Hi Tinman,
You have spoken some true and pivotal words, it is important to keep your feet on the ground. This is easy to do when you are on the fringe.
At the same time it is a different story for someone who is in the heat of the action, right in the middle of it all. His closeup involvement changes all.
All his eggs are in that basket, he might know that not all eggs are good for an omelet but there you come and want to mess with those eggs, you are asking for trouble and that you will get,  this is not so difficult to understand.  It is never nice to see "that good idea" of the last 12 month's obsession being trampled upon.

I call this the human factor,  give it some time and do some prodding peace meal, not too much in one go and the right responses will be received to answers these more difficult questions.  Because in the end OU would cook you an omelet, easy over.

The best OU test is frying omelets, pancakes, make coffee in the middle of a parking lot with an electric pan.  No meters, no batteries anywhere.  Only some nice smelling breakfast.  Now that is a indisputable OU test!

Lets remember that it is easier to breakdown an idea, that it is to bring one to the table.  An unrealized shared idea obviously needs help to get it to full realization,  constructive building criticism is needed here, so gently does it !

Gently would have probably been a better option.But the reason i joined the thread in the first place was because i actualy believed in UFO's work.
But then came the scream of !! overunity galore !!.What i saw after that was guy's spending money on kit's,so as to get this overunity galore for them self's.
My gentle approach turned into more of a !!hang on guys!! approach. (probably my mistake)

I have seen this happen all to often,and im sure many have aswell.
The kit's them self are a great base for doing some testing of your own,but there was no need to imply that they could achieve overunity if built right-as that has in no way been proven.

We would all be asked the same question's that i asked UFO,if we made that overunity claim aswell.
But that would be a claim i would never make,unless i could back it up with absolute proof-and it had been replicated by atleast 2 other people.
But time will tell,and many have there kit's now-so we shall see the outcome soon enough.

On another note:-I wish you all a merry Xmas.

Koalas have proverbs too, you know. One of ours goes, "If you make crazy mistakes in your power measurements, and have misconceptions about Ohm's Law, don't understand the relationship between Voltage, Current, Resistance and Power, and don't think SLA batteries can "generate" over 40 amps,  and don't understand the difference between a true Tesla Bifilar winding and one that cancels magnetic fields and inductance, for example ...... then there is no reason to believe you when you make claims of electrical overunity."
Or something like that. It's much more poetic in the original.

Kogs
I live by another rule,"the truth shall set you free".
In this Case the ultimate truth will prevail,and I find it quite commendable that you make a stand for that !
I personally would be sorely Dissapointed by your departure under these circumstances,especially given that post of yours explaining the Proper Context of UFO's Measurement Quote.
 
You are his Champion here ,it can be a cruddy Job but somebody has to do it!
HOLD!! !! !! !! !!
Do not yield the ground !!
 
Thx
Chet
PS
If you must depart for your own sanity sake ,[I am mostly insane /numb to this place from over exposure]
And you happen to become aware of any other untruths/deceptive postings
Send me an Email at Chetkremens@gmail.com
 
 
 
 

Well, I have finished reading the entire thread and watching the videos over there.  Not one measurement of efficiency on any of the modified motors was ever performed.  If I somehow missed an efficiency test, someone please point it out to me.

One poster, Turion, came closest to making a measurement, and began putting together a Prony, but apparently abandoned that, as I never saw any results posted.  He did make one anecdotal comment regarding torque or something, but no measurements that indicated improved efficiency were ever posted.  It is a shame, as he spent quite a bit on scales and such.  Had he replaced his rubber bungee or v belt (he might have cut a v belt and applied bungee hook ends to it, was hard to tell) and v pulley with a leather or metal belt and a drum pulley, he very likely would have been able to collect some great data.  (too much "stiction" from heating bounced his scale readings all over the place)

Early on, I believe he also wanted to use an unmodified RS motor as a generator, and drive it electricaly loaded with a modified and unmodified motor to see which was more efficient at driving the generaor.  That was, I believe, a brilliant, low cost, and simple way to determine if any efficiency improvement resulted from the new winding method.  But again, that method was abandoned, with his initial results not looking well for the mod.

For those that may be upset about me taking a quote from UFO out of context, I highly recommend reading the pages that lead up to that quoted statement.

UFO is all over the place with his measurement methods.  One method mentioned was to feed power to the motor and measure the unloaded output voltage from the output (generator) brush pairs.  I believe in the example he was driving the motor at 10 volts, and the output voltage was 18 volts, so that was a COP of 1.8, or something to that effect.  Another method, wherein I guess he figured current had to be accounted for somehow, he subtracted the output voltage from the drive voltage, and then multiplied that result by the amp draw.  So, for example, if it took 10 volts at 10 amps to drive the motor, most would consider that to be 100 watts.  But, if the output brush pair measured 8 volts (unloaded mind you), we subtract 8 from 10, and then multiply the remaining 2 volts by the 10 amps for 20 watts.  Amazing...

When anyone made mention of any type of measurement or observation that did not bode well for or questioned the mod motors' efficiency, UFO would pull out the all caps, large fonts, sarcastic emoticons, and remind all how much he knows that others don't.  Reminded me a lot of someone else who likes to use a lot of glowy text...

So yeah, I thought the quote I posted was quite telling, and I would not have bothered to post it if UFO had been pushing for proper and sensible measurement methods. 

Someone here asked why else would people be spending big bucks on larger motors if the low cost RS mod did not perform as expected.  And I too echo that question.  In my read, as I did not see even one measurement of efficiency improvement with the new winding method using the RS motor, I too question why some moved on to build other motors, without testing the first mods properly before doing so.

Many over there are dedicated builders/winders, and I wish them luck for all their efforts, but even now it seems UFO is talking about an even larger motor so as to mechanically "hammer" the load.

There are a lot of talented people over there, and as a group, they could likely accomplish a lot.  As followers,  I am not so sure...

That's just my take on the whole read... no evidence of improved efficiency, no evidence of OU.


PW

   

PW:

Thanks for doing all that hard work for me!  lol

No measurements of any substance performed on the modified motors?  Dang!

Let me segue shamelessly into a sales pitch I already made.

I am assuming that many experimenters bought two small identical DC motors.  Perhaps they have three small identical motors, that would be even better.  So if they use one as a generator connected to a big resistor they can test different motor configurations by driving the generator + resistor at the same RPM.  (Note the generator setup does not necessarily have to be done with an identical motor.)

Now any keeners should be able to do the basic number crunching and measuring that goes along with the following discussion:

Let's assume you want to have the big resistor dissipate about 3 watts at say 3600 RPM.   With a true-RMS meter and trying different load resistance values and using an unmodified motor to drive the generator you find a setup that comes close to your target.  Say for the sake of argument you find a resistor setup that gives you 2.8 watts of dissipation at 3600 RPM.

Step 1: The first thing you have to do is measure the DC voltage and the average current that you had to drive the original motor with so that the rotor turns at 3600 RPM and drives the generator setup to dissipate 2.8 watts in the load resistor.  You multiply the voltage and the average current to get the input power for the original motor configuration.   That is your reference for the next test.

Step 2: Now take your UFO-modified asymmetrical version of the same motor and connect it to the generator.  Measure the DC voltage and average current required to drive the generator at 3600 PM.

Step 3: Compare the power consumed by the original unmodified motor and the UFO-modified motor and see which one performed better.

This is a simple way to ensure you are putting the same mechanical load on the original and modified motors.  You will know right away if the UFO-modified motor performs better or not.

Note:  I haven't forgotten the fact that the UFO-modified motor can be a generator at the same time that it's motor.  Go for it and make the measurements; while keeping the RPM at 3600 by tweaking the supply voltage, try adding different load resistors to the generator output of the modified motor and with your true-RMS meter measure the power being dissipated in the local load resistor.  Create a table and share your data with the other experimenters.

Required equipment:

Two or three identical motors
Shaft coupler
Some resistors to connect in parallel and/or series to create your 3-watt load bank
Variable power supply
Optical tachometer
One digital multimeter
One true-RMS digital multimeter
Calculator or spreadsheet

MileHigh

For those who only think they know what ohms law is

here is a refresher in OHM's Law

Ohms law  Is an inverse proportional law Look here  with regard inverse proportionality
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportionality_(mathematics)
The concept of inverse proportionality can be contrasted against direct proportionality. Consider two variables said to be "inversely proportional" to each other. If all other variables are held constant, the magnitude or absolute value of one inversely proportional variable will decrease if the other variable increases, while their product (the constant of proportionality k) is always the same.
Ohms Law states that Power = Volts x Amps
Examples
Ohms law says  Power =Volts x Amps   

Therefore

720P =240v x 3A   and  720P = 120v x 6A  and 720P = 60v  x 12A   
Not
720P= 50v x 12A
or
720P =10v x 3A

PLease Moderators ban me from this list I do not want to even look at list again as too many people do not know what they are saying
or care to know what they are saying is correct and therefore say others are just like them

Good Bye

Ian,

You seem upset.  Not at all MY intention.

Perhaps I missed something in my read of that thread.

Can you point me to even one set of proper measurements that indicated any improvement in the efficiency of the modified motors?

PW

 Post Script

@Mile high
You just like you are doing here you was causing so mutch trouble not interested in what goes on anly trying to cause discord and that is why in UFOs Threads you were expelled not permitted to post there any more

I did not appreciate you sending me a private Email asking me to post a long document on UFO's thread I did not even read it I marked it as Spam

I just forgot to include this in my previous post

@Ian Koglin:

Is there some point in my video that you would like to dispute? 

What about V=IR? That is a DIRECT relationship, not an inverse one, and is one of several ways of stating Ohm's Law. If you hold resistance constant, then raise voltage, the current goes up, in direct proportion, not inverse. Your parroting of the "refresher" from Wiki in your post only reveals that you don't understand it.

Do you agree with this statement? Or not? UFOPolitics did.

Perhaps you can tell me just how to increase the current....without raising the voltage or lowering the resistance.

I am not disputing Ohm's law neither was UFO There is as you say a  DIRECT relationship between I and V and R
it just that what UFO said it is an Inverse proportional relationship

UFO said Ohms law is an inverse proportional and this what those disputing are disputing

Why can't you people even read  and understand V=IR   If you only change either I or R then the v has to change for V to be constant
both the I and the R have to change this is what inverse proportional is
I am only a simple Joiner and even I have learned that

This is the reason I asked the Moderators to ban me I just cannot reason with people that connot even understand what they read and jump in without putting thier brain into gear

I really an sorry for the way I have expressed my self here this argument is trivial and usless because of the ones here that are not humble enough to think they can be taught something they do not even check things to see what is correct

Please moderators ban me