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

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Sharing ideas on how to make a more efficent motor using Flyback (MODERATED)  (Read 350074 times)

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Sharing ideas on how to make a more efficent motor using Flyback (MODERATED)
« Reply #105 on: November 20, 2015, 03:04:45 AM »
I believe I posted what happens if the cap were not there one page back.

http://overunity.com/16167/sharing-ideas-on-how-to-make-a-more-efficent-motor-using-flyback-moderated/msg466132/#msg466132

"I had looked through my vids to see if i had one, but dont....  I remember trying to get a bemf spike into a higher henry coil and the higher H coil seemed to block most of the spike rather than take advantage of the full potential. Like a subwoofer crossover coil, it blocks out the high frequencies.  So the capacitor across your higher inductance coil probably loads up first then delivers it charge to the parallel coil?

Mags"

Mags

Magluvin.

Sorry for not acknowledging your comments.  You are right, the capacitor loads up first and the inertia of the coil prevents any significant current flow.  Note from Laurent's scope shots that the capacitor loads up in about 75 microseconds, which is quite fast.  The "flywheel of the coil" has so much inertia that it has barely even budged after 75 microseconds.

With respect to the situation where there is no capacitor, you can simply extrapolate from Laurent's scope shots and imagine the capacitor getting smaller and smaller.  The capacitor voltage will get higher and higher and the pulse width will get narrower and narrower.  At the idealized limit you have an infinitely high voltage spike and an an infinitely narrow pulse with - and yet there is still a finite amount of energy in this idealized pulse.

The flywheel version:  If you have a spinning flywheel next to a stationary flywheel on the same shaft, and they are the same size and weight, what happens when the two of them come into contact?

There are two cases you can examine for this:

1)  Imagine there are friction plates like a clutch setup when the two flywheels make contact.  There will be friction losses as the clutch plates come together.  If flywheel A was spinning at 100 RPM and flywheel B was stationary, then after contact the pair of flywheels will be spinning together at 50 RPM.  You will have lost one-half of the rotational energy through mechanical friction when the clutch plates make contact.   This is also identical to shorting two capacitors together and when the current rushes and voltages balance you lose one-half of the energy in the wire resistance.  This is also equivalent to a perfectly inelastic collision between two masses.

2) Imagine the impossible, just like magic the two flywheels are instantly fused together as one.  The spinning flywheel will impart an infinite amount of torque on the stationary flywheel for an infinitely short amount of time.  There is your infinitely high voltage spike for an infinitely short amount of time.  The final speed in this case will not be 50 RPM, it will be 70.71 RPM.  No energy will be lost after the magical creation of the unified flywheel.  This is equivalent to a perfectly elastic collision between two masses.

On the bench, when the drive coil outputs its current pulse into the secondary coil and there is no capacitor, you get an approximation to case 2) above.  You can assume that you lose some energy, but much less than losing 50%.   The parasitic capacitance in the interconnect wiring will absorb the voltage spike that comes as a result of the current pulse from the drive coil.  The resulting high-voltage spike is the "extreme torque for a very short time" that will get the secondary coil "rolling."  Naturally, there will be a risk of dielectric breakdown in the air when this happens.

MileHigh

synchro1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4720
Re: Sharing ideas on how to make a more efficent motor using Flyback (MODERATED)
« Reply #106 on: November 20, 2015, 05:45:52 AM »
@Milehigh,

What effect does the EMF induced into the high-voltage coil from the passing rotor magnet have on the capacitor discharge curve?

Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5884
Re: Sharing ideas on how to make a more efficent motor using Flyback (MODERATED)
« Reply #107 on: November 20, 2015, 06:44:32 AM »
Magluvin.

Sorry for not acknowledging your comments.  You are right, the capacitor loads up first and the inertia of the coil prevents any significant current flow.  Note from Laurent's scope shots that the capacitor loads up in about 75 microseconds, which is quite fast.  The "flywheel of the coil" has so much inertia that it has barely even budged after 75 microseconds.

With respect to the situation where there is no capacitor, you can simply extrapolate from Laurent's scope shots and imagine the capacitor getting smaller and smaller.  The capacitor voltage will get higher and higher and the pulse width will get narrower and narrower.  At the idealized limit you have an infinitely high voltage spike and an an infinitely narrow pulse with - and yet there is still a finite amount of energy in this idealized pulse.

The flywheel version:  If you have a spinning flywheel next to a stationary flywheel on the same shaft, and they are the same size and weight, what happens when the two of them come into contact?

There are two cases you can examine for this:

1)  Imagine there are friction plates like a clutch setup when the two flywheels make contact.  There will be friction losses as the clutch plates come together.  If flywheel A was spinning at 100 RPM and flywheel B was stationary, then after contact the pair of flywheels will be spinning together at 50 RPM.  You will have lost one-half of the rotational energy through mechanical friction when the clutch plates make contact.   This is also identical to shorting two capacitors together and when the current rushes and voltages balance you lose one-half of the energy in the wire resistance.  This is also equivalent to a perfectly inelastic collision between two masses.

2) Imagine the impossible, just like magic the two flywheels are instantly fused together as one.  The spinning flywheel will impart an infinite amount of torque on the stationary flywheel for an infinitely short amount of time.  There is your infinitely high voltage spike for an infinitely short amount of time.  The final speed in this case will not be 50 RPM, it will be 70.71 RPM.  No energy will be lost after the magical creation of the unified flywheel.  This is equivalent to a perfectly elastic collision between two masses.

On the bench, when the drive coil outputs its current pulse into the secondary coil and there is no capacitor, you get an approximation to case 2) above.  You can assume that you lose some energy, but much less than losing 50%.   The parasitic capacitance in the interconnect wiring will absorb the voltage spike that comes as a result of the current pulse from the drive coil.  The resulting high-voltage spike is the "extreme torque for a very short time" that will get the secondary coil "rolling."  Naturally, there will be a risk of dielectric breakdown in the air when this happens.

MileHigh

I hadnt ever put it together that the flywheel and inductor are both not going to react heavily to impulse hits. Like it would be very hard to get a flywheel to oscillate one way then the other at high freq.  So the cap with the coil would be the flywheel with a spring.  The smaller the cap, similarly the tighter the spring.

 ;)

For some reason the word inductor is underlined in red as a misspell as I write it here.  ::)

Mags

Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5884
Re: Sharing ideas on how to make a more efficent motor using Flyback (MODERATED)
« Reply #108 on: November 20, 2015, 06:48:54 AM »
@Milehigh,

What effect does the EMF induced into the high-voltage coil from the passing rotor magnet have on the capacitor discharge curve?

Was thinking about that earlier, in a way.  Like how a larger inductance will block an 'electrical' pulse, but a magnetic pulse induction would have no problem getting current to flow in the large inductance.

Mags

synchro1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4720
Re: Sharing ideas on how to make a more efficent motor using Flyback (MODERATED)
« Reply #109 on: November 20, 2015, 07:09:25 AM »
Was thinking about that earlier, in a way.  Like how a larger inductance will block an 'electrical' pulse, but a magnetic pulse induction would have no problem getting current to flow in the large inductance.

Mags

@Mags,

Woopjump produces a scope shot with the auxiliary coil separated from the rotor for comparison in his first video. A vastly greater amount of voltage appears on the scope when he repositions it close to the rotor. Woopy takes wide notice of it but doesn't offer any explanation.

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Sharing ideas on how to make a more efficent motor using Flyback (MODERATED)
« Reply #110 on: November 20, 2015, 08:36:58 AM »
@Milehigh,

What effect does the EMF induced into the high-voltage coil from the passing rotor magnet have on the capacitor discharge curve?

It should slow down the capacitor discharge curve.  This is because the passing rotor magnet induces counter-EMF in the secondary coil as compared to the voltage that the capacitor is putting across the coil.  So that counter-EMF is "stealing" or "eating" some of the voltage put across the coil by the charged capacitor.  Therefore there is less net voltage available to push current through the coil so the capacitor discharge slows down.  It seems counter-intuitive when you first think about it.

In the previous posting to this posting you make reference to something that Laurent did that is apparently opposite to what I am saying.  All that I can say is earlier in the thread I made reference to something similar that Laurent did in his clip that supports what I am saying.

The following comments are about the drive coil and you see it in the first(?) clip:  He is running the motor normally and the capacitor gets charged to say 60 volts.  Then he moves the drive coil away from the spinning rotor, and you notice that now the capacitor gets charged to say 80 volts.  So to repeat the logic:  With the drive coil in place, the passing rotor magnets induce a CEMF in the coil that acts against the applied voltage from the power supply.  So that CEMF "steals" some of the power supply voltage and that reduces the final current flow in the coil before the reed switch opens -> cap charges to 60 volts.   When the drive coil is not in place, there is no CEMF "inside" the drive coil, and therefore there is a "normal" level of current flow when the reed switch opens -> cap charges to 80 volts.

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Sharing ideas on how to make a more efficent motor using Flyback (MODERATED)
« Reply #111 on: November 20, 2015, 09:08:55 AM »
I hadnt ever put it together that the flywheel and inductor are both not going to react heavily to impulse hits. Like it would be very hard to get a flywheel to oscillate one way then the other at high freq.  So the cap with the coil would be the flywheel with a spring.  The smaller the cap, similarly the tighter the spring.

You are exactly right about the spring.   In my little treatise the two flywheels stick together, hence they have to have the same RPM after they make contact, which translates into the same current flow through the two coils in series.

Just for the heck of it, let's look at Laurent's clip and model it in the physical domain but let's put it on a frictionless linear track this time and use moving masses for the coils and springs for the capacitors.  Note in Laurent's circuit you have the diode, and the current flow in the two coils is separate and distinct.

So you have a long frictionless linear track.   At the beginning of the track you have a small mass with a firecracker attached with the end cut off to act like a rocket motor.  So when you light the firecracker you get the small mass moving.  That's the drive coil and the initial application of voltage on it when the reed switch is closed.

When the firecracker burns out, that's the equivalent of the reed switch opening.

The small mass is moving and it's on a track with a ratchet so it can't go backwards, only forwards.  That's the diode.

The instant the firecracker burns out, the small moving mass bumps into a spring attached to a large mass.  As you can imagine the spring is the capacitor and the large mass is the secondary coil.

So the small mass starts to compress the spring and the large mass slowly starts to budge, but not by very much.

Eventually the small mass comes to a complete stop, and since this part of the track is ratcheted, it stops dead against the compressed spring and can't move backwards.

Let's look more closely at the instant of time where the small mass comes to a dead stop:  The spring is at maximum compression, and the large mass is moving at a very low velocity.  The large mass got a small "nudge" as the spring was compressing, but it is barely moving.  At this instant in time assume that 99% of the available energy is stored as potential energy in the compressed spring and 1% of the available energy is stored in the very slowly moving large mass.

So now the spring decompresses and starts to transfer all of it's stored energy into the larger mass.   The larger mass is sent on its merry way, and naturally it starts out moving at a slower maximum speed as compared to the maximum speed of the small mass.

The spring keeps pushing the mass along the track at it releases its stored energy.

But, alas, the large mass is not on a frictionless track for this final stretch.  There are added friction pads on the track so the large mass lumbers along and in short order it comes to a dead stop and the experiment is over.

In this case for Laurent's setup the moment the spring gives up all of its stored energy the mass also lumbers to a dead stop.  So that's the capacitor pushing current through the resistance of the secondary coil where the resistance seems to predominate.  Once the capacitor is discharged, the current also stops flowing.

So, it took some thinking to get that right, and I don't think that I made a major mistake.  "Seeing" the circuit operate in the physical domain in the form of moving masses and springs and friction pads on a linear track might help some people understand how the electrical circuit works, and it's kind of fun.

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Re: Sharing ideas on how to make a more efficent motor using Flyback (MODERATED)
« Reply #112 on: November 20, 2015, 10:30:29 AM »
Yes, your mistake as it's impossible for me to delete a post and then re-post it using your user name.
That's the second time you accuse me of something that is not true. So please chill out and stop jumping to conclusions.

You didn't add the part I wrote saying if you don't understand you will once I demonstrate the GTL Gate.



My first post has this warning: "If you wish to post in this topic please keep it on topic and constructive as I reserve the right to edit or delete any post that are not so"

So how can this be a shock when you post about J Bedini stuff and then more posts arguing with others that it's the same thing?... I think you're over-dramatic.  And right now me taking the time to write this is taking away from experiments and also adding pages with useless posts. Do you not see this?

Yes correct, my experiment results lead me to believe a flux gate would be best use of this effect but that doesn't mean there is no other use for it.

The mostly magnet motor was a good learning experiment. It has taught me many things that will be incorporated in the GTL Gate.
I see no reasons you have not started experiments as we I can see you have plenty of stuff to use and make a video of your findings.

Looking forward to seeing ways you can think of using this and your experimenl results

Regards

Luc

Quote
So you're cool Joule

Lol-yea. Wonder where he got that name from  ::)

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Re: Sharing ideas on how to make a more efficent motor using Flyback (MODERATED)
« Reply #113 on: November 20, 2015, 11:17:53 AM »
@Citfta,

That sounds pretty scientific. What both you and Tinman are proposing is that it's possible for electrical power to share current and voltage of opposite polarities. This is physically impossible! 

There is no "Left Over" old current in the primary coil after the violence of the magnetic field collapse; There is only new current and voltage of opposite polarity. There is no cause and effect between the old current and the new current. The old current is in the past behind the event horizon. The violence of the field collapse has utterly and with absolute finality obliterated any trace of the old current along with any trace of previous electron paths for eternity. The new current can go in either direction depending on the pathway. Given a pathway of less resistance it will travel that way to it's newly biased ground. That includes an opposite direction. There is no force tendency of any kind at work on the new current from the old current. That's just superstition.

Synchro-your just not getting it,so i will try again one last time.

Picture 1 below shows the current flowing through the primary coil when the reed is closed,and the coil is getting it's current supplied via the battery. The red arrows show the current flow path--this is conventional current flow,as if we use true current flow,then that would lead only to more confusion.
Picture one shows the current flow from the positive of the battery,through the primary coil,and to the negative side of the battery. Current is flowing from the positive potential to the negative potential via the primary coil.

Picture two.
Picture two is when the reed switch opens,and current flow from the battery is interrupted.
So in picture one,we see the current flowing into the top of the primary coil,and exiting out through the bottom. Now with the reed switch open,the voltage polarity of the coil changes/inverts as the magnetic field collapses around the primary coil. So now the bottom of the primary coil is the positive potential,and the top of the primary coil becomes the negative potential. So which way will the current be flowing now?--thats right,from the positive potential to the negative potential. So the current is still flowing in the same direction through the coil,where it enters the top of the coil,and exits the bottom of the coil-->exactly the same way it was flowing through the coil when the reed switch was closed.

Now,before anyone gets started--yes,i know electron current cannot flow through a capacitor. But the current flow is still flowing through the coil due to the depletion of electrons on the positive plate of the capacitor,and the increase of electrons on the negative plate of the capacitor(true current electron flow used here to explain). The current flow through the circuit in this case is via displacement current flow through the capacitor.

So i hope that has cleared that up Synchro.
Current continues to flow in the same direction through the coil when the reed switch is open,and will continue to flow until such time as the magnetic field around the coil has totally collapsed.

synchro1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4720
Re: Sharing ideas on how to make a more efficent motor using Flyback (MODERATED)
« Reply #114 on: November 20, 2015, 11:58:00 AM »
It should slow down the capacitor discharge curve.  This is because the passing rotor magnet induces counter-EMF in the secondary coil as compared to the voltage that the capacitor is putting across the coil.  So that counter-EMF is "stealing" or "eating" some of the voltage put across the coil by the charged capacitor.  Therefore there is less net voltage available to push current through the coil so the capacitor discharge slows down.  It seems counter-intuitive when you first think about it.

In the previous posting to this posting you make reference to something that Laurent did that is apparently opposite to what I am saying.  All that I can say is earlier in the thread I made reference to something similar that Laurent did in his clip that supports what I am saying.

The following comments are about the drive coil and you see it in the first(?) clip:  He is running the motor normally and the capacitor gets charged to say 60 volts.  Then he moves the drive coil away from the spinning rotor, and you notice that now the capacitor gets charged to say 80 volts.  So to repeat the logic:  With the drive coil in place, the passing rotor magnets induce a CEMF in the coil that acts against the applied voltage from the power supply.  So that CEMF "steals" some of the power supply voltage and that reduces the final current flow in the coil before the reed switch opens -> cap charges to 60 volts.   When the drive coil is not in place, there is no CEMF "inside" the drive coil, and therefore there is a "normal" level of current flow when the reed switch opens -> cap charges to 80 volts.

@Milehigh,

Based on your analysis increasing rotor magnet strength would not improve the "Flyback Motor". What effect do you think placing magnets on the auxiliary coil's ferrite U core would have?

synchro1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4720
Re: Sharing ideas on how to make a more efficent motor using Flyback (MODERATED)
« Reply #115 on: November 20, 2015, 12:07:29 PM »
Synchro-your just not getting it,so i will try again one last time.

Picture 1 below shows the current flowing through the primary coil when the reed is closed,and the coil is getting it's current supplied via the battery. The red arrows show the current flow path--this is conventional current flow,as if we use true current flow,then that would lead only to more confusion.
Picture one shows the current flow from the positive of the battery,through the primary coil,and to the negative side of the battery. Current is flowing from the positive potential to the negative potential via the primary coil.

Picture two.
Picture two is when the reed switch opens,and current flow from the battery is interrupted.
So in picture one,we see the current flowing into the top of the primary coil,and exiting out through the bottom. Now with the reed switch open,the voltage polarity of the coil changes/inverts as the magnetic field collapses around the primary coil. So now the bottom of the primary coil is the positive potential,and the top of the primary coil becomes the negative potential. So which way will the current be flowing now?--thats right,from the positive potential to the negative potential. So the current is still flowing in the same direction through the coil,where it enters the top of the coil,and exits the bottom of the coil-->exactly the same way it was flowing through the coil when the reed switch was closed.

Now,before anyone gets started--yes,i know electron current cannot flow through a capacitor. But the current flow is still flowing through the coil due to the depletion of electrons on the positive plate of the capacitor,and the increase of electrons on the negative plate of the capacitor(true current electron flow used here to explain). The current flow through the circuit in this case is via displacement current flow through the capacitor.

So i hope that has cleared that up Synchro.
Current continues to flow in the same direction through the coil when the reed switch is open,and will continue to flow until such time as the magnetic field around the coil has totally collapsed.

@Tinman,

How much time do you imagine it takes for the magnetic field to collapse? This is a function of the rate at which the Reed switch is opened, which is proportional to the rotor R.P.M. times the number of rotor magnets divided by seconds. So lets say the frequency is 75 hertz! You believe that's perhaps too a short an interval for the collapse to fully occur?

The way you have the schematic drawn now the flyback would simply jump the Reed switch gap to get back to the positive electrode creating a nice blue spark and not follow any path you drew! The "Flyback" has a very Hi-voltage potential compared to the original current. That's why it's not going to follow your direction. I can't believe you're persisting in trying to prove this absurdity.

citfta

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1050
Re: Sharing ideas on how to make a more efficent motor using Flyback (MODERATED)
« Reply #116 on: November 20, 2015, 12:43:14 PM »
synchro,

There is nothing absurd about what Tinman is saying.  I have a few questions for you if you don't mind.

Are you willing to learn or are you going to stick to your misconceptions no matter what?  If you are not willing to learn then just ignore the rest of this post.

If you are willing to learn then please answer the following questions:

Can you do the simple test I proposed earlier with a 2 channel scope?

What direction does the current flow internally in a battery?

What is the definition of an inductor?

My apologies to luc for the side track of this thread.  Luc, if you want we can take this discussion to a new thread if synchro wants to continue this discussion.

Respectfully,
Carroll

synchro1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4720
Re: Sharing ideas on how to make a more efficent motor using Flyback (MODERATED)
« Reply #117 on: November 20, 2015, 01:00:25 PM »
synchro,

There is nothing absurd about what Tinman is saying.  I have a few questions for you if you don't mind.

Are you willing to learn or are you going to stick to your misconceptions no matter what?  If you are not willing to learn then just ignore the rest of this post.

If you are willing to learn then please answer the following questions:

Can you do the simple test I proposed earlier with a 2 channel scope?

What direction does the current flow internally in a battery?

What is the definition of an inductor?

My apologies to luc for the side track of this thread.  Luc, if you want we can take this discussion to a new thread if synchro wants to continue this discussion.

Respectfully,
Carroll

@Citfta,

Start a new thread. Where did you come up with these theories from? I've never encountered anything like this before. Can you direct me to any kind of legitimate source material whatsoever to support your claims?

citfta

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1050
Re: Sharing ideas on how to make a more efficent motor using Flyback (MODERATED)
« Reply #118 on: November 20, 2015, 01:18:05 PM »
I have started a new thread.  It is called "Inductive Kickback"  http://overunity.com/16203/inductive-kickback/msg466238/#msg466238

This information is standard textbook information about inductors.  See you on the new thread.

Carroll


ADDED BY GOTOLUC 

Please note that Carroll has started a new topic (link above) to discuss or debate anything related to "Inductive Kickback"
Normal discussions are acceptable in this topic, however, debates are not and your posts could get deleted.


Luc
« Last Edit: November 20, 2015, 05:15:07 PM by gotoluc »

woopy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 608
Re: Sharing ideas on how to make a more efficent motor using Flyback (MODERATED)
« Reply #119 on: November 20, 2015, 03:45:11 PM »
Hi all

I have tried the 10 ohm scr between the entry of the cap and the assistant coil (X4), the trace is much better but is at no place at zéro volt, so i think perhaps my probes or my scope should be recalibrated, so i stop measuring so small current with my scope to avoid junk datas. If somebody has a better equipment, feel free to follow MH recommendations for the measurement.

So this morning i have tried to get some feeling with my hands, and i decided to place a big ventilator fan on the rotor to significantly increase the mechanical load. So i decreased the voltage to 1.9 volts and i noticed that i had to increase a lot the cap in the flyback circuit (from 0.3 up to 10 uF ) to get the best rotation speed. For info, in this case the " parent " pulse duration in the main coil, is almost the same as the "child" pulse duration in the assistant coil.

So some results on this setup

1- when the main coil and the assistant coil are working together, the input voltage is 1.9 V and the average current is 0.110 A. that is 0.21 Watts and the fan spins at 500 rpm

2- i disconnected completely the assistant coil and flyback circuitery and put away the assistant coil in order to not influence the rotor magnetism.
    - i put a freewheeling diode across the main coil and put the power on. 1.9 volts and average current at 0.12 A that is 0.23Watts to get only 450 rpm.
    - than same setup and i disconnected the diode so the reed switch is strongly arcing  so 1.9 volt at around 0.12 A , that is 0.23 Watts and only 400 rpm

3- I remounted the flyback circuitery but put away the assistant coil from the rotor - in open magnetic assistant C core = 1.9 V and 0.130 A that is 0.247 Watts with 420 rpm
                                                                                                                                    -and than i magnetically closed the C core and 1.9 V and 0.125 A that is 0.24 Watts and 416 rpm

So it seems that the assistant coil bring an strong torque addition in comparison with the main coil alone and for the same or less input power, and it is what is important to me at this stage.

Just for info

Laurent