Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect  (Read 879738 times)

Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1410 on: May 21, 2013, 05:22:05 AM »
I recommend this MIT lecture video even for the layman, it helped me to understand a lot, I had to watch it several times and I have a way of being able to understand in a general way what he is talking about even though I don't understand the calculus very much at all because I've never learned it. I still found it was enlightening.

What do you guys think of the Prof. and this lecture in particular? At 36:00 minutes on he explains what I am seeing in the coils that will work to produce the speed up effect. If we go from say Omega L of 300 Ohms at 1000 rpm to Omega L of 900 Ohms at 3000 rpm then it might be enough to see the effect. Just arbitrary figures. And I might have the terminology wrong I'm just writing what I heard him say. But I did watch the entire video and watched him do all the calculations, he just lost me and I couldn't fathom it all at once. But I got what he was saying anyway I think.

Lecture
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpO6t00bPb8

Cheers

Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1411 on: May 21, 2013, 05:54:35 AM »
MileHigh, I see now what you mean about the flywheel yes it would do that, I envision when we try to stop the wheel quickly there is a very sharp rise in something for sure so I see your point now. The flywheel would seem to be the mechanical analogy like how a mechanical hammer works, I've used one of those there neat. And the elastic bag the gaseous one. There is no doubt a flywheel is not easy to pull up quickly, but it would seem the force needs to be applied to the flywheel to get the effect but with a coil the force is removed to see the effect. When we switch off the power that is driving the flywheel it doesn't let go of it's energy catastrophically it slows down gradually.

Take a vertical water pipe of say 20 mm Inside diameter and 100 meters "high" and install a fast " valve" at the bottom end then take out 20 meters of pipe in the middle and install a coil shaped (or not even) appropriately elastic rubber tube (bag) with an inside diameter of say the same 20 mm, the top of the pipe is fitted to the bottom of a tank with X head of water available and the flow from the valve is unimpeded, the bag is so that it would burst with 1.5 times the latent pressure, at the bottom of the bag (coil) is a safety valve set to fire when the pressure becomes slightly higher than the latent pressure and the main bottom valve is rated to burst at 1.5 times latent pressure. What happens when we turn the valve on and off quickly. Would the bag not expand under the momentum of the falling water build pressure then squirt water from the safety valve to prevent rupture ?

The force would be like the hammer effect in water pipes. I imagine a water system for low voltage low frequency stuff and a gaseous system for HV HF stuff. Just what I see when I visualize.

I see your point with the flywheel though if we try to stop it. But with water or gas we just turn a handle to stop the flow and the build up happens.

Cheers

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1412 on: May 21, 2013, 06:20:00 AM »
Farmhand:

I dug up a posting that I made a while ago, food for thought about the flywheel business:


-----------------------------------------------------
MECHANICAL EQUIVALENT CIRCUIT OF A JOULE THIEF

Imagine you go to the gym and you find an old-style exercise bicycle.  The type with a seat and pedals and a chain link to a big flywheel, like a regular bicycle.  There is a friction belt that goes around the circumference of the flywheel.  You set the tension on the friction belt to adjust the difficulty level.

Imagine the belt is completely loose.  You pedal for a few seconds and get the flywheel spinning and then you stop pedaling.  Then you add tension to the belt and the flywheel spins down and stops.  Then you loosen the belt and repeat the whole process all over again.

Even when you are completely exhausted, it's still possible for you to pedal and get the flywheel spinning if you pedal slowly and take your time to build up the speed.  Don't forget that the friction strap is loose when you pedal.

That's a Joule Thief.  You are the battery.  The flywheel is the coil.  The friction belt is the LED.

The torque that you put on the flywheel from pedaling is the battery voltage.  The torque that the flywheel puts on the belt during the braking is the coil voltage when it's de-energizing.  The rotational speed of the flywheel is the current through the coil.

I have never heard of any claims of over unity exercise bicycles and by the same token, a Joule Thief - an energizing and de-energizing inductor - is not over unity.

-----------------------------------------------------

In this context, is it possible to make a connection with a Joule Thief driving 100 LEDs?

Well, 100 LEDs means a larger voltage for the same current.  Since R = V/I we can say that a Joule Thief driving a 100 LEDs has a much larger "LED equivalent resistance" to drive.

Quoting myself above:

Quote
Imagine the belt is completely loose.  You pedal for a few seconds and get the flywheel spinning and then you stop pedaling. Then you add tension to the belt and the flywheel spins down and stops.  Then you loosen the belt and repeat the whole process all over again.

Adding tension to the belt means that you are putting a resistance on the spinning flywheel.  So 100 LEDs is equivalent to adding more tension to the friction belt, and the spinning flywheel will come to a stop more quickly.  You can easily see this on a scope with a real Joule Thief.

Also, you know that even if you add tension to the belt, the moment the belt makes contact with the flywheel the flywheel is still spinning at it's current angular velocity.  That explains why the 100 LEDs will light up.  The angular velocity of the flywheel is akin to the current flowing through the coil.  So even with 100 LEDs, when the inductor starts to discharge, there will still be sufficient current to light up each LED.

The more LEDs you add, the faster the current flow decreases and the shorter the time the LEDs are illuminated.  That's equivalent to adding more tension to the belt and slowing down the flywheel faster.  So, more LEDs in series = adding more tension (and resistance) to the belt.

Just for clarity:  The friction between the belt and the exercise bicycle flywheel while the friction is being applied represents the time the LEDs are illuminated and discharging the coil's stored energy.  In one case you get heat generated between the belt and the flywheel, and in the other case you get light and heat generated inside the LEDs.  In both cases you have an "energy burn."

The energy stored in the flywheel = 1/2 Moment_of_Inertia x angular_velocity-squared.
The energy stored in the coil = 1/2 Inductance_of_Coil x current_flow_around_the_coil-squared.

If you notice they are essentially the same formula.  The amount of moment of inertia of a flywheel is equivalent to the amount of inductance in a coil.  The angular velocity of the flywheel is equivalent to the current flowing through the coil.  The torque either applied to the flywheel to make it spin up faster (energizing), or produced by the flywheel when it is driving a friction load and slowing down (de-energizing) is equivalent to the voltage across the coil.

If you can visualize that it may help you visualize how a circuit with a coil operates.  My example of the exercise bicycle is an excellent analogy for the energy dynamics taking part in a Joule Thief circuit.  When you strip a Joule Thief circuit down to it's bare essentials, it's nothing more than a battery energizing an inductor followed by the inductor discharging though one or more LEDs. It's a very trivial circuit when you look at it from that perspective.

MileHigh

Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1413 on: May 21, 2013, 06:22:02 AM »
MileHigh, Here in these shots I think what I can see is the rotor of my motor is returning energy to the capacitors by generation through the coils. Because of the spacing of the coils when the rotor magnets pass they can at times put energy back into the electrical circuit briefly before it goes back to the rotor. This part of the generation is partly counteracted by the anti cogging effect at that part of the rotors travel I think.

In between the white lines is what I see as the mosfet "on" time just after the current drops off, but see before the current is rising in the coil before the mosfet allows energy to be input from the supply, and yet there it is, I think that is the rotor generating electricity in the coil and the current flows around through the return circuit as HopToad so kindly pointed out (thanks Hoptoad). Going that way means it must also go through the charging coil MC2 which helps turn the rotor, then into the charging capacitor/s to be switched through teh motor coil MC1 again along with what was also added from the supply. The only way the current can rise in MC1 that way when the mosfet is off is if a south magnet is passing it. As the south magnet is passing the MC1 coil and reinforcing the currents around the circuit MC2 is attracting a north magnet to it, as it just pushed the south that is passing the MC1 coil and MC1 pushed the north just before that.  If you look at my rotor timing chart you'll see what I mean, it is very confusing but I think I eventually got it fairly correct.

Still I might be a tad off on my analysis but what else would explain the current rise in a switched off coil if not from the magnet through the return circuit. The coils are kind of loosely locked together and the magnets help shape and reinforce the currents.

Also notice the RMS current values ? What does that mean ? THe current is scoped across 0.1 Ohm resistors. So that around 900 mA RMS in MC1 and 700 mA RMS in MC2, and the circuit drawing only 400 mA from the supply.

Anyway is that resonance. Or not sloshy enough.  ;)

Cheers

P.S. and harder running I think lowers the RMS current in the coils and raises the input current. So the energy stops being returned when under proper load.

Actually I think MC2 maybe forcing the current I see in MC1, dunno that's why I asked your opinion.  :) It is a bit confusing.

..

..




hoptoad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1009
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1414 on: May 21, 2013, 09:21:30 AM »
snip...
In between the white lines is what I see as the mosfet "on" time just after the current drops off, but see before the current is rising in the coil before the mosfet allows energy to be input from the supply, and yet there it is, I think that is the rotor generating electricity in the coil and the current flows around through the return circuit
snip...
..

Yep.... KneeDeep

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1415 on: May 22, 2013, 02:19:47 AM »
Farmhand:

I am glad you are having fun!  I am referencing you hand-drawn schematic in posting #1391 although I am not sure this is the proper one.

Quote
Also notice the RMS current values ? What does that mean ? THe current is scoped across 0.1 Ohm resistors. So that around 900 mA RMS in MC1 and 700 mA RMS in MC2, and the circuit drawing only 400 mA from the supply.

I notice in the schematic that there is a mechanism for current to flow counter-clockwise because of the diode arrangement.

I will start off with the yellow trace.  You can see the current starts from zero and reaches a certain level before the MOSFET switches on.  That is probably due to the approaching magnet or magnets (I am assuming MC-2 may be helping here).  So the current starts flowing with a "rotor push."

I am going to assume that the MOSFET switches on at top-dead-center.  So when that happens the current continues to increase in the coil and the cap between MC-1 and MC-2 is supplying the bulk of that current.

When the MOSFET switches off, you can see a nice linear decrease in the current output by the coil.  You also notice that there is only a modest increase in the current through MC-2.  To me that suggests that most of the current is going into the cap above the battery.   You also notice that the MC-1 coil completely discharges before the cycle starts all over again.

For the blue trace for the MC-2 coil, probably the most striking thing about it is that current is always flowing through it.  Note that it has capacitors on both sides of it to both feed it with current and absorb the current.  So if anything, it looks like MC-2 has a "spongy" ride.  I think that MC-2 is "pulled" when the MOSFET switches on as well as being influenced by passing rotor magnets.

It's great that you are looking at the currents because most experimenters don't look at the currents flowing through their coils and coils are devices that are based on current flow.   I am pretty sure that many pulse motor setups have coils with current continuously flowing through the coils and the experimenters are not aware.

Here is a possible bird's eye view of what's going on in your pulse motor:  The periodic MOSFET pulsing of MC-1 pushes on the rotor and also initiates some current to flow through MC-1 and MC-2.   Once the MOSFET switches off, you still have three "power sources" to keep current circulating counter-clockwise.  1) MC-1, 2) MC-2, and 3) the passing rotor magnets.

So between pulses current keeps circulating counter-clockwise.  I don't know if that's a "good thing" or a "bad thing" relative to your design goals.  One school of thought might say that continuous current flow implies continuous resistive losses.  However, it's still possible that the continuous current flow facilitates better performance and you can live with the resistive losses.

Is it resonance?  Personally I don't see anything that looks like conventional resonance.  Keep in mind I think that the term "resonance" for a pulse motor is a vague undefined term.  I believe that many people believe that the pick-up coils are supposed to be in resonance with the passing rotor magnets but I am not sure.

My personal opinion is that some form of resonance may be possible with a pulse motor but it would have to be defined and you would need scope traces to confirm the observations.  You would expect to see something like very nice sine waves that are slightly modified by the drive coil synchronously adding energy.  Somewhere you would need to see an energy drain that is also synchronous with the resonance.

To repeat myself, "resonance" is often an ill-defined and often abused term.  Some pulse motor designs are very likely to be devoid of all resonance.  Note that they are "pulse circuits" which is a separate and distinct class of circuits as opposed to "resonant circuits."

I think you made reference to musical instruments and resonance.  In all musical instruments there are two distinct components that slosh the energy back and forth at the resonant frequency, and the energy in each component is in a separate and distinct form.  Can you clearly identify these two separate and distinct components and energy storage mechanisms in a pulse motor to find resonance?  Also, keep in mind that "resonance" has an almost magical and mystical meaning on the forums that is often quite disconnected from reality.  Suppose you make a fantastic pulse motor with great performance and it doesn't resonate!  It doesn't really matter, does it?

Just for fun, think of all of the wind instruments that don't use a reed, like the pipes in a pipe organ.  Let's take a look at a lowly beer bottle.  When you blow across the opening in a beer bottle you hear a resonant tone.  Can you identify what's resonating in the case of the beer bottle?  This question is open to anybody.

Anyway, I hope what I just said helped!  I don' see resonance in your waveforms, I see a setup that is recirculating energy to use it again.  If you are getting better performance from your pulse motor like this, then the proof is in the pudding!

MileHigh

Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5884
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1416 on: May 22, 2013, 02:37:52 AM »


Anyway is that resonance. Or not sloshy enough.  ;)



Lol slosh.  I dont find it to be a good word to describe resonance really. Sounds a bit messy and not in order.

MH, do the books call it sloshing? Just wondered. Dont think I have heard it put that way before. I could be missing out here.


Mags

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1417 on: May 22, 2013, 02:51:03 AM »
Magluvin:

I am pretty sure you will find the term "sloshing" in text books.  Between peaks, you have that mixture where one component of the energy is in electric field form and the other part is in magnetic field form and they are continuously transitioning and 90 degrees out of phase with each other so that sounds "sloshy."  Just recently I read "tank circuit" was derived from the notion of water sloshing back and forth in a water tank.

MileHigh

Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1418 on: May 22, 2013, 05:44:58 AM »
Well Milehigh, I did show that when I speed the motor up to a certain speed there are sine waves both in voltage and current wave forms, Already shown, and I don't limit myself to your definitions of resonance.

It's obvious you just don't want to get it, because the improvement was immediate and obvious as soon as I put the charging coil near the rotor and it sped up as a result, an immediate increase in torque and efficiency. I need to prove nothing. My claims of an improvement are blatantly obvious in just the design principal alone. However when I am ready I will prove whatever I please. No one can stop me simply because all anyone can do is talk at me.  ;D

1. There is the resonance frequency of a coil, a coil can be tuned to resonance frequency and not actually exhibit resonance as such due to loading.

2. There is EM resonance.

3. There is sound resonance.

4. There is mechanical resonance.

5. Resonance has different meanings just like many other words.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resonance

Quote
In physics, resonance is the tendency of a system to oscillate with greater amplitude at some frequencies than at others. Frequencies at which the response amplitude is a relative maximum are known as the system's resonant frequencies, or resonance frequencies. At these frequencies, even small periodic driving forces can produce large amplitude oscillations, because the system stores vibrational energy.
Resonance occurs when a system is able to store and easily transfer energy between two or more different storage modes (such as kinetic energy and potential energy in the case of a pendulum). However, there are some losses from cycle to cycle, called damping. When damping is small, the resonant frequency is approximately equal to the natural frequency of the system, which is a frequency of unforced vibrations. Some systems have multiple, distinct, resonant frequencies.
Resonance phenomena occur with all types of vibrations or waves: there is mechanical resonance, acoustic resonance, electromagnetic resonance, nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), electron spin resonance (ESR) and resonance of quantum wave functions. Resonant systems can be used to generate vibrations of a specific frequency (e.g. musical instruments), or pick out specific frequencies from a complex vibration containing many frequencies (e.g. filters).

This diagram below I was referring to.

There is a resonant exchange of energy from coils to rotor to coils to rotor again and so on.

I think that is tied to the way the currents can become sinusoidal in both coils, the currents don't always look the same as in the shots there, I showed shots of two sine waves for the current as well before, and a voltage sine wave on both coils can be had as well. Not many resonant setups are resonant at all frequencies, there is a frequency where there is best resonance effects. Anyway I'm not here to prove anything to you and the setup is not even complete.

Anyway If I didn't recognize resonance and how to attain it I would not have so many resonant devices. I'm outa time to argue the point any longer. I have things to do.

And since I have nothing to add in this thread for some time it's bye bye for a while.   :)

Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5884
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1419 on: May 22, 2013, 06:06:40 AM »
Magluvin:

I am pretty sure you will find the term "sloshing" in text books.  Between peaks, you have that mixture where one component of the energy is in electric field form and the other part is in magnetic field form and they are continuously transitioning and 90 degrees out of phase with each other so that sounds "sloshy."  Just recently I read "tank circuit" was derived from the notion of water sloshing back and forth in a water tank.

MileHigh

I see that there are references to sloshing of water in a tank. There are some examples out there. There are some differences though. If we had a tank and it teetered a bit from on side to the other where the water is nicely moving from left to right, back and forth, from end to end and time it till it settles, then that would be very close to an LC. But the water tank could take a random tilt, splash or hit and not be in the same state of resonance as we are discussing, but still take a relatively long time to settle, where the LC if left on its own after a random charge or induced pulse will still only continue to 'slosh' for a time period at its resonant frequency, like a bell.  If the teetering tank were rocking in a nice timely back and forth slosh and it were disrupted with a random teeter jolt( input is teeter for the water tank), and left to react, the rocking rhythm would not be the same, yet it would continue a more complex sloshing than the single sloshing wave back and forth. Instead of tic toc tic toc, it could go toc tic  tic toc  tic  tictoctic toc toc. lol An lc would not behave that way if disrupted during resonance. It will just ring at the same freq at different levels or be nulled out, depending on the disruption and timing.

So the water tank I can see sloshing being a good term any way you look at it. But an LC is consistent in maintaining its freq of operation when set off with nearly what ever input or disturbance. Not that it cannot pass currents of other freq, but we are talking about resonant states. Sloshing seems sloppy, splashy, random energy dissipation and distribution, where an LC works more in an orderly fashion and a pendulum is a much closer model in most ways. In order to get the water tank to slosh in resonance would require a controlled input to get it smoothly sloshing back and forth. But a pendulum, no matter the input pulse, where or when, will always resort to its resonant freq or a dead stop, just like an LC.  ;)

If we look up slosh, the definitions dont coincide with resonance at all. So maybe for some beginners the term sloshing might lead them to think of something other than what is really happening in an LC circuit.  ;)

The water tank is a better analogy of an 'LC ladder' with many LCs in a series parallel fashion where you pulse the input and the LCs transfer their energies to the next LC and down the line where the output is delayed by the progression through the circuit. The output is usually a load. But the load can be eliminated and the 'wave' will bounce back at the end of the circuit back to the beginning. Like the water tank.

Now this LC ladder can be randomly disturbed else where in the circuit or random input pulses, 'will' have  ripples and disturbed waves 'sloshing' around the circuit. Of course its 2 dimensional, and water is 3d.

Mags

Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1420 on: May 22, 2013, 06:14:20 AM »
One more comment then you can have all he last words you want.

An example of the abject denial. You say that in the case of the AV plug the Earth is a "wire" but it isn't, you want to be so specific about everything but cannot bring yourself to admit that a "wire" is a man made conductor, and the Earth is a natural conductor the Earth is not a wire by definition, but it can be a conductor. When there is wireless transmission of electricity using no wires that means using no man made conductors. Talk about ignorance and arrogance.

It would be wise not treat others like idiots. I bet my leftie I could school you real good on a number of different skills and knowledge of many subjects, so get over yourself.

I require no further communications with you as I get nothing really from it. So any efforts on your part are your own wasted efforts.

The Earth is a wire what a joke. Even a school kid can tell the difference between a piece of wire and some dirt. Hahahaha

Go read up the definition of "wire" and "conductor", if you don't already know the difference and are just being silly.

Regards

Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5884
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1421 on: May 22, 2013, 07:01:06 AM »
One more comment then you can have all he last words you want.

An example of the abject denial. You say that in the case of the AV plug the Earth is a "wire" but it isn't, you want to be so specific about everything but cannot bring yourself to admit that a "wire" is a man made conductor, and the Earth is a natural conductor the Earth is not a wire by definition, but it can be a conductor. When there is wireless transmission of electricity using no wires that means using no man made conductors. Talk about ignorance and arrogance.

It would be wise not treat others like idiots. I bet my leftie I could school you real good on a number of different skills and knowledge of many subjects, so get over yourself.

I require no further communications with you as I get nothing really from it. So any efforts on your part are your own wasted efforts.

The Earth is a wire what a joke. Even a school kid can tell the difference between a piece of wire and some dirt. Hahahaha

Go read up the definition of "wire" and "conductor", if you don't already know the difference and are just being silly.

Regards

In this vid below, I use a small neon transformer from an old scanner that fires the scan tube. its about 1kv ac out. I use 1 lead of the secondary to an AV plug, to 2  .33uf 275v caps in series and discharged into the primary of the spark/ign coil using 2 SIDACs in series. Sidac works as a solid state spark gap, these are about 230v break over.

You will see that if I connect another lead to the other end of the neon transformer secondary, the charging of the caps through the AV plug increases. And then bringing that lead close to the ign coil it charges even faster, and finally I touch the lead to the casing of the coil and we have liftoff. lol The lead from the other end of the neon secondary connects to the circuit via the capacitance of the ign coils can and the windings inside. We are just using capacitance as part of the circuit loop any way we look at it when using the AV plug.

I would venture to say the av plug would still charge the cap with little or no 'outside' capacitive loops just because of HF brute force. That open neon secondary is pumping charge back and forth in the open secondary, compressing and decompressing. If a cap plate is neutral and that compress/decompress impresses a difference of potential across that diode, then I feel the cap will charge anyway whether it has interaction with outside capacitance or not. This could be tested with different outside capacitance levels to see if there is a plateau that shows that charge can happen with just brute force, charging one side of the cap at a time. ;) Being that capacitor plates seem to be 'flexible' with their plates being at different levels of charge, then I think they would accept or give charge differences of the single plates without a connection to the other plate, like how the AV plug functions.  If we ran a wire to the space station from earth, we could charge the space station to probably what ever charge and polarity we would desire, or how ever much it would accept or give up. There are limits.




None of this circuit is connected to ground. It happens with capacity in the air between components. But if we are close to the 'ground, I would say that limits the lower radius of air capacity, but just might help increase the air capacity between components in the circuit depending on the proximity of the circuit to the 'ground'/'earth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TR3WmK3qrws


Mags

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1422 on: May 22, 2013, 02:35:18 PM »
Farmhand:

You are really upset that I did not see resonance in your motor setup.  It's like you want to force me to agree with you.  So your passive aggression has transformed into outright aggression and nasty words.  What the hell?

Your rant against my comments about how an AV plug works are over the top and nonsensical.  There you completely lost it.

That's about all that I can say.

MileHigh

Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1423 on: May 22, 2013, 07:48:48 PM »
My purpose to posting in this thread about the motor design with what very many people call a "resonant charging circuit" is to show what I am using, how it works and the principal behind it, is so that others may benefit from the concept if they wish. I made the process of understanding the thinking behind it as step by step as I could so that the real intention for doing it is seen by at least some. And in that regard I think I have succeeded.

In common usage the motor would be run from the grid power and would be microprocessor controlled in the most advanced application and merely a compromise in general use, as are all motors, none are perfect in all applications.

I don't require permission to use the word resonance. Furthermore I have little regard for arguing semantics. Hence the mentioning of the Earth is a wire rubbish. Those of us stuck in reality realize that the Earth conducts and displacement current exists so the "Earth is a wire rubbish" is completely unnecessary. It would be much less confusing to just say the Earth is a conductor and is acting as a wire would act as a conductor. But repeatedly it is said by the Tesla deniers that there is no wireless energy transfer, they equate wire to conductor and treat everybody like an idiot by insinuating we don't know what the heck a conductor is compared to a wire for goodness sake. Personally I take that a direct insult to my intelligence. And I know others take it that way as well. And I know you know it MileHigh, just like I know Ex. knows it. I feel you guys deliberately complicate things, and deliberately misrepresent what some people say at times particularly when our dear Mr Tesla's devices or inventions are mentioned. I am not concerned of the wild claims made by those other than Mr Tesla. If the patent tells the truth then that is all that matters to me. The patents have the claims.

So I cannot take anyone seriously who continues to claim the Earth is a "wire" when it is clearly not, though it can be a "conductor". The difference is very important in the context of the purpose of the devices it relates to. Please desist with trying to make everybody else conform to your views and accept that people know the difference between these things.

Anyway when I am ready I will make a thread particularly about this motor here, at the present time I'm not happy to say I have a motor put together that posses all the required relationships to work in the best possible way for the design.

During the RomeroUK thread I mentioned using a resonant charging circuit to power a pulse motor and that the charging coil could help to turn the rotor, no one did it that I am aware of so I thought it was time for me to try it and see what happened.

As It turns out, after more adjustments the charging coil as it sits now in my motor is approximately 90 degrees lagging out of electrical phase with the motor coils (there are two now), each one 360 degree electrical phase occurs in a 90 degree sector of the rotor and the charging coil is 90 degrees out of phase with the motor coils.

MileHigh, You seem to not want to just let things happen, even when there is seen to be a reason for it there is negativity in general from you, though I do admit that you do agree on points at times and even say when you think something is a good idea. So I don't see you as being intentionally nasty so to speak.

Please keep in mind to argue with you i need to research to find the words to fit the pictures in my head, and that wastes my time, I work in pictures and when i need figures I know it and educate myself with the necessary information learn enough to get the job or project done to my satisfaction.

I can work two ways, I can keep everything to myself, or I can share as I go. As I find it I prefer to share so that if I miss things people like HopToad and SeaMonkey help me because they are actually interested in if I succeed or not. At certain times I can have a lot on my mind because I find order in chaos, I do get confused and make many mistakes or misspeak. I try to rectify when I do.

No hard feeling on my part, I'm just sayin I don't communicate that way.

Cheers

P.S. And as far as my motor goes, it does not matter what you think it has or hasn't got in it's operation what matters is what is. What is is what is and that is that. If anything I may claim is incorrect then so be it. But please if you want in imply that I made a claim please back it up with a quote so that I may retract it if I see I am in error. That is the proper thing to do.

The use of series capacitances is not yet even explored, but the effects can be foreseen in certain situations if we run simulations in our heads based on previous "hands on" experience (engineering), usually the simulations are very close to operating conditions as of course they must be when based on real previous outcomes..

..

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1424 on: May 23, 2013, 03:30:44 AM »
Farmhand:

You're objecting to my use of metaphor, like it's some sort of offense.  It's really crazy when you think about it.  On top of that, when I post I am always conscious of the general readers of the thread, I am also posting for them.  The use of the metaphor is to give people insight, and they might benefit from visualizing the earth acting like a conductor, a wire.  It's something they might not have thought of before.  I am willing to bet there are people in this thread right now that have never pondered this stuff.  There is also a buzz word, "single wire power transmission."  If you believe this when first learning about electronics, if you stumble and don't master the basic basics, then you are crippling yourself and it will corrupt your understanding of electronics.  Single-wire power transmission is impossible, because you must have current and voltage to transmit power.  Also, any electric circuit must form a current loop to work.  All of these important concepts are contained within visualizing the fact that "single wire power transmission" is in fact "two wire power transmission."  Some of the readers of the thread might not realize it and benefit from the learning experience.

And I get that kind of response from you, because I used a metaphor?  You think I was trying to insult anybody?  Give me a break.

MileHigh