and 3 -party verified) by
arguing on a conventional platform that known laws of physics are not violated, but perhaps re-directed.
Definitions, Rules and Evaluation:
1) Supporting equations, including common classical theorems, are not used nor the scope of this paper.
2) Regenerative Braking: A regenerative brake is an apparatus, device or system which allows a vehicle
to recapture and store part of the kinetic energy that would otherwise be 'lost' to heat when braking.
3) Laws of Physics and Thermodynamics:
a. Laws of Thermodynamics: The four laws of thermodynamics define fundamental physical
quantities (temperature, energy, and entropy) that characterize thermodynamic systems. The
laws describe how these quantities behave under various circumstances, and forbid certain
phenomena (such as perpetual motion).
i. First Law of Thermodynamics: According to the First Law of Thermodynamics,
the internal energy of a closed thermodynamic system increases or decreases only by
the amount of heat supplied to (or removed from) the system and the amount of
work done by (or to) the system. Hence, the internal energy of a closed system only
changes precisely as heat and work are transferred in or out of it. As a result, perpetual
motion machines of the first kind (see below) are impossible.
ii. Second law of thermodynamics: The second law of thermodynamics resolves that
differences in temperature, pressure, and chemistry balance over time at equilibrium in
any isolated physical system. The second law declares that it is impossible for
machines to generate usable energy from the abundant internal energy of nature by
processes called perpetual motion of the second kind.
b. Laws of Energy:
i. Law of Conservation of Energy: The nineteenth century law of conservation of energy
is a law of physics. It states that the total amount of energy in an isolated system
remains constant over time. The total energy is said to be conserved over time. For an
isolated system, this law means that energy can change its location within the system,
and that it can change form within the system, for instance chemical energy can
become kinetic energy, but that energy can be neither created nor destroyed.
c. Laws of Motion:
i. First law of motion: The velocity of a body remains constant unless the body is acted
upon by an external force.
ii. Second law of motion: The acceleration, a of a body is parallel and directly
proportional to the net force F and inversely proportional to the mass m, i.e., F = ma.

8. iii. Third law of motion: The mutual forces of action and reaction between two bodies are
equal, opposite and collinear.
4) Perpetual Motion Machine: Perpetual motion describes a hypothetical situation in which machines
might operate indefinitely and/or produce more useful work or energy than they consume, whether they
might operate indefinitely or not.
The traditional broad argument within the scientific community is that perpetual motion in an isolated
system would violate the first and/or the second laws of thermodynamics.
On the other hand, such machines clearly exist and are capable of operating indefinitely from sources
within nature such as geothermal, wave or tidal power systems which extract energy from seemingly
perpetual sources—such as massive natural heat sinks which are capable of indefinitely supplying
energy as long as the source remains available. These are not considered to be perpetual motion
machines, because they are consuming energy from an external source in isolated systems.
The interesting caveat is that though successful isolated system ‘perpetual motion’ devices are
physically impossible in terms of our current understanding of the laws of physics, the pursuit of
perpetual motion remains popular. Regenerative acceleration is not such a system and does not fall into
any of the ‘perpetual motion’ categories described below:
a. Perpetual Motion Machines of the First Kind: A machine that produces work without the input of
energy. It thus violates the first law of thermodynamics: the law of conservation of energy. Note
that Regenerative Acceleration operates based on magnetic field moving through inductive coil
creating electrical current, a common phenomenon.
b. Perpetual Motion Machines of the Second Kind: A perpetual motion machine that can
spontaneously convert thermal energy into mechanical work. Thermal energy can be converted
to work without violating the law of conservation of energy, however it does violate the second
law of thermodynamics because there is only one heat reservoir involved, which is being
spontaneously cooled without involving a transfer of heat to a cooler reservoir. This conversion
of heat into useful work, without any side effect, is impossible, according to the second law of
thermodynamics. Regenerative acceleration is not a process or product of a perpetual motion
machine of the second kind and does not violate the second law of thermodynamics.
Regenerative acceleration is not dependent on converting heat to work.
5) Regenerative Acceleration utilizes a specially wound thin wire coil to store potential energy as voltage
as magnets mounted on a flywheel cause the magnetic field to approach the coil, and releases the
energy in the coil as the magnet moves away. The potential energy is dissipated through the coils via
current flow which creates a delayed magnetic field having the same polarity as the receding magnetic
field.

9. Results of Findings of Demonstration:
During the demonstrations on March 11 – 12, 2012 in Uxbridge, Ontario, Canada, several iterations of
regenerative braking, normal operation, and regenerative acceleration were conducted. All leads and power
supplies were checked for connectivity, including instrumentation and power meters. The motor and system
were run in normal operation during each test, demonstrating normal, anticipated results as a baseline prior to
initiating regenerative braking or regenerative acceleration.
In each case, regenerative braking showed results as expected where current returned power to the system
when regenerative braking was applied, and the motor slowed.
Also, more importantly in each case regenerative acceleration was also subsequently applied and
instrumentation verified invariably an increase in the amperage to the battery system while the motor speed
increased. This is difficult to grasp at first look and the demonstration makes more sense after reflection of the
above explanation about the storage and release of ‘power’ as the flywheel moves the magnets and magnetic
field toward and away from the coil.
Recommendations:
1) Detailed recording of data including current versus torque during normal operation, regenerative
braking, and regenerative acceleration through multiple demonstrations;
2) Motorize the prototype system to demonstrate how, with a fixed amount of input energy, at a
given RPM;
a. The system runs longer while utilizing regenerative acceleration coils than it does with
conventional coils;
b. The system re-charges a rechargeable battery more completely while utilizing
regenerative acceleration coils than it does with conventional coils;
3) Design, assembly, installation and testing of two new regenerative acceleration systems for:
a. A 12 kw diesel generator and a 40 or 250 kw diesel generator;
b. These regenerative acceleration systems will be installed and tested on FG
Willson/Caterpillar diesel generators at Technomoteur S.A. in Haiti;
Conclusion:
Regenerative acceleration appears to be a viable motor enhancement technology significantly impacting motor
efficiency based design which incorporates positive effects of magnetic field captured, stored and released in
inductive motor coils.

10. References:
Holman, Jack P. (1980). Thermodynamics. New York: McGraw-Hill. pp. 217. ISBN 0-07-029625-1.
Where does the energy go?". Advanced technologies and energy efficiency, Fuel Economy Guide. US Dept. of
Energy. 2009. Retrieved 23 March 2012.
Journal/Proceedings of the Institution of Electrical Engineers, Volume 38: 1906–1907 page 374-398. Institution
of Electrical Engineers. 7 February 1907. Regenerative Control of Electric Tramcars and Locomotives. Alfred
Raworth, November 22, 1906. Retrieved 23 March 2012.
Straun Jno, T Robertson, John Markham (19 February 2007). "The Regenerative Braking Story: 2007". Venture
Publications. Retrieved 23 March 2012.
GM patent 5775467 – Floating electromagnetic brake system.
Roger Ford (July 2, 2007). "Regenerative braking boosts green credentials". Railway Gazette International.
Retrieved 23 March 2012.
Serway, Raymond A.; Jewett, John W. (2004). Physics for Scientists and Engineers (6th ed.). Brooks/Cole. ISBN
0-534-40842-7.
MISN-0-158 The First Law of Thermodynamics by Jerzy Borysowicz for Project PHYSNET.
ReGen-X Demonstration Videos
Liberty e-cars Toronto Demo:
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLkH1zLdXy1Sw5CvDRDLh70mMmDbmKn0SN&feature=plcp
HERO Electric CEO Toronto Demo:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0-5QNrT7lA&list=PL24ABC533E6537D68&index=1&feature=plpp_video
Toronto EV Transportation Industry Demo and 3D Film Shoot:
http://www.youtube.com/user/PDiCanada1

11. KEGS vs KERS
ADDENDUM: Supplemental ReGen-X KEGS Information KERS vs KEGS
1) KERS Kinetic Energy Recovery System
In the conventional KERS generator torque paradigm the vehicle stored kinetic energy
torque (Tt) rotates the generator. The generator responds by creating a counter-
electromotive-counter torque (Tg) which opposes the original torque supplied by the
vehicle’s inertia and the system decelerates the vehicle while charging the KERS
batteries for later use.
2) KEGS Kinetic Energy Generating System
In the ReGen-X KEGS innovation developed by Potential Difference Inc. the generator
creates a complimentary-clockwise-electromotive torque (Tg) while supplying power to
the KEGS batteries which adds to the original torque supplied by the vehicle (Tt) and
the system adds kinetic energy which accelerates the vehicle while charging the KEGS
batteries for later use.

12. EV WORLD REGEN-X REVIEW:
Mike Brace, Professional Mechanical Engineer, Technical Editor at EV World
"Mike Brace" techeditor@evworld.com
http://www.slideshare.net/ThaneCHeins/heins-effect-gaining-credibility-ev-world
NRC Scientist Test Data shows:
1. The on-load conventional generator coil decelerating the system, requiring a 12% prime mover input
increase to sustain power to the load.
2. The on-load ReGen-X coil accelerating the system, requiring a 40% prime mover input decrease while
delivering over 200% more power to the load than #1 above.
https://www.box.net/s/kqo8knpgk7femc0jldnz
For more information please contact:
Thane C. Heins
President & CEO
Potential +/- Difference Inc. R & D
"Using our potential to make a difference"
Email: thaneh@potentialdifference.ca
Cell: 613.795.1602
YOUTUBE http://www.youtube.com/user/pdicanada1
Linkedin http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=107557432&trk=tab_pro