Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Mechanical free energy devices => mechanic => Topic started by: tim123 on September 02, 2013, 09:23:33 AM
-
Hi Folks,
I'm starting a new thread for this device because I think it does the 'impossible' - and uses the Lenz-force to aid the rotation - just like Tinman says.
The videos:
Part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yC4rCChVK8Y
Part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZixHuoVHxc
Torque Test - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6xRcSkPYn4
RT Vs Motor Pt1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVmVtRqwaRc
RT Vs Motor Pt2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szpJ97M58G4
Riding the Waves - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X163_IilwHk
Brief Description:
- The device is a modified 'Universal Motor' - i.e. a brushed motor that works with DC or AC
- The stator coils are disconnected from the input power. (They're usually connected to the brushes in series)
- DC or Rectified AC Power is provided in the usual way to the brushes. The motor turns by the attraction of the magnetised rotor to the iron stator.
- Power is taken off the stator coils, but only in the 'right' direction - via a diode.
- Increased load on the stators causes the motor to increase it's torque, it speeds up, and less input power is required.
Principle of Operation:
Here's how I think it works:
- The rotor segment is magnetised just before it enters the stator.
It's attracted to the iron core of the stator.
No power is taken off the stator at this point.
- The rotor segment enters the stator, providing torque...
- The rotor is depowered as it moves past the brushes, and the next rotor segment is powered up.
- The stator coil sees the 'loss' of flux, as the rotor segment in contact with it is depowered, so Lenz's law says it will attempt to reinforce that field.
Now the power is taken off the stator coils...
- The stator produces a field of the *same polarity* as the rotor (was), in reaction to the loss of flux.
So the stator then actively attracts the next rotor segment - for 'free'...
So the Lenz's Law / Back-EMF is acting in the same direction as the rotor. It's genius. :)
-
Hi Folks,
I'm starting a new thread for this device because I think it does the 'impossible' - and uses the Lenz-force to aid the rotation - just like Tinman says.
The videos:
Part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yC4rCChVK8Y
Part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZixHuoVHxc
Torque Test - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6xRcSkPYn4
RT Vs Motor Pt1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVmVtRqwaRc
RT Vs Motor Pt2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szpJ97M58G4
Riding the Waves - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X163_IilwHk
Brief Description:
- The device is a modified 'Universal Motor' - i.e. a brushed motor that works with DC or AC
- The stator coils are disconnected from the input power. (They're usually connected to the brushes in series)
- DC or Rectified AC Power is provided in the usual way to the brushes. The motor turns by the attraction of the magnetised rotor to the iron stator.
- Power is taken off the stator coils, but only in the 'right' direction - via a diode.
- Increased load on the stators causes the motor to increase it's torque, it speeds up, and less input power is required.
Principle of Operation:
Here's how I think it works:
- The rotor segment is magnetised just before it enters the stator.
It's attracted to the iron core of the stator.
No power is taken off the stator at this point.
- The rotor segment enters the stator, providing torque...
- The rotor is depowered as it moves past the brushes, and the next rotor segment is powered up.
- The stator coil sees the 'loss' of flux, as the rotor segment in contact with it is depowered, so Lenz's law says it will attempt to reinforce that field.
Now the power is taken off the stator coils...
- The stator produces a field of the *same polarity* as the rotor (was), in reaction to the loss of flux.
So the stator then actively attracts the next rotor segment - for 'free'...
So the Lenz's Law / Back-EMF is acting in the same direction as the rotor. It's genius. :)
Hi Tim
You have one half of the operation worked out,now you just need the other half.
Hint-DC current is no good,it must be pulsed DC or Rectified AC-wich is kinda like a pulsed dc,only in a wave form.
The universal motor isnt so good for this sort of operation,but it's all i had at the time.The bigest problem is the over laping rotor winding's,and the fact that it is only a two pole motor.
Now what happens when you have two inductors facing each other(say a 3mm gap between them),one has a load placed across it,and the other is your primary(powered)inductor.Now hit the primary with a good sharp pulse of power-what dose the loaded secondary inductor do? Yes-it creates a backEMF against the primary inductor,or the lenz force effect.
So how do the magnetic fields cut through the above setup,that differs from a standard generator or altinator???.
-
I can't see ATM how rectified AC on the input will help. The change is too slow, and can't be sychronised with the rotor...
For example - take 50Hz AC - rectified = 100 pulses per sec.
If motor runs at 5000RPM (83.3Hz), and has 18 rotor poles (mine has 18) = (5000 / 60) x 18 = 1500 pole-changes per second
So each pulse covers 15 rotor-pole change-overs. So each rotor pole sees a more-or-less constant voltage throughout its 'powered-up' time. The pulses seem too slow to do anything but just reduce the overall throughput.
If the pulsing was important, surely it would have to be synchronised with the pulsing of the rotor / stator poles...?
I'm prepared to accept that pulsing may perhaps give better efficiency, but I think it will be at the expense of torque.
"So how do the magnetic fields cut through the above setup,that differs from a standard generator or altinator???."
I think it doesn't have to cut through any fields - because they're all the same polarity. It's the clever (but simple) switching arrangement ensures the stator only ever goes to the same polarity as the rotor.
I'd like to see a comparison test of plain DC Vs. pulsed / rectified. I would definitely expect to see more rotary power out from plain DC than pulsed DC of the same voltage...
-
For example - take 50Hz AC - rectified = 100 pulses per sec.
Actually, it would be 50 pulses per sec. ;)
Mags
-
That is if it is half wave rectification. ;) Which is it?
Mags
-
I tried running an old washing machine motor from a 12v lipo battery and was amazed it ran so well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPF7s9r8K7A (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPF7s9r8K7A)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9latuhlCMo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9latuhlCMo)
-
Actually, it would be 50 pulses per sec. ;)
Mags
Mags ???
50Hz is 50 complete cycle's per second,that means 100 half cycles per second.When we rectify the ac,we bring the bottom half of the wave,and place it between the two top half's. This give's you 100 half wave cycles,or 100 pulses a second.
-
@ Tim
You must also remember the overlap on the rotor segments to that of the brushes.This means that four rotor segments have current passing through them at once, 80% of the time.
As you will see in the video's,my motor only runs at around 1200 to 1300 RPM.
Dont forget that in the video of the scope trace i am using a PWM at high frequency,and also notice the half wave AC. But you will also see no switching of the rotor segments in the scope,and this is because the current flow is never broken-due to the over lap.
So we have a situation were we have 2 rotor segments on,then 4, then 2 ,then 4 -and so on.
This also means that your math is not a constant,and only true for 20% per revolution.
Please dont get me wrong here. What you explained is very true and correct,but there is more happening.When you get yours up and running,do a test between pulsed DC or rectified AC,and straight DC.Work out P/in for both,torque out for both,and also P/out for both. You will find that the pulsed P/in is far more efficient.
In reguards to the overlap of the brushes to rotor segment's,you will find that the rotor segment aproaching the stator core,is always on-this is how they work in normal operation.So if it's always on,how dose the field around the stator core collap's?]
Now like you said,the frequency of the rectified ac is very low,and it is this that makes this unit very average in performance. The frequency would need to be matched to each rotor segment,and then we would have something realy cool. But us poor men have to use what we have lol.
Anyway,i am going to dust of the old unit,and reserch it right along side you on this thread.Now i have my two channel scope,we can look at the current in,and p/out from the stator coils. This way you will be able to see exactly what is happening.
As you said-this motor realy isnt good for this effect to work. But in saying that,even this motor far outperforms an off the shelf motor.
Oh,and there is one other hickup we have to sort out,and that comes when you try to use two stator coil's. I havnt figured that one out yet,but i think we will have to cut the stator housing in half???.
-
@ Tim
You must also remember the overlap on the rotor segments to that of the brushes.This means that four rotor segments have current passing through them at once, 80% of the time.
As you will see in the video's,my motor only runs at around 1200 to 1300 RPM.
Dont forget that in the video of the scope trace i am using a PWM at high frequency,and also notice the half wave AC. But you will also see no switching of the rotor segments in the scope,and this is because the current flow is never broken-due to the over lap.
So we have a situation were we have 2 rotor segments on,then 4, then 2 ,then 4 -and so on.
This also means that your math is not a constant,and only true for 20% per revolution.
Please dont get me wrong here. What you explained is very true and correct,but there is more happening.When you get yours up and running,do a test between pulsed DC or rectified AC,and straight DC.Work out P/in for both,torque out for both,and also P/out for both. You will find that the pulsed P/in is far more efficient.
In reguards to the overlap of the brushes to rotor segment's,you will find that the rotor segment aproaching the stator core,is always on-this is how they work in normal operation.So if it's always on,how dose the field around the stator core collap's?]
Now like you said,the frequency of the rectified ac is very low,and it is this that makes this unit very average in performance. The frequency would need to be matched to each rotor segment,and then we would have something realy cool. But us poor men have to use what we have lol.
Anyway,i am going to dust of the old unit,and reserch it right along side you on this thread.Now i have my two channel scope,we can look at the current in,and p/out from the stator coils. This way you will be able to see exactly what is happening.
As you said-this motor realy isnt good for this effect to work. But in saying that,even this motor far outperforms an off the shelf motor.
Oh,and there is one other hickup we have to sort out,and that comes when you try to use two stator coil's. I havnt figured that one out yet,but i think we will have to cut the stator housing in half???.
Hi Tinman,
Just curious, what are the best figures have you been able to obtain for overall efficiency of the motor in your configuration?
Liberty
-
i am going to dust of the old unit,and reserch it right along side you on this thread.Now i have my two channel scope,we can look at the current in,and p/out from the stator coils. This way you will be able to see exactly what is happening.
Thanks TM for bringing this project back out.
I'll be watching the tests with interest
Luc
-
Tinman:
But in saying that,even this motor far outperforms an off the shelf motor.
I watched the clip where your modified washing machine motor outperforms a fan motor which is very impressive. However, it's possible that this will only be within a narrow range of outputs and operating parameters.
I think there are two unresolved issues when it comes to the forums and modifying motors.
The first is that to know if you are making progress you need to compare your modified motor with an unmodified motor. Without making measurements on the two motors under the same conditions you are in a kind of data limbo.
The second is to take measurements and plot performance curves from those measurements. This takes some real work and I have never seen it on a free energy forum. Performance curves are what a motor is all about:
http://tinyurl.com/lozae5s (http://tinyurl.com/lozae5s)
I am not making any demands, just pointing out some issues.
MileHigh
-
@ Liberty &MH
The testing done so far was what you see in the video's,and also l lot of testing by way of a generator attached to the motor.
The later was a "behind the scenes" test setup. The generator was calibrated against a motor of known performance,and many variable P/in P/out were graphed.The rotary transformer was then coupled to the same generator,and once again graphs were ploted over many different P/in values and loads placed on the generator.
These results were never posted,and that will become aparent as to why in this thread.
One must also remember that i was only using one of two stator coil's,and the results of the second stator coil being put into service was never shown-along with the generator test.
So for this reason,and to build side by side with those that wish to try it,i have started a fresh build on a fresh motor. I have also been videoing each step as we go,and the first will be up here tonight.
There is one thing i wish to make very clear here, and that is we are building an efficient electric motor ONLY.
This will not become a UFOpolotics thread.
No kits will be made for sale.
No test of performance will be done using light bulbs.
And no one will be asked to leave for having a difference of opinion.-ALL opinions welcome,and looked into.
And "NO CLAIMS" of overunity will be made-unless ofcourse we can self loop the device,and have it run itself.
I know this is Tim's thread,but im sure he would agree with the things stated above. If not,im sure he will let us know.
I will also be continuing the thread on my forum on this update build of the rotary transformer.
http://iaec.forumco.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1040
For those looking for information about the original build-it can be found there.
Below is a couple of graph i made while calibrating the standard motor and generators performance curve.
The generator was actualy a DC motor that is identical to the motor driving it.
This turned out to be a very inefficient generator,and we will need to find a better one.
The graph's made using the rotary transformer as the prime mover,will be withheld for the time being.
Im guessing you remember this Mag's?.
-
Ok ,this is the first part of my new build. I hope those that are interested in this,put something together,as there is nothing better than being able to have a working device in front of you to test.
For those that use simulator's-well,if you must lol. But im not sure a sim will do motor's? But if they do,then i would be interested in seeing if it come's up with the same results shown in an actual build.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQ1xoq7g8Zk
-
Nice to see the thread's got some life in it... :)
@Tinman:
...You will find that the pulsed P/in is far more efficient.
I'm prepared to believe it, but I can't see the mechanism yet - esp. when it's not synch'd.
Do you have a variable-speed inverter? It should be easy enough to synch with one of those? Not too expensive usually, Eg:
http://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/inverter-drives/7673040/
-
Hi Tim
We dont need to synch anything yet,we can see on the scope what is happening,by using SCR's on the input and output. From this you will be able to see that it is the 100Hz rectified AC that provides most of the output power,and the armature switching only creates noise and very small spike's-just like in the last video of the original.
Like you said,this motor is realy not that good,but it's the best we have at the moment. The statore coil formers are way to wide,and cover to much of the rotor segments.
But all this we can work on,and make it better than it is now.
If i can get that sort of efficiency out of a stock(not well suited) motor,what could we do with one made for the job?.
I made some mod's to the old one,and increased it's efficiency by another 28%. But we will leave that out for now,and concentrate on the build from scratch.
I hope you will be doing a build aswell,and posting some video's of your progress.
-
Hi Tinman,
just seen the new vid. Nice and clear. Looking forward to the next... Not sure I understand the need for rewiring the stators though...
(Update: Rewatched the vid - I see your motor has 1/2 the windings on each side - that's why. Neither of mine have that arrangement - they're just single coils each side...)
Today's progress:
- Drilled the rivets out of my motor. It was easy.
- Took the motor apart. Easy.
- Separated the 2 stator coils by snipping them in the middle, then feeding the extra ends out. Easy
- Dropped the rotor. All too easy.
- Bought some bolts
- Re-assembled motor.
- Discovered I had broken the rotor when I dropped it. :(
Before I dropped the rotor I measured the resistance between the segments. They were all the same! (2.2 Ohms) After the drop, the values were all different - so it must've shorted out inside.
I discovered that the rotor doesn't work the way I thought it did:
- The rotor coils are not separate - they're all one big coil.
- It doesn't pulse individual rotor coils, powering up & down
- The brushes effectively separate the one big coil into 2 coils of opposite polarity.
- So all the rotor copper has current flowing in it at all times.
- It's a very clever design.
- They're quite fragile. Don't drop 'em! (D'oh!)
I'm not going to be able to fix the rotor. So, I'll have a look inside the old vacuum cleaner later & see what I can find... The bearing are shot in my washing machine. I may scrap that...
-
Since i have an old washing machine motor i think i'm gonna try to follow along with this experiment, thanks Tinman and Tim for sharing this.
I don't see the point of unwinding my stator coils because i already have two coils as you can see in the picture i attached?
There is also a reed switch between the stator coils in my motor.
Regards
-
Ok, I was annoyed with myself for messing up the last one. So I made an extra effort, and now I can report an initial experimental success. :)
The pic below shows the motor from a vacuum cleaner. The field coils & brushes were all connected in series, so I cut the wires, and fed the extra wire out as before. It's powered (just to the brushes now) with plain DC from a bench power supply.
The motor runs very nicely at 17v, 0.7a
I had to connect both stators in series to get any effect, but now if I take power off via some LEDs, the motor speeds up.
It is not quite the same as TM's because:
- I can't get the stator to put any drag on the rotor (yet)
- I had to use both field coils
- The voltage goes up as the speed goes up (the power supply is keeping the amps constant)
But it's close, and a decent start. The washing machine better watch out... ;)
-
Now I've had one apart, and I get how the rotor works, I have to revise my principle of operation a bit...
The rotor is fully magnetised by the windings, not just individual segments. This is why there's only 2 large stators in the motor: they create one large field for the rotor to rotate in.
The image below shows the path of the rotor thru the stator.
- The change of polarity, for each segment / winding is (I assume) in the middle of the stator.
- In the standard motor the stator is powered by input DC to a constant polarity.
- In the RT, the stator only powered by Lenz, so it pulses, but still to the same polarity...
- The rotor is attracted to the center of the stator, at which point, it reverses polarity
- The rotor segments leaving the stator are thus repelled by the stator.
The reason why the RT works is this:
- As the change-over segment swaps polarity, the field coils see a loss of flux ('N' in the drawing)
- The coils produce EMF - resulting in a magnetic field of the *same* polarity.
- So the coils act as if they were powered - for free.
:)
Tim
PS. I think this means it should be possible to use permanent magnets to power the rotor (indirectly, will work on a pic). Which would mean proper OU...
-
Here's an idea... Using the same principle, but with PMs to polarise the rotor segments...
- The stator & PM are all fixed.
- The rotor is just magnetic steel segments
- The rotor segments extend the field of the PM they are over
- When the segment crosses the center-line / change-over point it loses/changes it's polarity, just like in the powered version.
- The coil / stator reacts just the same - with a pulsing field.
- So the stator attracts & repels the rotor segments - as if it was powered.
What do you think? :)
-
Hi Tim And TinMan
thank's for sharing
OK i have found a suitable motor for beginning the experiment
1- The motor spins under 240 volts as normal (it is a domestic "hacheur " for vegetables .
2- it spins under 36 volts DC on the brushes only (without any connection to the stator coils )
3- it spins with 36 volts DC connected directly to the brushes and stator coils as a normal AC connection ??
4-it spins when i connect the motor to my variac and from very low up to full 230 voltage.
5- it spins when i connect the motor to my variac but through a full wave bridge rectifier. (without smoothing cap)
So Tinman please post a shematic to let me go inside your project
Of course if you wish
Thank's
Laurent
-
Here's an idea... Using the same principle, but with PMs to polarise the rotor segments...
- The stator & PM are all fixed.
- The rotor is just magnetic steel segments
- The rotor segments extend the field of the PM they are over
- When the segment crosses the center-line / change-over point it loses/changes it's polarity, just like in the powered version.
- The coil / stator reacts just the same - with a pulsing field.
- So the stator attracts & repels the rotor segments - as if it was powered.
What do you think? :)
From what I understood about this, the armature is a carrier of the pulsed dc from 1 stator to the other, by which when the output stator was loaded, the motor ran better than if the stator was open. If the rotor is just PMs, the pulses from the stator are not going to get to the output stator. The output stator will only get induced by the rotor magnets moving like a normal gen. In that case, loading the output stator would slow the motor down, except under special conditions.
Also, if you were to 'look' at the magnetic poles of the wired rotor while running, they will not rotate around the rotor, at least not all the way. This is what the commutator and brushes accomplish is maintaining particular magnetic poles in particular positions on the rotor in reference to the stators polls, to maintain a constant torque to the rotor. So mags on the rotor wont work. Unless you redesign the motor to do so. ;D
Mags
-
Magnets on the rotor wont work. Unless you redesign the motor to do so. ;D
Mags
Hi mags and all,
Some months ago, when I first saw TinMan's rotary transformer I joined his site and posted on the topic that when I have time I would like to work with him to see if we could use his effect on my Mostly Magnet Motor design.
You maybe familiar with my design and I know Tim is. Do you think TinMan's effect could be used to improve on my motor design?
Anyone can share their thoughts
Thanks
Luc
-
Hi mags and all,
Some months ago, when I first saw TinMan's rotary transformer I joined his site and posted on the topic that when I have time I would like to work with him to see if we could use his effect on my Mostly Magnet Motor design.
You maybe familiar with my design and I know Tim is. Do you think TinMan's effect could be used to improve on my motor design?
Anyone can share their thoughts
Thanks
Luc
Hey Luc
Maybe try replacing the magnet with a coil. Coil vs Coil. By being able to turn off the magnets can be advantageous, especially if having to try and release pm magnetic pull after a magnetic event with cores and such.
What might be interesting is to have a coil on a pole of a magnet and see how much the other pole flexes due to influence of the coil. Im sure it does, but maybe more restrained than a normal core.
Mags
-
Hey Luc
Maybe try replacing the magnet with a coil. Coil vs Coil. By being able to turn off the magnets can be advantageous, especially if having to try and release pm magnetic pull after a magnetic event with cores and such.
What might be interesting is to have a coil on a pole of a magnet and see how much the other pole flexes due to influence of the coil. Im sure it does, but maybe more restrained than a normal core.
Mags
Hi Mags,
thanks for the reply.
From what you have written I feel you may not understand my motor design or have forgotten how it works! as there is NO " release pm magnetic pull after a magnetic event with cores and such"
Here is the most up to date video. Have a look and let me know what you think.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eTQ49RcFKM
Thanks
Luc
-
Hi Mags,
thanks for the reply.
From what you have written I feel you may not understand my motor design or have forgotten how it works! as there is NO " release pm magnetic pull after a magnetic event with cores and such"
Here is the most up to date video. Have a look and let me know what you think.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eTQ49RcFKM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eTQ49RcFKM)
Thanks
Luc
Just watched it. I remember seeing it. ;) Remember I commented that it us similar to a loud speaker motor. They call the coil mag configuration a motor. ;D Pic below
Kind of the way I see things, the shorter path for a magnetic loop, the stronger the field is. Without any cores, using a piece of plastic for the slider and putting the magnets at the ends would give the worst results. Once you add the center slider iron, of course the N pole fields will be attracted to it. With both mags in place, those 2 N poles now make that slider iron thee N pole. The field is spread out from each to the middle, and N field is available outward all over the 4 sides of the slider iron. But the S fields are free to go outward into space and loop back to the slider from all angles.
With just the 2 mags on top of the slider and 1 core piece on top, we have a similar situation and a lot of the S field is 'guided' closer to its destination, the N slider. So now the fields from S to N are shorter path and stronger. The S outer core also attracts the N fields from the other 3 sides of the N slider to just the one side mostly. So you have a high concentration between the bars. As you add more mags and bars, you are encasing the coil winding in a strong mag field on all sides, like a voice coil of a speaker. If you glued a hook to the center of a cone of a speaker and applied 1w, you may be surprised how many grams of pull you get. And the larger the speaker, you should get more pull with the 1w in. About 2v for a 4 ohm speaker.
It brings back a thought on the guy on YT that added more magnets to the outer casing of a small electric dc motor and it was faster. Most skeptics argued that it increased the speed, but not the power out. :o But you device sort of proves them wrong I would say. ;) More, stronger magnets makes for a stronger motor output for the same amount of input.
I tried adding neos to the outside if a toy motor and it ran faster. I have a few motors around to try and test the input vs speed/torque changes.
But according to what you show, the input should not change, right? ;) I dont see why there would be much difference
About the outer core pieces, have you tried thicker ones and output was less?
Mags
-
Forgot the pic for the last post ::) ;D
Mags
-
Just watched it. I remember seeing it. ;) Remember I commented that it us similar to a loud speaker motor. They call the coil mag configuration a motor. ;D Pic below
Kind of the way I see things, the shorter path for a magnetic loop, the stronger the field is. Without any cores, using a piece of plastic for the slider and putting the magnets at the ends would give the worst results. Once you add the center slider iron, of course the N pole fields will be attracted to it. With both mags in place, those 2 N poles now make that slider iron thee N pole. The field is spread out from each to the middle, and N field is available outward all over the 4 sides of the slider iron. But the S fields are free to go outward into space and loop back to the slider from all angles.
With just the 2 mags on top of the slider and 1 core piece on top, we have a similar situation and a lot of the S field is 'guided' closer to its destination, the N slider. So now the fields from S to N are shorter path and stronger. The S outer core also attracts the N fields from the other 3 sides of the N slider to just the one side mostly. So you have a high concentration between the bars. As you add more mags and bars, you are encasing the coil winding in a strong mag field on all sides, like a voice coil of a speaker. If you glued a hook to the center of a cone of a speaker and applied 1w, you may be surprised how many grams of pull you get. And the larger the speaker, you should get more pull with the 1w in. About 2v for a 4 ohm speaker.
It brings back a thought on the guy on YT that added more magnets to the outer casing of a small electric dc motor and it was faster. Most skeptics argued that it increased the speed, but not the power out. :o But you device sort of proves them wrong I would say. ;) More, stronger magnets makes for a stronger motor output for the same amount of input.
I tried adding neos to the outside if a toy motor and it ran faster. I have a few motors around to try and test the input vs speed/torque changes.
But according to what you show, the input should not change, right? ;) I dont see why there would be much difference
About the outer core pieces, have you tried thicker ones and output was less?
Mags
Hi Mags
I'll explain how my design works.
A current through a coil of wire will produce a North pole on one end and a South pole on the other end.
Slide a steel core in the center of that coil and the coils magnetic flux will now flow through the steel creating the same poles.
If you add magnets on each end of the core, with each the same pole (lets say North). With a core that's longer then the coil, the North end of the coil will repel the North end of the core permanent magnet and the South end of the coil will be attracted to the opposite North end of the core permanent magnet which causes the coil to move from one end of the core to the other. Flip the polarity of the current in the coil and the coil will travel the other opposite direction.
When you think of it, both ends of the coil are being used to do work, which is good.
However, what many fail to see or are unaware of is, half way through a coils inner and outer thickness (winding layers) there is a blotch wall. So from the inside where the coil is North, a South pole will start from the coils half way thickness and peak on the most outer surface of the coil.
This is why when I add the outside core on the opposite poles of the permanent magnets now the outside opposite coil field is doing the same work as the inner part of the coil. This is also why the scales grams pull force exactly doubles when I add the first outside core.
So if you understand the above my design is actually using 4 sides of a coil flux and converting it to mechanical power. Also, my design has zero core to magnet sticking or cogging. Actually, the stronger the magnets are, the stronger the mechanical output is and I have demonstrated this well.
I don't believe this is the case for standard PM motors as stronger magnets will not give you a boost in mechanical power.
Hope my explanation is clear enough
Now, if we can get my design to use TinMan's effect, I think we may have something good. That's what I'm interested in knowing.
Luc
-
Forgot the pic for the last post ::) ;D
Mags
Could you please indicate how the poles on the magnets are. Without that I'm not sure of how this works
Thanks
Luc
-
From what I understood about this, the armature is a carrier of the pulsed dc from 1 stator to the other...
Hi Mags :)
The armature (rotor) and stators are not electrically connected in the RT. It would make no difference to the stator if the field was from a PM, or an EM.
Also, if you were to 'look' at the magnetic poles of the wired rotor while running, they will not rotate around the rotor, at least not all the way.
Not sure what you mean. The induced field in the rotor does rotate around the whole rotor - as it rotates, and the brushes move from one segment to the next. It doesn't move smoothly - it steps from one brush to the next - but it does rotate all the way around...
So mags on the rotor wont work.
Yes, that's why I said they had to be fixed to the casing.
Tim
-
... So Tinman please post a shematic to let me go inside your project ...
Hi Woopy :)
What do you need to know? Perhaps I can help?
Looks like you have a nice little motor for testing...
Regards
Tim
-
OK,about the PM's in the stator core. Im not sure why you would want PM's ,insted of a self induced EM ,with wich we have controll over.One of the main ideas behind this machine, is to use it as a transformer,as well as a motor. PM's we cannot switch off,or collect any power from.Using EM's,we can create a strong repelling field,and that field only become's stronger,the more load we place on the output. This also increases the torque on the motor,while reducing the P/in.
Tim-If you think it would work,then give it a shot,and i will keep with the original design,so as others can see the effect.There is a small hickup coming,when we try to use the second stator coil,the same way we use the first-but we'll leave that until we get there. But looking at the stator coil core shape,it will become apparent what is happening,and why.
Now about the windings on the rotor. Although they are all joined like Tim said,the current will only power up two rotor segments at a time-like Mags said.This is because there is less resistance in these two segment's,and current follows the path of least resistance. So although they are all joined,only the two lowest resistance coils will use the current. These will be the two between the two stator coil core's-so the rotor field is pushed away from one stator core,and attracted to the other.
Oh and Tim- a big yes on the rotor being pushed away from the stator core's,not attracted too.
Also try the rectified AC or pulsed DC,as i sugested,and see the difference than that of DC current.
Now the rough schematic below shows the very simple diode and resistor conection.If the motor bogs down when the resistor is placed in series with the diode and coil,simply turn the diode around,so as you allow the current to flow in the opposite direction.Try one coil first,and then see what happens when you try and use both coil's ay once.
-
OK,about the PM's in the stator core. Im not sure why you would want PM's ,insted of a self induced EM...
No mate, not in the stator... The rotor. If you can polarise the rotor using PMs - then you don't have to provide the electricity...
If the principle that the RT demonstrates can work with PMs - then it's definitely OU - no question - no measurements needed. No power input.
There is a small hickup coming,when we try to use the second stator coil,the same way we use the first-but we'll leave that until we get there. But looking at the stator coil core shape,it will become apparent what is happening,and why.
I *had to* connect both stators in series to see the effect in my motor. I think it's because completing the magnetic circuit is necessary. I don't think including the other coil should be a problem, but I could be wrong... My motor isn't behaving quite like yours, and I don't know why yet.
Now about the windings on the rotor. Although they are all joined like Tim said,the current will only power up two rotor segments at a time-like Mags said.This is because there is less resistance in these two segment's,and current follows the path of least resistance. So although they are all joined,only the two lowest resistance coils will use the current. These will be the two between the two stator coil core's-so the rotor field is pushed away from one stator core,and attracted to the other.
There are only 2 brushes. They split the coil into two, so the current has to travel the full length of the wire...(?)
-
Attached are some diagrams, hopefully explaining the PM idea a bit better.
I'm not trying to take us off topic here. The point of this is to explore the principle of operation of the RT, and see how else it can be applied, and optimised.
If I'm right, this should be a self-rotating generator...
Top Pic - 'Dimensions':
- Shows the relative dimensions of the stator to rotor segments.
- Rotor segments are separated by an equal size gap
- 3 rotor segments must be in contact with the stator at any one time
- so the stator must be 6 units wide
Middle: 'Operation'
- Shows how the polarity of the rotor segs changes as they move past the stator
- ...and how that looks to the stator
- ...and that taking power off the stator will help turn the rotor.
Bottom: 'Side View'
- Shows how these things are arranged.
- Magnets below the rotor
- Stator above the rotor
- This is just a schematic, and it could be arranged radially or axially.
-
I agree with TinMan!... I also fail to see how his design would work with permanent magnets.
Even if the magnets are on the rotor!
The way I think TinMan's design works is it takes advantage of the off time of the rotor coil which would of induced a magnetic field in the stator core when on.
But once the rotor coil comes to a zero volt from the pulsed DC, the induced field in the stator will want to collapse and reverse which would cause a braking effect on the rotor. However, since TinMan has made as large of a coil he can fit on the stator, the stator magnetic field can be stored in that coil.
However, it will do nothing if the coil is open! ... but add a diode (in the right direction) on the stator coil and instead of the stator core field reversing when the rotor coil field comes to zero (from DC pulses) the diode will redirect the stored magnetic field in the stator coil to go in the same direction it was originally going and the result will be the rotor will continue on its way instead of it being stalled by the reversing collapsing field.
So maybe we can say there is No opposing Lenz if you want. It's just redirected and reused during the off time.
If this is TinMan's working principal, then permanent magnets on the rotor would not work as they can't be switched on and off.
I shared this concept (in a different way) 4 years ago. I called it "Effects of Recirculating BEMF to coil" where I demonstrated that a short pulse to a coil would push a magnet so far and if I added a diode (in the correct direction) the coil would need much less power to push the magnet the same distance.
Here's a video of the effect and advantage of recirculating a coils collapsing field: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QUYkilgkzU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QUYkilgkzU)
What I think TinMan is doing is using the same effect but using the stator flux stored in the stator coil and redirecting it which will have a benefit on the already set motion of the rotor. This is very smart of TimMan to do.
One can add a load (resistor) on the stator coil but for obvious reasons the best results will be with the lowest resistance or just a short.
Luc
-
Hello gotoluc!
A diode and a capacitor in parallel to the input (or maybe output) circuit and connect to the two end of the solenoid, your video is old but had a very good suggestion and a very good idea, especially that of putting a diode.
-
Hi Woopy :)
What do you need to know? Perhaps I can help?
Looks like you have a nice little motor for testing...
Regards
Tim
Thank's Tim
today i spent some time playing with my motor and diode and more.
And by doing this, I have read the Tin man's blog (i didn't know about before ) and also this thread, and i have a better clue now.
I can get the acceleration and much better torque by shorting the stator coils with diode (i used super fast diode UF 4007 )
I have tried to connect the 2 stators coils in serie and parallel and also separated with 2 diodes everything works fine.
I have tried to understand if there is a attraction or repulsion motor. And it seems to me that there is a repulsion motor. And further more . the torque seems to appears when the slot ,between 2 commutator's sections, is situated in the middle of the brushes.
Something interesting is that the motor, when connected to a DC power supply . spins always the same direction independantly of connected the polarity. ??
Voila for my first entry in this experiment
good luck at all
Laurent
-
Could you please indicate how the poles on the magnets are. Without that I'm not sure of how this works
Thanks
Luc
Hey Luc
In the pic I posted, the blue magnet is really a ring. The cutaway view is of round parts, where yours would be square with 4 sides. The magnet is one pole inward toward the coil and the outer surface is the other pole, facing the outer core part. It is the same as what you have, only open ended. You can try yours open ended by just replacing all the mags on one end of your device with non magnetic blocks, plastic, wood, etc.
Its not the fact that the 2 N poles at each end interact directly with the coil. The N of both mags is applied to the coil through and out of the outer core parts, and the center slider core 'is' the S pole in reference to the coil.
Here is an experiment you might enjoy. If you have a home stereo amp, connect a speaker wire to the coil like it was a speaker. The way you use the straps to connect the scale, replace that with rubber bands, only use a rubber band for the other side also, so the the coil wants to rest at or near center of the slider. Now turn up the volume using some music with some bass. Something that will get that coil 'vibrating' back and forth. You say the coil is around 100ohm. The stereo should handle that load fine. Being that it is 100ohm, you might have to pump up the volume a bit, not sure. In the end, you will see that it is basically a speaker motor.
When I said above that the inner core 'is' one pole and the outer core 'is' the other pole in reference to the coil, I wasnt kidding. ;) The coil is not working with or against poles that are at the ends of the device, it is working with(and or against) magnetic field that is concentrated through the coil windings from the inner core to the outer. So just about no matter where the coil is on the slider, you should be getting as much pull force as if it were anywhere else on the slider. There may be a bit thicker field closer to the magnets. In a speaker, the cone excursions are typically 1inch front to back, with some subwoofers(extreme) up to 3inch throw. So possibly the longer the device, the more that fields closer to the magnets, as you have them, will be stronger than in the middle. Thats why the magnet in the pic I posted was used as it is, because the coil is always next to the actual magnet pole facing inward and the core redirects the other pole to the inner side of the coil. So the field lines you are working with are strung between the inner and outer core and the coil is bathed in it from the inside outward between inner and outer cores.
These motors are much different in their workings than what we think about how motors work. Once you catch on, it will make you think differently a bit. But then again, Once you get it, you might think differently about what you thought about typical motors and find it is all the same and what you thought before was all wrong. ;) And thats a good thing. ;D
Below is a cutaway view of a speaker and its motor. The cone suspension is the 'rubber bands' and the large ring magnets, grey, are say N up and S down, and the yellow core parts take the magnets fields and concentrate them on the coil. The N field is guided to the outside of the coil and the S is guided to the inner side of the coil. Hope that helps. ;)
Mags
-
Hmm, I wonder if Tinmans motor could run another Tinman motor on the first ones stator output? Just a thought. Then a third off of the second? :o ;D
Mags
-
I agree with TinMan!... I also fail to see how his design would work with permanent magnets.
Even if the magnets are on the rotor!
The way I think TinMan's design works is it takes advantage of the off time of the rotor coil which would of induced a magnetic field in the stator core when on.
But once the rotor coil comes to a zero volt from the pulsed DC, the induced field in the stator will want to collapse and reverse which would cause a braking effect on the rotor. However, since TinMan has made as large of a coil he can fit on the stator, the stator magnetic field can be stored in that coil.
However, it will do nothing if the coil is open! ... but add a diode (in the right direction) on the stator coil and instead of the stator core field reversing when the rotor coil field comes to zero (from DC pulses) the diode will redirect the stored magnetic field in the stator coil to go in the same direction it was originally going and the result will be the rotor will continue on its way instead of it being stalled by the reversing collapsing field.
So maybe we can say there is No opposing Lenz if you want. It's just redirected and reused during the off time.
If this is TinMan's working principal, then permanent magnets on the rotor would not work as they can't be switched on and off.
I shared this concept (in a different way) 4 years ago. I called it "Effects of Recirculating BEMF to coil" where I demonstrated that a short pulse to a coil would push a magnet so far and if I added a diode (in the correct direction) the coil would need much less power to push the magnet the same distance.
Here's a video of the effect and advantage of recirculating a coils collapsing field: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QUYkilgkzU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QUYkilgkzU)
What I think TinMan is doing is using the same effect but using the stator flux stored in the stator coil and redirecting it which will have a benefit on the already set motion of the rotor. This is very smart of TimMan to do.
One can add a load (resistor) on the stator coil but for obvious reasons the best results will be with the lowest resistance or just a short.
Luc
Correct Luc
A PM on the rotor will only give you a PM generator-nothing more.Even by using the diode,you still have a PM generator that is only catching a half wave AC from the stator coil. You need to be able to switch the field off on the rotor-at the right time. Then the more load you place on the colapsing stator field,the stronger the EMF from that stator is. This is why the more load you place on the output,the more torque you get from the motor action of the RT.
-
Testing Full-Wave-Rectified AC...
Using my vacuum-cleaner motor, as previously shown...
I've done a basic test of pulsed AC. From a variac, through a diode bridge, into the brushes...
I can't accurately test motor speed, or input power ATM, so it was just a qualitative test.
In my motor - pulsed AC and plain DC work just the same. They both give the same *qualitative* results.
Note, I have to run the motor at half-speed or less to see the effect. It has to have some room for acceleration...
I have both stator coils connected in series.
Taking power off the stators - through an LED - causes drag in one direction, and causes a speed-up in the other. If I short them out, rotation speed stays the same - I guess they cancel out.
-
Hi Woopy :)
the motor is a 'Universal Motor' - it's designed to run on AC or DC - and always in the same direction.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_motor
The acceleration is what we're looking for. It proves that the Lenz-force / Back-EMF can work in your favour. Which is supposed to be impossible - according to mainstream engineering.
So you get the extra rotary force, plus you get the electrical output from the stator... :)
Regards
Tim
-
Luc & Tinman,
guys. For the *third* time :o, the magnets are not attached to the rotor... The rotor segments pass over the magnets. The PM design is basically a self-running Ecklin-Brown type generator...
If, after reading the posts, you don't understand it - I'm happy to answer questions.
If you don't think it'll work - I'm happy to listen.
If you don't think it's relevant, I'd suggest you're perhaps missing the point:
I think a *custom-made* RT could have a COP of up to 2, maybe more. But the RT as it stands - as a converted motor - will AT BEST demonstrate the effect. I.e. It's not going to power a house.
I think it'll be hard to prove OU with it, and it'll be hard to make a motor which is significantly better than standard. I think it's do-able, and worth doing, but it won't be easy, and it's not the ultimate goal...
I think the RT is EXCELLENT at demonstrating the effect.
I think that it is ENOUGH for the RT to demonstrate the effect. Just showing a mechanism by which Lenz can be 'overcome' is a HUGE ACHIEVEMENT.
Obviously, a converted uni-motor is not going to be the optimal configuration. The point of the research has to be to understand the cause-and-effect - so it can be engineered into a new device. One that will power a house!
:)
Tim
-
Hi Luc,
how's the houseboat going? :)
I don't think that this is right:
But once the rotor coil comes to a zero volt from the pulsed DC, the induced field in the stator will want to collapse and reverse which would cause a braking effect on the rotor. However, since TinMan has made as large of a coil he can fit on the stator, the stator magnetic field can be stored in that coil.
...the diode will redirect the stored magnetic field in the stator coil to go in the same direction it was originally going
I think the idea of 'stored flux' in this case is just confusing.
The relationships involved are defined by Faraday-Lenz's Law:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/farlaw.html
VoltageGenerated = - NumberOfTurns x ChangeInFlux x CoreArea / Time
So the stator voltage and flux is generated in response to the change in flux caused by the rotor.
It all happens instantaneously (well, at the speed of light), so there's no storage...
Regards
Tim
-
@ Tim-Quote: and it'll be hard to make a motor which is significantly better than standard.
Well we already done that. In my video's you can see the RT kicked the standard fan motor's ass.
And we never took into account the output power from the stator coil of the RT in those test.
That House fan in the test has a 5 start efficiency rateing,wich is suppose to be up near the best.
But the average guy can build a far more efficient motor in his shed,to do the same job,but better.
Now about those PM's .Im guessing they are there to magnetize each rotor segment as they pass,with having the correct timeing ofcourse. Problem is the field of PM's are rather large,so i dont believe that the magnetic field will just be removed from each rotor segment that easly.
But i have always said-if you want answers,there best answer'd by a working device.
As far as OU go's-well like i said,this is just an efficient motor at the moment,and shows no sign of OU.But i do believe that the answer lies with the PMM of some description. What if we impliment this effect in one of those wankel PMM's as pictured below?
-
@ Tim-Quote: and it'll be hard to make a motor which is significantly better than standard.
I think we would need to test an RT against a * non-modified motor of the exact same type * for a proper test.
When I say significant - I guess I mean 10%-15%... Maybe I'm just being too conservative. Maybe it'll be 50% better straight off...
One potential problem with the RT is that you can only fit so much copper on the stators. I think more would be better...
I'll have a look at, and think about the Wankel PMM...
PM Motor:
- yes the PMs magnetise the passing rotor segments.
- there would be cogging in a symetrical motor
- it would prob. be best built similar in design to an Ecklin-Brown generator.
- I'm trying to generalise the principle, by coming up with other designs that use it.
- If I can't think of any better ones, I'll (eventually) build this.
:)
Tim
-
Ok,here is the first run of the new RT.
Oh,and how to take a resonably accurate P/out from a pulsed output.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wIwa_kEhOY
-
Rotary Transformer Test Results
I've run a series of tests on my vacuum-cleaner RT... It has a fan connected - so it has a physical load.
There's only a small range of speeds at which the effect is evident - at the lower range of the motor. This is probably due to the 10w LED I'm using as a load. A fast diode alone would be better.
Note, my diode bridge only seems to be giving half-wave output. So that applies to the results below. And I can't do the math for AC (yet) - to see it's relative efficiency TBH...
Test 1 - Rotary Transformer Configuration
To obtain a 43Hz Running Speed:
Plain DC - No Load on Stator:
- 13v
- 1.33a
- 17.3W
Plain DC - LED Load:
- 12.1v
- 1.26a
- 15.25W
Rectified AC - No Load:
- 23v (peak)
Rectified AC - LED Load:
- 22v (peak)
To obtain a 60Hz Running Speed:
Plain DC - No Load on Stator:
- 15.3v
- 1.40a
- 21.4W
Plain DC - LED Load on Stator:
- 14.9v
- 1.33a
- 19.8W
Rectified AC:
- load did cause a speed up, but only slight.
Test 2 - Standard Configuration
I returned the wiring to it's original state...
To obtain a 43Hz Running Speed, with Plain DC:
- 14.9v
- 0.57a
- 8.5W
To obtain a 60Hz Running Speed, with Plain DC:
- 19.8v
- 0.61a
- 12.1W
Conclusions
- The RT configuration, certainly for my motor, is less efficient than the standard config.
- The output from the 10w LED is perhaps 3-4 Watts, and doesn't make up the difference.
- I can't draw any conclusions from the use of rectified AC.
- The RT does demonstate a Positive Lenz-Effect...
Also, it's interesting to note that the motor runs much smoother in the standard configuration:
- the rotor is suspended by the constant stator fields.
- the brushes have fewer amps going through them.
-
@ Tim
Good testing there,and some great comparisons.
What we are realy looking at here,is the effect itself. Like we have both said,it could be designed to be far more efficient at using that effect. Even with the motor in standard series conection,we can get the same effect,in that we can draw power from the stator coil's without it effecting either the P/in or the torque of the motor.
So give it a try.place your LED across the stator coil one way,then the other. If i series connect mine,ofcourse the current draw go's down,due to the higher resistance value of the series conection.You also have an electromagnet in way of the stator core aswell,so rpm and torque will go up. I can still then draw power from the stator coil,while dropping the P/in.
The problem we have,is that the motor was designed to run in the series conection. Now what if the motor was designed to use the effect we have gotten?. More turns of wire on the rotor would drop the current draw,while maintaining the field strength.
You can also catch the inductive spikes on the input,and put that power to use aswell.
But the main goal was to see the effect,and work out how to use that in a motor designed for the effect to be maximised.
I guess you could say we are running a gasoline engine on diesel. Now by placing a large cap on my FWBR,the motor dose indeed speed up,and i get more output from the stator coil. But the P/in voltage also climbs from 22 volts,to 36 volt's,while dropping only .2 of an amp once the motor speeds up.
Tomorrow i will be setting my generator up on the motor,and doing some P/in P/out testing.
I will post the result,and also the video showing the test.
-
Thanks TM :)
the testing has made me realise how beneficial a permanent-magnet stator field would be for the motor - as long as it doesn't affect the magnetic circuit of the stators.
The diagram below is for discussion purposes. The idea is to include a pair of PMs to provide a nice strong field for the rotor to turn in, but without connecting them to the stator's magnetic circuit. So the * change of flux * seen by the stators is unaffected by the PMs - whereas the rotor is very much affected by them.
Also - to maximise that change in flux seen by the stator, I think it would ideally cover just 3 rotor segments. Then it goes from NNS to NSS etc. The flux change is then 1/3 of the total, and it has one segment to pull, and one to push at all times with the positive-lenz effect...
PS - Other things that may help optimise the design:
- As you said - more turns on the rotor, or even a bigger rotor in general - with much more copper.
- Much bigger stator coils. More turns = more volts = more turning force!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the bigger the stator coils, the stronger the effect will be...
It's possible that OU is just a matter of stator size... Because the lenz-force is positive - we should be able to take as much off it as we like, and it'll just help...
Huge stator coils will cause a huge force - by Faraday's law - detailed previously.
:)
-
Another pic to explain the Permanent Magnet idea I've been boring y'all with. ;)
- It uses the same rotor / stator geometry I described previously.
- The magnets shown are only one of each pair - so the middle rotor segment can 'flip' from one polarity to the other.
- The rotor segments aren't shown in detail.
- 3 rotor segments must fit between each pair of magnets & their coil.
- The coil sees, (for example) NNS on the left, and NSS on the right...
- These flip to NSS and NNS as the rotor turns, and back etc...
- Every change in flux (that's harvested thru the diode) causes the coil to pulse a field which helps to turn the rotor.
I'm not sure it'll work at all:
- I don't think it would rotate if the coils were replaced with PMs, and the field was static. It looks like it should, but static magnets always seem to find a resting point, even if you can't imagine one.
- But, perhaps the pulsing of the coil would actually keep it all moving around...
Anyway, it's just an idea for people's entertainment...
-
Luc & Tinman,
guys. For the *third* time :o , the magnets are not attached to the rotor... The rotor segments pass over the magnets. The PM design is basically a self-running Ecklin-Brown type generator...
:)
Tim
Sorry about that Tim, I thought the magnets were in the rotor because when TinMan wrote: "OK,about the PM's in the stator core. Im not sure why you would want PM's" ... you replied with the below
No mate, not in the stator... The rotor.
So I thought you were correcting him but I looked at your original post of your design suggestion of PM and realized I was mislead by your above reply to TinMan.
At this point I can't say I fully understand how your design suggestion with PM's would work, so please go on with your idea and in time I may get it.
Hi Luc,
how's the houseboat going? :)
It's going well thanks. I don't know if you're following the topic on it but if not here's the link to it: http://www.overunity.com/13496/building-a-solar-electric-houseboat/msg360011/#msg360011 (http://www.overunity.com/13496/building-a-solar-electric-houseboat/msg360011/#msg360011)
I don't think that this is right:
I think the idea of 'stored flux' in this case is just confusing.
The relationships involved are defined by Faraday-Lenz's Law:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/farlaw.html (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/farlaw.html)
VoltageGenerated = - NumberOfTurns x ChangeInFlux x CoreArea / Time
So the stator voltage and flux is generated in response to the change in flux caused by the rotor.
It all happens instantaneously (well, at the speed of light), so there's no storage...
Regards
Tim
I may not explain the effect with the correct terms as I have no formal education in all this stuff as I've been self teaching over the years as I experiment. So sorry about that.
Luc
-
Attached is (hopefully) a clear description of how the Positive Lenz effect actually works in the Rotary Transformer. To the best of my understanding it's correct, and logical.
Hopefully this should help de-mystify what Tinman & I are spending our time on, and it should help people design their own devices based on the principle.
It is my understanding that the amount of power available from the stator is defined by the physical size of the stator coils, and the amount of flux change...
I think that the Positive-Lenz effect is a clear route to overunity... ;)
-
Sorry about that Tim...
No problem mate. TBH, I re-read my posts and I could have been clearer. Not sure it''l work anyway (but it might)... :)
I may not explain the effect with the correct terms as I have no formal education in all this stuff as I've been self teaching over the years as I experiment.
It can be really diffficult choosing the right terms and analogies when researching, and we are covering some interesting, and as far as I'm aware, newly noticed phenomena. I hope that the image I did gets to the heart of what it is we're observing... And I hope nobody objects to the term 'Positive-Lenz'... I just felt we needed a name for it. Am open to suggestions...
Will check out the housboat thread. Nice one.
:)
Tim
-
Load on stator coils gives nice acceleration with diode ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3MqnJw8zg0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3MqnJw8zg0)
-
Clean and simple video demo of the effect scratchrobot
Thanks for sharing
Luc
-
For your entertainment
Universal Motors at Obscene Voltage, Speed and Noise
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g96AVc5SMxY
-
Hi Tinman,
FYI - I'm apparently getting blocked from going on your forum at http://iaec.forumco.com by my ISP... It's a little complicated - my router has half-failed, and I can only access interchat by this 'OpenFON' functionality it has, that's still working. OpenFON is a public wifi network - and uses 'Cleanfeed' filtering (I believe). It seems to be blocking all of forumco.com.
Hopefully should be getting a new router today that will fix the problem. Thought you might be interested to know forumco.com seems blocked by some networks in the UK though...
-
Hi Tim
Yes i am aware that some(very few)block forumco,and other site's. We have had a few members with the same problem,one most recently from ireland. The simple fix is,just call your isp and ask them to unblock the site-it has worked every time so far.
Anyway,another test done,with the stator coil conected in series with the rotor-as per norm. Seems we can still draw from the stator coil,without effecting the P/in-infact,once again dropping it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqmp6FtlYBU
-
Some things i have noticed with the series conection,using rectified AC
1-the current draw is lower-ofcourse.
2-the output obtainable from the stator coil is a lot lower.
3-the RPM's are a lot lower
4-Odly(and im not sure why yet)the torque is lower,unlike i stated in the video???.
Same test using smooth DC,by adding large caps to the FWBR.
1-Power consumption go's way up-almost double.
2-Cannot draw enough power of the stator coil to run the same LED.
3-RPM slightly higher-maybe 200RPM.
4-Torque about the same-but just a rough guess.
5-motor sounds like it's doing some welding-its not happy at all.
This may be due to the change i made to the brushes-but unknow.
Now i believe it's time we had a load placed on the RT's output shaft,and begin some testing on P/in and P/out from the generator.
I will be using an 80 series fisher and pykle smart drive for the generator.
-
Fisher and Paykel Smart Drive Motors:
- http://www.theinventory.orconhosting.net.nz/smartdrives.htm
- http://www.watchtv.net/~rburmeister/smart.html
-
Test Using Pulsed DC
I tested my motor using pulsed DC:
- Timing controlled by signal generator
- Power switched by DC solid-state-relay (Teledyne 603)
- I included a smoothing capacitor in parallel with the power supply this time too.
Frequency
- I ran it at only one speed: 10,000Hz.
- 1000Hz brings the motor to a stop
- My SSR can do up to 25KHz max
Duty
- I used a duty cycle of 90% - which was the minimum that worked apparently without affecting performance at the 10KHz frequency.
- A lower duty-cycle slows it a lot.
Rotary Transformer Config
43 Hz - No Load
- 12.5v
- 1.28a
43 Hz - With Load
- 12.2v
- 1.24a
60 Hz - No Load
- 15.0v
- 1.33a
60 Hz - With Load
- 14.8v
- 1.27a
Standard Config
43 Hz
- 15.2v
- 0.57a
60 Hz
- 19.6v
- 0.6a
Conclusions
The results seem slightly better than with plain DC, but it's not a lot, and it's probably within the range of measurement error. The smoothing cap may well affect the readings.
The motor runs really badly on a low duty, or a low frequency.
The power from the load - as measured by LED brightness - didn't seem significantly different.
Given how the motor works, I still can't really see a way that pulsing the power - in any way - can help it's performance... But I see TM's still getting some interesting results I can't duplicate... :)
It's my 100th post apparently... 8)
-
Hi Folks,
I've been thinking about this, and I really think that the powered-rotor is the Achilles-heel of the system, as far as OU goes... It is the thing that allows the Positive-Lenz effect to show-up though, by allowing switching...
1) Input power... We really want a system that doesn't need any.
2) The power available at the stator is basically equal to the change in flux.
The change in flux is caused by the input current being re-routed by the brushes.
So the input & output are too closely related...
My feeling is they are * directly * related. Which means UU, not OU...
(Note: In the standard configuration of the motor there is Negative Lenz at work in the rotor, as it switches against the stator field.)
Also, I re-thought my comments about coil size, and I don't think they were right...
Field-Switching at the Stator-Face...
It's the * switching of polarity * of the magnet at the center of the stator that causes the effect...
Ideally we'd be able to switch the polarity of the rotor segment without the stator's field being able to affect it at all. In reality, who knows...
I also want to explore the possibility of using PMs for the rotor a bit more. I have a new idea...
The diagram below shows a stator / rotor arrangement.
- The idea is that the PMs * are * on the rotor this time ;) - and in pairs.
- The stator core has 2 extensions: one aligned with the rotor's 'N' magnet, the other aligned with the 'S'.
- The rotor approaches the stator, with one of it's magnets near the extension.
- As the rotor passes thru the center of the stator, it 'switches track', the other magnet comes near the extension, and the stator sees the change in flux we're looking for.
- The stator field will do it's Positive Lenz effect, attract the incoming magnet & repel the outgoing one.
The Sticky Point...
The problem with this is that the switch-over point, where the 2 magnets meet the 2 extensions, might be really sticky.
- The magnets are making a circuit
- The coil field is pulling the magnet back.
There are solutions to this problem - i.e. timing the output instead of relying on a diode... It only gives a half the time to take power out though. I think.
The stickyness may be equal to, or less than, the thrust given by the +ve Lenz effect. In which case it's not a problem. A generator with no reaction force would be a great result...
-
Attached is a diagram showing a number of the above coils & cores in sequence, with rotor magnets shown too.
Coils are the dark circles, cores are rectangles, magnets are squares.
There are 2 sets of coils that would be active alternately. So it would be producing electricity and thrust 100% of the time.
It's a lot easier to build than my last idea. :)
But the sticky point might be really sticky... :-\
But it is counteracted by the +ve Lenz, and with this arrangement - with all the cores connected - it could all balance out...
Actually, I'm finding it hard to work out if the coils clash, or help. I'm a bit slow sometimes... I'll have to do a step by step set of diagrams.
-
Here is my Replication test of Tinman's Rotary Transformer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkH8jfGq0yM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkH8jfGq0yM)
-
Turxotor... Linked from Peswiki news today... Does it look familiar to anyone? ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVuwWpoIkCA&feature=c4-overview&list=UUKhTnTVs4KJaTZgVdphYAjg
-
As you know, I've been trying to figure out a way of using PMs for the rotor... So I've been trying to analyse the way the magnetic fields & coils interact. I've been thru a few different arrangements, trying to understand the effect, and how / if it can be used.
My thinking at the moment, is that switching the rotor polarity at the stator face requires as much energy as you get back from the coil in back-emf. So this is an Under-Unity phenomenon...
That's not to say it's not useful, it may be, but I don't think it's the direct route to free energy I hoped. I'll keep thinking about it though. I could be wrong. I often am. :)
-
Thane Heins, Regen-X...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLeu9dha-y0
Seems related to the RT, +ve Lenz effect to me... Thoughts anyone?
Update: I found the thread on Thane Heins. The two effects are not the same:
http://www.overunity.com/13398/pdi-regenerative-acceleration-and-bitt-principles/60/
It turns out that AUL (Acceleration Under Load) has been pretty well tested by some of the senior members, and found to be UU...
-
@ Tim
There are many different ways to get the AUL effect,and that come's with understanding magnetic field reactions,be it PM's or EM's.
As i stated very clearly in the second post of this thread-the RT is not an OU device,but a demonstration of one of the many AUL effects. Befor the RT,was my L.A.G (lenz asisted generator). The AUL effect in that machine was due to bucking the magnetic field's between the primary and secondary windings of the toroid drive coils.
As we all know here-there ! as of yet ! are no OU machine's that have been proven to be OU.
Our good old washing machine motor just wont cut it,but it will show an AUL effect.
-
Hi TM, we've not gained a means to OU, and that, ultimately, is why we're here. But, we have gained valuable knowledge. Life is short, we've got a lot to learn, and it's usually painful. That's just the way it is eh. You're married, I'm sure you understand... ;)
-
Hi TM, we've not gained a means to OU, and that, ultimately, is why we're here. But, we have gained valuable knowledge. Life is short, we've got a lot to learn, and it's usually painful. That's just the way it is eh. You're married, I'm sure you understand... ;)
Lol-yes married for 20 year's,but thankfully still very happy in my relationship.I got one of them ! 1 in a million girls !
Anyway,there was and is something i am trying to show with this setup,and the L.A.G-and it isnt what you think. Only one person has caught on so far,and he now see's the light lol.
So i ask you this Tim-do you see anything fantastic in the RT or the L.A.G ?,Apart from it being quite efficient.
Is there anything mystical about how they accelerate under load?
In all the other setup that show acceleration under load,have you ever asked them to remove the generating coil,and see how much P/in is drawn from the prime mover when the coil is removed?
Some times the facinating is nothing out of the ordinary.
-
...Anyway,there was and is something i am trying to show with this setup,and the L.A.G-and it isnt what you think. Only one person has caught on so far,and he now see's the light lol.
So i ask you this Tim-do you see anything fantastic in the RT or the L.A.G ?,Apart from it being quite efficient.
Is there anything mystical about how they accelerate under load?
No mate, nothing either fantasic or mystical. But that was kinda the point - to de-mystify the effect.
I would be quite pleased if I had missed something...
In all the other setup that show acceleration under load,have you ever asked them to remove the generating coil,and see how much P/in is drawn from the prime mover when the coil is removed?
Some times the facinating is nothing out of the ordinary.
Well, I'm intrigued... Please elaborate.
:)
Tim
-
Well lets look at it like this,using pipe's and water-much the same.
We have a pump(power supply),and a preasure vessle (the RT)hooked to the pump via pipes..On that preasure vessle there is two valve's(1 our rotor and 1 the stator coil). We start the pump,with one valve open(the rotor) and the other closed(the stator coil,wich is open circuit).The pump is of the positive displacment type-no slip or cavitation.The pump delivers say 100LPM,but the open valve(rotor)can only disipate 70LPM.So the pump starts to bog down,and draw more power.
We then open the second valve(hook a load to the stator coil),and the pump speeds back up while dropping in power draw,as the second valve allows the preasure to drop in the preasure vessle-releaving the preasure right back to the pump.
My point is,all these AUL devices are doing nothing other that releaving preasure buildup within the system.
Sure the effect work's,but it will never amount to any extraordinary power gain.
What you will see in all the AUL device video's,is they always start with the generating coil in place.They then take a P/in measurement with the coil unloaded,then a P/in with the coil loaded,and a P/out from the generating coil.
Never will you see a P/in done without the generating coil in place.
What we have done here ,is give everyone a cheap way to see the effect. As you can see,the effect is real enough,but nothing out of the ordinary,and not in any means a way to gain extra energy.The RT was defently more efficient than the induction motor ,at spining that large fan blade. But who's to say a standard universal motor wouldnt be just as efficient?.
You could see this about half way through this thread,and not many people can do that. They just see something fantastic or mistical-i was one of these people a few year's back,and even today i tend to see things that just are not there some time's. But when i do,i throw it out there,and let those with greater knowledge tell me what they see.
-
Yes, I understand.
I found the Thane Heins thread interesting - I didn't realise there could be more than one mechanism for AUL... Gestalt's vid was really impressive - and he has some great kit.
I guess I'm still wondering about the 'efficiency rating' of that fan... Given that the RT was better, I think the standard uni-motor would outperform it by quite a margin. Was it running at it's rated voltage? I guess that feels a bit like a 'loose-end' to me... I.e. if that efficiency is correct - and the uni does 50% better - that raises a few questions... Prob not OU ones, but interesting...
-
Yes, I understand.
I found the Thane Heins thread interesting - I didn't realise there could be more than one mechanism for AUL... Gestalt's vid was really impressive - and he has some great kit.
I guess I'm still wondering about the 'efficiency rating' of that fan... Given that the RT was better, I think the standard uni-motor would outperform it by quite a margin. Was it running at it's rated voltage? I guess that feels a bit like a 'loose-end' to me... I.e. if that efficiency is correct - and the uni does 50% better - that raises a few questions... Prob not OU ones, but interesting...
What that test told me,was the fan motors efficiency rateing was way higher than it should be.Look at it like this-these companies say they spend millions on development to improve the efficiency of there products. And along comes a guy,with a 13 year old,well use motor from a washing machine,dose a few simple mod's in his back yard work shop,and ends up with a more efficient motor to do the same job???.
You realy have to ask,what exactly dose the R&D team do at these companies to earn there money?.
I need there job.
It almost sounds as though UFOpolotics is running the R&D crew there.
-
What that test told me,was the fan motors efficiency rateing was way higher than it should be....
It almost sounds as though UFOpolotics is running the R&D crew there.
Yeah, I guess that's probably the case, and lol. :)
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZBYLXnZYnY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZBYLXnZYnY)
apparently being released on a larger scale
thx
Chet
-
YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME
The fantastic keppe motor is just a pulse motor???????????????/////
And to top it off,looking at his 18 watts for a 1700 RPM on the fan-is more than the RT used for the same size fan @ 1730 RPM.
No wonder Stirling didnt ever get back to me,when i proposed a side by side comparison of the keppe and my RT.
Time to go into business i think. But first i think a challenge video is in order to the keppe mob and Mr Ruddy Stirling Allen.
-
Lol. My (cheap) vacuum-cleaner motor can turn it's fan at 3600rpm with 12.1 Watts.
http://www.overunity.com/13777/tinmans-rotary-transformer/msg369899/#msg369899
-
@ Tim
Lol,watch the video that ramset posted on the keppe motor lol
You will now have a good laugh-because of what you learned in this thread.
You will see that when he turns on the LED's,his motor speed dosnt change,and the motor dosnt draw any more current from the power supply>>> isnt that just amazing-what an outstanding achievment lol.
-
Hey TM, yeah, I watched as much of the vid as I could take... The TurdXmotor the other day was drawing 100 Watts - with no load at all - and he was chuffed the AUL brought it down to 60 watts. ;D
It's true mate - knowledge is valuable - just a bit of tinkering and thought, and you become invulnerable to low-level scammers. The high-level scammers are still a problem though (i.e. government, church etc.), perhaps more tinkering and thought will sort them out too...
::)
-
The keppe motor P/in for RPM.
6 minutes into the video
P/in=53 watts
RPM of fan=1316
The RT with same size fan
P/in=28.552 watts
RPM of fan=1588
Keppe motor RPM per watt=24.83
RT RPM per watt=55.61
As you can see,the RT has twice the efficiency of the keppe motor-so WTF.
-
TinMan
I would Love to see 10 ceiling fans [doing 100 watt work] running off one 20 Watt solar panel as he clains at the 10.Min mark in the Vid.
Maybe you should get an invite To Paradise for a little contest...........?
thx
Chet
-
TinMan
I would Love to see 10 ceiling fans [doing 100 watt work] running off one 20 Watt solar panel as he clains at the 10.Min mark in the Vid.
Maybe you should get an invite To Paradise for a little contest...........?
thx
Chet
First up-take one high speed 9 volt motor. Gear it down to do 100 RPM-and wula,one celling fan running of a 9 volt battery. Oh and i didnt see where they were getting the 2 watt input from??
A celling fan is designed to move the air at a slow rate of speed,and is more for circulating large volume's of air. A small motor on a 9 volt battery could indeed shift the same CFM's as that celling fan-it all come down to knowing how fans and prop's work.
My large standard house fan draws only 37 watt's for the same RPM he was showing-so i have no idea as to why his standard house fan of the same size draws in excess of 130 watt's??? Think he needs a new watt meter.
I am glad Tim opened the RT thread here,as it will show everyone here that there is another scam,or over claimed device trying to hit the market.
The proof is in this thread.
-
@Chet
Chet,could you please start a thread on the Keppe motor,and post what video's and info on it,that you can find.
I have just been in contact with a friend(who i believe will comment here soon),and there is going to be a show down lol.
I believe the thread will get extreemly busy.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZBYLXnZYnY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZBYLXnZYnY)
apparently being released on a larger scale
thx
Chet
Alike principle is in classic automotive ignition systems coils: when the magnetic field collapses, it does NOT produces anything: it only TRANSFORMS energy of higher amperage, lower voltage into the opposite: higher voltage, lower amperage. Additionally, it's very short impulse: the higher voltage received, the shorter impulse. Thus, power remains the same.
-
Tinman
The thread is here [your white glove challenge awaits]
http://www.overunity.com/13798/keppe-is-headed-to-the-big-show-first-exotic-product-to-market/msg370352/#new (http://www.overunity.com/13798/keppe-is-headed-to-the-big-show-first-exotic-product-to-market/msg370352/#new)
Qwert
The Big release did not refer to energy
it refers to an actual product being "released"
a ceiling fan that draws 2 watts to do 100 watts of work [thus TinMan's white glove challenge]
-
Let the games begin
Tinman's Rotary transformer vs the Keppe Motor
http://revolution-green.com/2013/09/10/keppe-fan-challenge/ (http://revolution-green.com/2013/09/10/keppe-fan-challenge/)
-
Tinman
The thread is here [your white glove challenge awaits]
http://www.overunity.com/13798/keppe-is-headed-to-the-big-show-first-exotic-product-to-market/msg370352/#new (http://www.overunity.com/13798/keppe-is-headed-to-the-big-show-first-exotic-product-to-market/msg370352/#new)
Qwert
The Big release did not refer to energy
it refers to an actual product being "released"
a ceiling fan that draws 2 watts to do 100 watts of work [thus TinMan's white glove challenge]
What is that "product" if not ENERGY then?
-
Qwert
It slices it dices it will snip the wings off a Jersey Mosquito
The all new .....Much much better than New
Keppe 10 Watt 250 RPM ceiling fan....
here of course
http://pesn.com/2013/09/06/9602368_4x-efficient_Keppe-Motor_ceiling-fan_featured_at_China-Sourcing-Fair/ (http://pesn.com/2013/09/06/9602368_4x-efficient_Keppe-Motor_ceiling-fan_featured_at_China-Sourcing-Fair/)
Thx
Chet
-
Qwert
It slices it dices it will snip the wings off a Jersey Mosquito
The all new .....Much much better than New
Keppe 10 Watt 250 RPM ceiling fan....
here of course
http://pesn.com/2013/09/06/9602368_4x-efficient_Keppe-Motor_ceiling-fan_featured_at_China-Sourcing-Fair/ (http://pesn.com/2013/09/06/9602368_4x-efficient_Keppe-Motor_ceiling-fan_featured_at_China-Sourcing-Fair/)
Thx
Chet
Just be a man and answer like a MAN. Probably, It's not only that that motor is efficient, but also, that those others were/are just INEFFICIENT. Nothing else. It long been known that higher frequency is is much more efficient.
-
Qwert
Sorry to upset you,However My crystal ball is in the shop for repair. so until some hard Test data comes along I would only be guessing?
Where are you getting your info from?
thx
Chet
-
Ramset, it's not first time you make an impression of a haunted guy.
-
Qwert
Read the links and make your own conclusions.
or better yet call them up [phone number is in the link]and ask for more info on their test protocol and see if your posted statement has any merit?
Thats usually what men do before they make statements like yours.
Not around here tho, the Stats roll in favor of the anonymous critic saying anything he choses
thx
Chet
-
TinMan, Is your motor basically doing what I posted in this thread at EF in May 2012 ?
Modified universal motor.
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/11417-modifying-motors-generators.html
Seems like the same principal.
..
Also in that thread I show the recovery of the flyback becomes less when the motor is loaded.
I showed that to stop everyone trying to make the thread about OU.
And to prove the flyback or the torque is not free in any motor.
Drop in recovered energy when loaded to accelerate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAiYzYGOKIs
..
-
TinMan, Is your motor basically doing what I posted in this thread at EF in May 2012 ?
Modified universal motor.
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/11417-modifying-motors-generators.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/11417-modifying-motors-generators.html)
Seems like the same principal.
..
Also in that thread I show the recovery of the flyback becomes less when the motor is loaded.
I showed that to stop everyone trying to make the thread about OU.
And to prove the flyback or the torque is not free in any motor.
Drop in recovered energy when loaded to accelerate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAiYzYGOKIs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAiYzYGOKIs)
..
Hey Farmhand
I think Tins motor setup is a bit different. But your setup seems interesting also. You say the motor can work just powering the armature and the stators are not connected at all in one post. Was it just working on attraction to the stator cores? I might imagine the motor would slow down when loading the stators due to increase lenz.
Tinman is powering 1 stator and pulling power from the other, which increases motor speed when loaded.
Nice Idea though. ;)
Mags
-
Tinman
The thread is here [your white glove challenge awaits]
http://www.overunity.com/13798/keppe-is-headed-to-the-big-show-first-exotic-product-to-market/msg370352/#new (http://www.overunity.com/13798/keppe-is-headed-to-the-big-show-first-exotic-product-to-market/msg370352/#new)
Qwert
The Big release did not refer to energy
it refers to an actual product being "released"
a ceiling fan that draws 2 watts to do 100 watts of work [thus TinMan's white glove challenge]
Please show me the measurement of 2 watts input,and please show me the measurement of 100 watts output force being produce by the fan??.
What you have just posted Chet,is a COP>50 -50 times more power out than in.
Chet,i know you have been in the game long enough to know this is absolute rubbish. I also know you are only forwarding the claims made by other's. But this is how they manage to rob people of there hard earnd cash,and peddle products that are nothing out of the ordinary.
People like you ,me and everyone (well most) on forums like this,try so hard to make the world a better place,at no cost to anyone but our selfs. Our hard work,valuable time,and cost only to ourself,is taken away, from thieves like this,who steel other peoples idea's ,and profit from them.
It's time this crap stoped,and people or companies like keppe are put right back under the rock they crawled out from.
We have one member here(Mark) who has put a lot of hours and money into exposing the trash,and some beat him down for it, when infact he needs to be congradulated and thanked for saving us from the profiteers like keppe,milo and the likes.
Chet,i know you are one of those guys that spend so much time helping other's,and i also concider you a great friend.
The world needs more like yourself and Mark,but be aware of such claim's as above,as they can bring faulse joy.
Brad
-
Hey Farmhand
Tinman is powering 1 stator and pulling power from the other, which increases motor speed when loaded.
Nice Idea though. ;)
Mags
I did that as well, it was the natural progression, I just didn;t show it,I became ill as well as annoyed with the
responses and shelved the setup. The principal is the same.
I'm not saying Tinman copied me in any way, I'm just saying I did it too. ;) There won't be any free energy just
a different way to improve the operation to what we want to do. Increase efficiency.
Lots of people have the same idea's without seeing others efforts, that's a given.
Regardless he has taken it to the next level which is very good. Just sayin it has been done.
I didn't get the chance to experiment with it with good bearings the bearings that were in it were shot - worn out.
We Aussies are practical creative people, well some of us are. ;D Tinman is a fine Aussie example of practical creativity in action.
Take em down Tinman you have my full support. :)
Cheers
I fully admit I seem to come across the wrong way at times. People don't seem to get me the way I explain myself. My bad.
I'll put it this way Mags, If I video taped every experiment I did and uploaded it I would have thousands of video's.
I find it difficult to find the ones I want to link with only 180 video's. 1800 would make it so much harder. ;D
..
-
I want to say again I fully support Tinman and his RT. He see's something amiss with the Keppe demos and is going to debunk them in practice and I respect that.
It needs to be done. I myself put a lot of time and effort into debunking fakers like "Thane Crimes" :D among others. In my opinion the fact that I can produce the effects he has
in numerous ways shows he is a criminal or delusional. The next step is for others and I am only one of many to debunk him. But it all adds up. Bedini's "h" wave is seen in the IRFPG50 data sheet and the circuit to produce it is there so he cannot effectively patent the inductive release in any way, I have been pointing that out for years now. All he can patent is his actual circuit configurations and bluff people. Boost converter topology is open source, that's all he does when he charges a cap with the flyback and dumps it. It's a switched output boost converter. Simple. Would not hold up in court.
They all need taking down. It's time.
They are like dead fish in a pond they will foul the waters, we need to take them out of the water for our own good. To prevent an epidemic.
Cheers
-
TinMan, Is your motor basically doing what I posted in this thread at EF in May 2012 ?
Modified universal motor.
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/11417-modifying-motors-generators.html
Seems like the same principal.
..
Also in that thread I show the recovery of the flyback becomes less when the motor is loaded.
I showed that to stop everyone trying to make the thread about OU.
And to prove the flyback or the torque is not free in any motor.
Drop in recovered energy when loaded to accelerate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAiYzYGOKIs
..
Hi Farmhand
No,not quite.
The RT was an ofspring from the L.A.G,which i started in january 2012.
http://iaec.forumco.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=193
The RT is a heaver,more robust unit,that uses the same priciple of bucking the magnetic fields of the rotor and stator.It seems yours is more of a transformer setup,using the magnetic fields of the rotor to generate power in the stator winding's. The RT uses only the collapsing magnetic field from the rotor,and when loaded ,create's the bucking field effect-same as the L.A.G.
There are similarities and differences between your setup,and the RT.
However,your setup could be change within 5 minutes to opperate in the same way- a couple of sniped wires and a couple of diode's is all that would be needed.
But i would have to say that -yes-you were the first of the two of us to use a universal motor as the building block.
So that being said-im off to read your thread at EF.
-
Qwert......
Thanks, Ramset. I like this way people talk.