Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

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

Google Search

Custom Search

Author Topic: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect  (Read 781182 times)

Offline hoptoad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1009
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1185 on: April 22, 2013, 04:37:53 AM »
Hoptoad:

Sorry but I am going to correct you.

In figure 19 when the transistor is on the current from the battery flows through bi-filar winding A only.

When the transistor is switched off the bi-filar winding A becomes the power source and it has to discharge its stored energy.  The "load" in this case is the switched-off transistor, bi-filar winding B, and D1.  That's how the current flows.  The battery has no affect on what happens during the inductive energy discharge.

So the load is the switched-off transistor, the bi-filar winding B, and D1.   So that's three components in series.  The vast majority of the power dissipated in the series load will go into the component that has the highest resistance.

The component with the highest resistance is the switched-off transistor.  So when the transistor switches off, it instantly gets whacked with the energy that is stored in bi-filar winding A.

MileHigh

Sorry but we'll have to agree to disagree. When the transistor turns off, current is fed by winding B into the battery. The stored energy does not create a high voltage into winding A, manifesting as a high voltage across the collector and emitter of the transistor, so long as winding B is connected as shown. You can theorize as much as you like, but actual current measurements show that winding B discharges any stored energy from the coil/s into the supply, when the transistor turns off.

Cheers

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1186 on: April 22, 2013, 05:00:03 AM »
Hoptoad,

For starters, I corrected my posting and edited it to also include the battery when bi-filar winding A discharges.

Quote
When the transistor turns off, current is fed by winding B into the battery.

This is not possible for a simple reason.  Current has to go into the top of bi-filer winding A as per your schematic.  It can come from either bi-filer winding B or from the battery.  There is no opportunity for current to flow from winding B into the battery.

Note the discharging coil sets up a clockwise current flow in the left loop and a counter-clockwise current flow in the right loop.  For both of the loops, the transistor is the one thing with the highest resistance therefore it burns off most of the energy stored in bi-filar winding A.

If you have a chance you might want to investigate this again.  It looks to me like you should see a high-voltage spike across the transistor when it switches off.  That would be telling you that the transistor is being whacked by the discharging coil.

MileHigh

Offline hoptoad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1009
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1187 on: April 22, 2013, 05:22:59 AM »
Hoptoad,

For starters, I corrected my posting and edited it to also include the battery when bi-filar winding A discharges.

This is not possible for a simple reason.  Current has to go into the top of bi-filer winding A as per your schematic.  It can come from either bi-filer winding B or from the battery.  There is no opportunity for current to flow from winding B into the battery.

Note the discharging coil sets up a clockwise current flow in the left loop and a counter-clockwise current flow in the right loop.  For both of the loops, the transistor is the one thing with the highest resistance therefore it burns off most of the energy stored in bi-filar winding A.

If you have a chance you might want to investigate this again.  It looks to me like you should see a high-voltage spike across the transistor when it switches off.  That would be telling you that the transistor is being whacked by the discharging coil.

MileHigh
Indeed you will see a high voltage spike across the transistor when it switches off, if coil B is not connected via a diode as shown.
But with coil B connected via the diode as shown, you will not see a great big voltage spike across the transistor, but you will see current from winding B  feeding into the supply, indicated by meters, and also because that's the only way coil B can discharge, when the transistor is off.  But don't take my word for it. Do it. Check it with meters. Theory is one thing, practical application is another. Fig 19 has been replicated by a great number of people on this forum and others, and every person who has tried it, reports the same. I_ron (who hasn't posted here for some time) tried it only very recently and reported to me via personal email, that everything I outlined would happen, did in fact happen.
A reduction in current consumption during on time, a surge of current from winding B back into the supply during off time, and an increase in motor torque. Not O/U of course, just a measurable increase in overall efficiency compared to using only a single wire drive coil.

Cheers

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1188 on: April 22, 2013, 05:40:42 AM »
Hoptoad:

I'll take your word for it but it would be nice to see the data also.  It's a kind of tricky circuit because of the bifilar coil.  It's very hard to visualize this stuff in your head once you have more than just a handful of components to look at.  Perhaps one day I will try to simulate it with pSpice also.

MileHigh

Offline hoptoad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1009
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1189 on: April 22, 2013, 06:00:18 AM »
Hoptoad:

I'll take your word for it but it would be nice to see the data also.  It's a kind of tricky circuit because of the bifilar coil.  It's very hard to visualize this stuff in your head once you have more than just a handful of components to look at.  Perhaps one day I will try to simulate it with pSpice also.

MileHigh

Please - as I say on my web-site - don't take my word for anything - please try it yourself.
Yes, what actually occurs with fig 19 seems counter intuitive, which is one of the nice things about it. It begs questions to be asked.

Cheers

Offline Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1190 on: April 22, 2013, 07:34:06 AM »
Please - as I say on my web-site - don't take my word for anything - please try it yourself.
Yes, what actually occurs with fig 19 seems counter intuitive, which is one of the nice things about it. It begs questions to be asked.

Cheers

Wouldn't it be true to say that once the magnetic field is formed the energy is stored not so much in the coil's wire that created it but within the magnetic field itself ?
And then when the magnetic field collapses it's energy can discharge through the second winding and into the battery.

That's the regular way to do it, we can even use a FWBR on the second winding, (which in a Bedini setup or one with a trigger coil would be the third winding)
which the Bedini people call a trifilar setup. It can use a single rectifier or a FWBR.

The point is the magnetic field discharges into the lesser resistance by preference, because the emf from the magnetic field collapse produces current through the lesser resistance first. If the load coil is open then bingo transistor is hit with coil discharge energy in total. Same thing happens if the charge battery is very badly sulfated.

Hoptoad is correct as I see it. I agree try it and see. I like to say that too.  :D

P.S. I admit I did not look very well at the drawing.

I can't find the link, is there a link to a circuit drawing or the "pages" ? Please.


Cheers

Offline ALVARO_CS

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 178
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1191 on: April 22, 2013, 09:18:41 AM »
Farmhand:
Here`s the link: http://www.totallyamped.net/adams/index.html

the No19 schematic is in page 6 with a full explanation.
I have used that setup in many experiments with voltages from 4.5 to 12 V at 500mA max.
May be I was lucky or may be it works as said, unfortunately, I cannot show accurate measurements,
as I have got poor equipment. (and very low economic means, but very high spirits).

Hoptoad:
Thanks for your answers, and thanks for those pages, which have been of invaluable help in my learning process.
cheers

Offline hoptoad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1009
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1192 on: April 22, 2013, 10:09:53 AM »
Wouldn't it be true to say that once the magnetic field is formed the energy is stored not so much in the coil's wire that created it but within the magnetic field itself ?
And then when the magnetic field collapses it's energy can discharge through the second winding and into the battery.

snip...

Exactly.       KneeDeep

Cheers

P.S. Exactly the sort of question the circuit begs asking. Sometimes the answer to a question is so obvious the question is never asked.
But, alas, all too often we forget or simply overlook the obvious.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2013, 12:41:54 PM by hoptoad »

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4137
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1193 on: April 22, 2013, 05:07:14 PM »
Other MOSFETS:

I switched to the AUIRF9Z34N (P-Channel) and the AUIRFZ34N (N-Channel) because they have less resistance when switched on. This produces a little bit higher rpm value (about 10%) for the same power input. Theire 55 V Drain to Source braekdown Voltage is high enough because the drive coil is switched (commutated) cleanly, only small spikes.

Greetings, Conrad

Hi Conrad,

You have very nicely solved the control of the H-bridge by a single Hall sensor instead of the two, using complementary MOSFETs, congratulations.

Would like to suggest two things.

One is using a diode D in series with the positive supply rail going to the H-bridge and connecting a puffer capacitor C across the supply rails of the H-bridge. (I modified your original schematic to show what I mean.) The reason for these small modifications is that the collapsing field of the coil in your original schematic goes back to the power supply and most probably dissipates across its inner resistance but inserting a diode prevents the 'flyback' pulse seeing the power supply and can only go into the puffer capacitor.

The second suggestion would be (after testing the first one) to use Schottky diodes in parallel with the built-in body diodes of all the 4 MOSFETs, (one diode for each MOSFET). The reason is that the spikes from the collapsing fields are steered automatically into the puffer capacitor from both switching phases of the H-bridge (in your original schematic this is also inherently available of course except that it is steered onto the supply rails).
The body diodes when conduct normally have a forward voltage drop very close to 0.55-0.6V as minimum drop, so shunting them with diodes of less forward drop feature increases the captured energy. (Even fast recovery Si diodes like UF4002 etc can help as a start to check this if there are no four Schottky diodes at hand.) By the way you can check the body diodes forward drop by digital multimeter's built-in diode test feature if there is such, just remove the coil and supply rails from the FET bridge. With this feature you can see the resulting forward drop when paralleling an outside diode with the body diode, albeit at about 1mA forward current level only what most diode testers provide. (Obviously, anode goes to anode, cathode goes to cathode when paralleling.)

What else could be done to improve your setup?  I already referred to a few pages back to utilize both poles of the electromagnet, unfortunately this is not a simple task. And also, the use of coils with much much less DC resistance to minimize copper loss. This latter can involve the possibility of reducing the supply voltage to the bridge.
Also, I think it might be worth somehow reduce the 50% duty cycle which now inherently comes from the diametrically magnetized ring magnet. However, to achieve lower duty cycle in your present setup, you would have to make a separate disk onto the rotor axle with small disk magnets and fix the Hall (or Halls) over them.  This way the duration of the attract-in and the repel-out phases could be controlled more precisely (if needed).

rgds,
Gyula

Offline conradelektro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1843
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1194 on: April 22, 2013, 06:40:53 PM »
@Gyula: thank you for the many suggestions, I will test them.

My set up still has some mechanical problems (in spite of the new brass axle). The ball bearings make some strange noise, may be I damaged them a bit during mounting. Now it also became evident that the ring magnet is not balanced. Up to 4000 rpm the vibrations are minor, at the peak rpm of 8400 the noise scares me because everything could fly apart.

But for the moment I leave everything as it is (besides the diodes and the buffer capacitor as suggested by Gyula). I want to try to generated some power with "strange coils".

Please note the rather low "input power" requirements and we will see how much "output power" various strange "allegedly Lenz free" coils will produce.

Greetings, Conrad

Offline conradelektro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1843
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1195 on: April 22, 2013, 07:08:06 PM »
@Gyula:

I thought about your suggestion to use both magnetic poles of the coil. But I do not have the mechanical talent to build such a C-shaped core or to modify an existing core in the right way. Therefore I will stay for the time with my most simple design.

Concerning the pulse duration: to do this in a versatile way I will use an Arduino (I have the new Arduino Due), but this will be a future project. The optimal pulse duration for a spinning ring magnet would be 25% N, 25% off, 25% South, 25% off.

Concerning a drive coil with less DC resistance: I built several pulse or Bedini motors in the past and I came up with the high DC resistance relay coils as a drive coil because they seemed to work in a more efficient way than low DC resistance coils. For some strange reason a pulse motor seems to works better with higher Voltage (12 Volt and more). And when going to a higher Voltage the drive coil should have a higher DC resistance (very many turns of wire) in order to keep the current low. There will be higher losses (copper resistance) in the coil, but they seem to be minor in comparison with the efficiency gain of the pulse motor when driven at higher Voltages. I might be wrong, but my (rather crude) tests led me in this direction.

Lenz free coils: Now, good people, let's hear some Lenz free coil designs? Pancake coils with secret ingredients? Coils with embedded magnets?

In my set up such a magic coil only has to produce 0.15 Watt at 3000 rpm in order to go OU. The spinning ring magnet (25 mm diameter, 7 mm hight) is Neodymium NdFeB / N35, so plenty of magnet power. It is difficult to remove tools (screw driver, wrench, pincers) once they are caught by this magnet.

Well, sounds too good.

Greetings, Conrad

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4137
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1196 on: April 23, 2013, 12:03:13 AM »
Hi Conrad,

Regarding the use of both magnetic poles of a coil, I think it must be designed in advance to have a mechanical setup for supporting that goal, unfortunately, and even then it can still be difficult to build it, using preferably off the shelf cores etc. And to rebuild a certain,  already differently working setup can be even more problematic.

Using an Arduino to have variable pulse width or duty cycle gives indeed more versatility, albeit in case of this 25% on-off sequencies (with changing pole polarities) valid for this ring magnet may not warrant its use, strictly speaking. Nevertheless it can give many variations, easy to use and good for many pulse motor types.

I understand the higher voltage-less current approach for the pulsed input coil(s) as you have found in building pulse or Bedini motors.  I believe a great number of pulse motors built in this "free energy quest" by many tinkerers have used mainly 12V DC input voltage due to the widespread availability of the car batteries or some multiples of 12V. I also believe that this 12V greatly "defined" the coils more or less 'optimal spectifications' as the wire diameter and number of turns are concerned, to be able to recapture enough energy for recharging again the 12V battery (preferably from the same coil(s) which are the input coils) in a range from say 7 AmperHour to some ten AmperHour capacity. Very few of the replicators have changed input voltage either below or above 12V and even less changed coil specs.
It is the AmperTurns which defines the strength of electromagnets, and many variations exist to have the needed AmperTurns for a job. For relay coils the many thousand number of turns (from very thin wire) involve relatively smaller input current than for instance Bedini style pulse motor coils etc. At the same time many relay types exist with given sizes for certain jobs, this indicates that coils should be 'designed' to fulfill a needed job, preferably in the most optimal way,  your approach to vary supply voltage surely helps finding the optimal input power parameters for a chosen relay coil, especially if you occasionally try other types of relay coils. And the non-continuous but pulsed operation of such motors lets using higher input voltages than the original relay coil, mainly destined for a 100% duty operation.

'Lenz-free' coils...  is there such? :)  Bill Müller may have had such with his stepped winding technics. Pancake coils? It needs to be thoroughly explored how to utilize their interesting magnetic pole positions.

Keep up your excellent work.

rgds,  Gyula 

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1197 on: April 23, 2013, 12:42:20 AM »
Hoptoad:

I think I finally see how the bi-filar coil works in figure 19 for the motor drive coil.  It's really quite ingenious.

When the transistor shuts off, bi-filer winding A shuts down completely and current stops flowing through it.

Bi-filer winding B is wrapped around the same magnetic flux as bi-filer winding A and basically "hijacks" the field collapse and takes over the discharge of energy and pumps it into the battery.

To be more accurate, winding A is trying to push current through the transistor but it is blocked.  Winding B on the other hand has smooth sailing to pump the energy into the battery so that's the way the discharge goes.  So it's almost like a magnetic switching function is taking place.  Charge winding A -> discharge winding B.   "No rules are broken."

The rule I thought was being broken is if you look at the top of winding A, current has to flow down into the winding when the transistor shuts off because that's how coils work.  With this clever configuration that doesn't have to happen, the winding B coil "picks up the slack" and allows everything to work like it is supposed to work.

This circuit could be used on Bedini motors to recycle the pulse energy less the losses that you have to endure with respect to the charging efficiency and subsequent discharging efficiency of the battery itself.  No more need for neons.  (Ha ha I forgot the spike is supposed to go into the charging battery.  I was more focused on the "motoring" aspect.")

MileHigh

Offline hoptoad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1009
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1198 on: April 23, 2013, 01:31:27 AM »
Hoptoad:

I think I finally see how the bi-filar coil works in figure 19 for the motor drive coil.  It's really quite ingenious.

When the transistor shuts off, bi-filer winding A shuts down completely and current stops flowing through it.

Bi-filer winding B is wrapped around the same magnetic flux as bi-filer winding A and basically "hijacks" the field collapse and takes over the discharge of energy and pumps it into the battery.

To be more accurate, winding A is trying to push current through the transistor but it is blocked.  Winding B on the other hand has smooth sailing to pump the energy into the battery so that's the way the discharge goes.  So it's almost like a magnetic switching function is taking place.  Charge winding A -> discharge winding B.   "No rules are broken."

The rule I thought was being broken is if you look at the top of winding A, current has to flow down into the winding when the transistor shuts off because that's how coils work.  With this clever configuration that doesn't have to happen, the winding B coil "picks up the slack" and allows everything to work like it is supposed to work.

This circuit could be used on Bedini motors to recycle the pulse energy less the losses that you have to endure with respect to the charging efficiency and subsequent discharging efficiency of the battery itself.  No more need for neons.  (Ha ha I forgot the spike is supposed to go into the charging battery.  I was more focused on the "motoring" aspect.")

MileHigh

Glad to see you got it. Sometimes things are so simple it's hard to see the forrest for the trees!
Winding B can feed the collapsing magnetic field energy back to the source battery as shown, or it can be offloaded to another battery.
Cheers

Offline hoptoad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1009
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1199 on: April 23, 2013, 09:04:35 AM »
snip...

This circuit could be used on Bedini motors to recycle the pulse energy less the losses that you have to endure with respect to the charging efficiency and subsequent discharging efficiency of the battery itself.  No more need for neons.  (Ha ha I forgot the spike is supposed to go into the charging battery.  I was more focused on the "motoring" aspect.")

MileHigh

It doesn't necessarily work as efficiently in a true bedini motor circuit as it does with a hall or optical or even mechanical switching control. Whenever a regenerative coupling to the collapsing field is introduced, it changes the dynamics of the interaction between rotor and coil, influencing the rotor induced signal waveform, sometimes dramatically.

A true bedini circuit derives its transistor base signal voltage / current from the induced flux of the passing rotor magnets via one of the windings of the core/coils.

That's why they often need a small physical kick start on the rotor to make it spin in order to provide a signal voltage / current to the transistor base.

Coupling a recycling output to the main drive winding of the core/coils not only changes the drive coil's discharge time curve, but also by mutual transformer action induces waveform changes to the signal winding. Because the drive coil switches larger currents than the signal winding, it has a dominating influence on the mutual induction between the two windings.

Sometimes there will be a benefit, sometimes there won't. It mostly depends on the inductance / impedance of the coils, which determines whether the recycling circuit discharges its stored energy before the rotor hits the 50% duty cycle marker, between pulses, and whether the signal waveform remains relatively true to the voltage / current polarity induced by the rotor magnets.

Cheers