-
Hi everyone,
This topic is a continuation of the discussion and replication of Pierre Cotnoir's Device.
Pierre's demo videos: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbTYIW_yo65zgWdMlcA3s9A (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbTYIW_yo65zgWdMlcA3s9A)
Post rules of this topic
Please keep your post on topic and constructive. I reserve the right to edit or delete any post that are not so.
Also, this is a bilingual English and French topic. I reserve the right to edit in the translation of your post.
Regards
Luc
français
Bonjour à tous
Ce sujet est une continuation de la discussion et de la réplication du dispositif de Pierre Cotnoir.
Les vidéos de démonstration de Pierre: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbTYIW_yo65zgWdMlcA3s9A (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbTYIW_yo65zgWdMlcA3s9A)
Les règles de post dans ce sujet
S'il vous plaît gardez votre message sur le sujet et constructif. Je me réserve le droit d'éditer ou de supprimer tout article qui ne l'est pas.
Aussi, c'est un sujet bilingue anglais et français. Je me réserve le droit d'éditer la traduction de votre message.
Cordialement
Luc
-
salut LUC je me demandais si pour le stator on ne pourrait pas utiliser celui du compresseur d'un réfrigérateur ,car il a un stator pareil juste une idée.
English
Hi LUC, I was wondering if we could use a refrigerator compressor stator? because they have the same kind of stator. Just an idea.
-
Hi Luc
Good idea to move discussion to where ou can moderate
Always problem here with perpetual arguments that creates so much anger one cannot even think straight
français
Salut Luc
Bonne idée de déplacer la discussion où vous pouvez modérer
Toujours un problème ici avec des arguments perpétuels qui crée tellement de colère qu'on ne peut même pas penser correctement
-
salut LUC je me demandais si pour le stator on ne pourrait pas utiliser celui du compresseur d'un réfrigérateur ,car il a un stator pareil juste une idée.
English
Hi LUC, I was wondering if we could use a refrigerator compressor stator? because they have the same kind of stator. Just an idea.
Oui, pourquoi pas
English
Yes, why not
-
Hi Luc
Good idea to move discussion to where ou can moderate
Always problem here with perpetual arguments that creates so much anger one cannot even think straight
français
Salut Luc
Bonne idée de déplacer la discussion où vous pouvez modérer
Toujours un problème ici avec des arguments perpétuels qui crée tellement de colère qu'on ne peut même pas penser correctement
I'm always willing to help the research community which ever way I can.
Regards
Luc
français
Je suis toujours prêt à aider la communauté de recherche ans toute les moyens disponible.
Cordialement
Luc
-
Thanks Luc for moving the discussion here. Hopefully people will stay focused on topic here and not insult others. Btw. did you get my PM about measuring the capacitance of the coils? Curious how much parasitic capacitance there is in a stator like this, especially when we are talking about parametric variation of the inductance.
PmgR
français
Merci Luc d'avoir avancer la discussion ici. Espérons que les gens resteront concentrés sur le sujet ici et n'insulteront pas les autres. Avez-vous eu mon PM sur la mesure de la capacitance des bobines? Curieux combien de capacité parasite il y a dans un stator comme celui-ci, surtout quand on parle de variation paramétrique de l'inductance.
PmgR
-
Hi everyone,
This topic is a continuation of the discussion and replication of Pierre Cotnoir's Device.
Pierre's demo videos: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbTYIW_yo65zgWdMlcA3s9A (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbTYIW_yo65zgWdMlcA3s9A)
Post rules of this topic
Please keep your post on topic and constructive. I reserve the right to edit or delete any post that are not so.
Also, this is a bilingual English and French topic. I reserve the right to edit in the translation of your post.
Regards
Luc
français
Bonjour à tous
Ce sujet est une continuation de la discussion et de la réplication du dispositif de Pierre Cotnoir.
Les vidéos de démonstration de Pierre: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbTYIW_yo65zgWdMlcA3s9A (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbTYIW_yo65zgWdMlcA3s9A)
Les règles de post dans ce sujet
S'il vous plaît gardez votre message sur le sujet et constructif. Je me réserve le droit d'éditer ou de supprimer tout article qui ne l'est pas.
Aussi, c'est un sujet bilingue anglais et français. Je me réserve le droit d'éditer la traduction de votre message.
Cordialement
Luc
Good to see a moderated thread Luc--good choice.
I would like to ask something here at this point.
We have transistors driving relay's,which them self have a very limited operating frequency.
Is there any reason the relays cant be omitted ,and use the transistors them self to drive the coils?
The transistors would be cheaper,and you cut out the time and expense of the relays,and the transistors would be a much cleaner switching option.
Just some thoughts.
Brad
français
C'est bon de voir le sujet modéré Luc - bon choix.
Je voudrais demander quelque chose ici à ce stage.
Nous avons des transistors qui pilot les relais, qui eux-mêmes ont une fréquence de fonctionnement très limitée.
Y at-il une raison pour laquelle les relais ne peuvent pas être omis, et utiliser les transistors eux-mêmes pour entraîner les bobines?
Les transistors seraient moins chers, et vous coupez le temps et les dépenses des relais, et les transistors seraient une option de commutation beaucoup plus propre.
Juste quelques pensées.
-
Thanks Luc for moving the discussion here. Hopefully people will stay focused on topic here and not insult others. Btw. did you get my PM about measuring the capacitance of the coils? Curious how much parasitic capacitance there is in a stator like this, especially when we are talking about parametric variation of the inductance.
PmgR
français
Merci Luc d'avoir avancer la discussion ici. Espérons que les gens resteront concentrés sur le sujet ici et n'insulteront pas les autres. Avez-vous eu mon PM sur la mesure de la capacitance des bobines? Curieux combien de capacité parasite il y a dans un stator comme celui-ci, surtout quand on parle de variation paramétrique de l'inductance.
PmgR
Thanks PmgR, I'm always glad to help.
I did receive your PM (private message) but I had to recharge the battery of the meter overnight. I also want to know if you are interested in Capacitance readings across the coil or between adjacent coils?... also, at this point the coil connections are all separated, would the capacitance not be affected once all the coils are connected in series as Pierre has them?
Regards
Luc
français
Merci PmgR, je suis toujours heureux d'aider.
J'ai reçu votre PM (message privé) mais j'ai dû recharger la batterie du compteur pendant la nuit. Je veux également savoir si vous êtes intéressé par les lectures de capacité à travers la bobine ou entre les bobines adjacentes? ... aussi, en ce moment les connexions de bobine sont toutes séparées, la capacité ne serait t'elle pas affectée une fois que toutes les bobines sont connectées en série comme Pierre les a?
Cordialement
Luc
-
Related to stiplanet's question...do folks know where we can look for these stators in other discarded machines ?
Am not averse to ripping such a thing from something sat on the roadside !
Am thinking it may be good to have a list of machines that are likely to contain them.
français
En rapport avec la question de stiplanet ... les gens savent-ils où nous pouvons chercher pour ces stators dans d'autres machines mises au rebut?
Je ne suis pas opposé à arracher une telle chose de quelque chose assis sur le bord de la route!
Je pense qu'il peut être bon d'avoir une liste de machines susceptibles de contenir un stator utile à ce projet.
-
Possible ON time to relay X? (No!)
Possible sur ON pour relayer X? (Non!)
Until someone comes up with a better relay principle (timing), that makes the relays able to work, I'm hesitant that Pierres Contraption works giving OU as shown in the movies!
Jusqu'à ce que quelqu'un trouve un meilleur principe de relais (timing), cela rend les relais capables de fonctionner, j'hésite à dire que Pierre Contraption travaille sur O.U. comme le montre le film!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8moN-nDHvzU&feature=youtu.be
-
Good to see a moderated thread Luc--good choice.
I would like to ask something here at this point.
We have transistors driving relay's,which them self have a very limited operating frequency.
Is there any reason the relays cant be omitted ,and use the transistors them self to drive the coils?
The transistors would be cheaper,and you cut out the time and expense of the relays,and the transistors would be a much cleaner switching option.
Just some thoughts.
Brad
français
C'est bon de voir le sujet modéré Luc - bon choix.
Je voudrais demander quelque chose ici à ce stage.
Nous avons des transistors qui pilot les relais, qui eux-mêmes ont une fréquence de fonctionnement très limitée.
Y at-il une raison pour laquelle les relais ne peuvent pas être omis, et utiliser les transistors eux-mêmes pour entraîner les bobines?
Les transistors seraient moins chers, et vous coupez le temps et les dépenses des relais, et les transistors seraient une option de commutation beaucoup plus propre.
Juste quelques pensées.
Glad to help mate!
We're still unsure if the relays have a favorable effect on Pierre's device but yes, transistor or mosfet switching should be able to do a much better switching job then relays.
That will be tested first on my build with the below H-Bridge which we can buy 5 of them for $9.95 from a US supplier.
Cheers
Luc
Link /lien:
https://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?ff3=4&toolid=11800&pub=5574900467&campid=5338252492&mpre=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.com%2Fitm%2F222461752336%3FrmvSB%3Dtrue
français
Content d'aider!
Nous ne savons toujours pas si les relais ont un effet favorable sur l'appareil de Pierre, mais oui, la commutation transistor ou mosfet devrait être capable de faire un meilleur travail de commutation que les relais.
Cela sera testé d'abord sur ma construction avec le H-Bridge ci-dessous que nous pouvons acheter 5 pour 9,95 $ d'un fournisseur américain.
Luc
-
Related to stiplanet's question...do folks know where we can look for these stators in other discarded machines ?
Am not averse to ripping such a thing from something sat on the roadside !
Am thinking it may be good to have a list of machines that are likely to contain them.
français
En rapport avec la question de stiplanet ... les gens savent-ils où nous pouvons chercher pour ces stators dans d'autres machines mises au rebut?
Je ne suis pas opposé à arracher une telle chose de quelque chose assis sur le bord de la route!
Je pense qu'il peut être bon d'avoir une liste de machines susceptibles de contenir un stator utile à ce projet.
Une solution à prix raisonnable consiste à trouver un groupe électrogène en panne d'occasion, en consultant les petites annonces. C'est ce que j'ai fait. Je l'ai obtenu pour 40 €.
En général c'est le moteur thermique qui est en panne, pas la génératrice. Si la panne se trouve sur la génératrice, cela n'a pas d'importance, vu le traitement qu'on lui réserve.
English
A reasonably priced solution is to find a used gasoline power generator, by looking at the classifieds. That's what I did. I got one for 40 €.
Most common problem with these is the gasoline engine, not the generator. Even if the generator is bad, it doesn't matter, since the stator and rotor don't go bad.
-
Une solution à prix raisonnable consiste à trouver un groupe électrogène en panne d'occasion, en consultant les petites annonces. C'est ce que j'ai fait. Je l'ai obtenu pour 40 €.
En général c'est le moteur thermique qui est en panne, pas la génératrice. Si la panne se trouve sur la génératrice, cela n'a pas d'importance, vu le traitement qu'on lui réserve.
English
A reasonably priced solution is to find a used gasoline power generator, by looking at the classifieds. That's what I did. I got one for 40 €.
Most common problem with these is the gasoline engine, not the generator. Even if the generator is bad, it doesn't matter, since the stator and rotor don't go bad.
Single phase, 2 rotor pole generators up to 2.8KW, are more likely to have 24 slot stators, like the one shown. The larger 5-6KW three phase two rotor pole generators are likely to have 36 slot stators.
Regards
L192
français
Les générateurs monophase de rotor à 2 champ jusqu'à 2.8KW, sont plus susceptibles d'avoir un stators de 24 fente, comme celui montré. Les générateurs plus grands de triphases rotor 2 champ de 5-6KW sont susceptibles d'avoir un stator de 36 fente.
Cordialement
-
Thanks for the advice MichelM and L192 :)
Luc, i've realised that my writing should contain less slang, due to your translations to French.
"huh ?" is likely a universal expression on the other end.
-
Single phase, 2 rotor pole generators up to 2.8KW, are more likely to have 24 slot stators, like the one shown. The larger 5-6KW three phase two rotor pole generators are likely to have 36 slot stators.
Regards
L192
français
Les générateurs monophase de rotor à 2 champ jusqu'à 2.8KW, sont plus susceptibles d'avoir un stators de 24 fente, comme celui montré. Les générateurs plus grands de triphases rotor 2 champ de 5-6KW sont susceptibles d'avoir un stator de 36 fente.
Cordialement
L191, please have a closer look at the picture you're referring. I'm quite sure it's a 30 slots. The welds and shape looks exactly like my 30 slots stator and the rotor looks the same as well.
However, I would agree with you that the larger 5 kW or more may have 36 slots.
Regards
Luc
français
L191, regardez de plus près la photo dont vous parlez. Je suis tout à fait sûr que c'est un 30 fentes. Les soudures et la forme ressemble exactement à mon stator à 30 fentes et le rotor a la même apparence.
Cependant, je suis d'accord avec vous que les 5 kW ou plus peuvent avoir 36 fentes.
Cordialement
Luc
-
Luc, le programme Arduino a-t-il été demandé à Pierre ?
-
L191, please have a closer look at the picture you're referring. I'm quite sure it's a 30 slots. The welds and shape looks exactly like my 30 slots stator and the rotor looks the same as well.
However, I would agree with you that the larger 5 kW or more may have 36 slots.
Regards
Luc
français
L191, regardez de plus près la photo dont vous parlez. Je suis tout à fait sûr que c'est un 30 fentes. Les soudures et la forme ressemble exactement à mon stator à 30 fentes et le rotor a la même apparence.
Cependant, je suis d'accord avec vous que les 5 kW ou plus peuvent avoir 36 fentes.
Cordialement
Luc
Hi Gotoluc,
Difficult to confirm from that photo that it is 24 or 30 slots.
Ordinarily the number of slots in the stator is a multiple of the number of poles and the number of phases, thus the stator of a 4 pole 3 phase alternator may have 12,24,36,42,48 slots etc, all which are multiples of 12.
So for a 3 phase 2 pole alternator the slots may be 12,18,24,30,36,42. In both cases the slot numbers above 36 would be only used in much larger diameter stators (higher power), as otherwise the pole CSA would be diminished in a smaller diameter stator, reducing efficiency. The commonly used numbers of slots are in bold for domestic generators.
Regards
L192
français
Bonjour Gotoluc,
Difficile de confirmer à partir de cette photo qu'il s'agit de 24 ou 30 fentes.
Ordinairement, le nombre de fentes dans le stator est un multiple du nombre de pôles et du nombre de phases, ainsi le stator d'un alternateur triphasé à 4 pôles peut avoir 12,24,36,42,48 fentes etc, tous ce qui sont multiples de 12.
Ainsi, pour un alternateur bipolaire triphasé, les fentes peuvent être 12,18,24,30,36,42. Dans les deux cas, les numéros de fentes au-dessus de 36 ne seraient utilisés que dans des stators de plus grand diamètre (puissance plus élevée), sinon le pôle CSA serait diminué dans un stator de plus petit diamètre, réduisant ainsi l'efficacité. Les nombres d'emplacements généralement utilisés sont en gras pour les générateurs domestiques.
Cordialement
-
L191, please have a closer look at the picture you're referring. I'm quite sure it's a 30 slots. The welds and shape looks exactly like my 30 slots stator and the rotor looks the same as well.
However, I would agree with you that the larger 5 kW or more may have 36 slots.
Regards
Luc
français
L191, regardez de plus près la photo dont vous parlez. Je suis tout à fait sûr que c'est un 30 fentes. Les soudures et la forme ressemble exactement à mon stator à 30 fentes et le rotor a la même apparence.
Cependant, je suis d'accord avec vous que les 5 kW ou plus peuvent avoir 36 fentes.
Cordialement
Luc
I cannot see what difference there would be between using a 30 or 36 slot stator core,other than it (the 30 slot) being a smaller version.
In both cases,all you are doing is creating a step charged rotating electromagnetic field that has a 60Hz frequency.
Because relays are being used,each coil will be either on or off,and when a scope is placed across the center output coil,you will see these steps in the AC sine wave. This could be smoothed with the right value cap across each stator coil.
Some here think a replication is based around the physical properties of a device,when they should base it around working principles of the device.
Brad
français
Je ne vois pas quelle différence il y aurait entre l'utilisation d'un stator à 30 ou 36 fentes, autre que celle-ci (la fente 30) étant une version plus petite.
Dans les deux cas, tout ce que vous faites est de créer une étape chargée de champ électromagnétique tournant qui a une fréquence de 60Hz.
Puisque les relais sont utilisés, chaque bobine sera allumée ou éteinte, et lorsqu'un ocliloscope est placée sur la bobine de sortie centrale vous verrez ces étapes dans l'onde sinusoïdale AC. Cela pourrait être filtré avec la bonne valeur de condensateur à travers chaque bobine du stator.
Certains ici pensent qu'une réplication est basée sur les propriétés physiques d'un appareil, quand ils devraient se baser sur les principes de fonctionnement de l'appareil.
-
Is Pierre going to continue with his step by step build in this thread?
Luc your in direct contact with him, What does he have to say?
Why is everybody trying to change the build, do an exact replication first ,then make the changes, no?
Seems like this topic is already being lost.
My question to Pierre is, can you give us a breakdown , six poles , overlapping or turning off as six more turn on, 3 north 3 south in an alternating fashion, at 600 switches a minute, 18 coils right 36 slots means 18 coils right, it takes 2 slots to make a coil right?
A simple commutator with adjustable speed could be used, if that is the only role the relays play.
I don't know
Just saying
artv
français
Est-ce que Pierre va continuer avec sa construction pas à pas dans ce sujet?
Luc, tu es en contact direct avec lui, qu'a-t-il à dire?
Pourquoi tout le monde essaie-t-il de changer la construction, de faire d'abord une réplication exacte, puis de faire les changements, non?
On dirait que ce sujet est déjà perdu.
Ma question à Pierre est, pouvez-vous nous donner une répartition, six pôles, chevaucher désactiver quan six pôles de plus s'allume, 3 nord 3 sud en alternance, à 600 commutateurs par minute. 18 bobines correct veux dire 36 fentes signifie 18 bobines correct? ça prend 2 fente pour faire une bobine correct?
Un simple commutateur à vitesse réglable pourrait être utilisé, si tel c'est le seul rôle joué par les relais.
Je ne sais pas
Je dis juste
-
Is Pierre going to continue with his step by step build in this thread?
Luc your in direct contact with him, What does he have to say?
Why is everybody trying to change the build, do an exact replication first ,then make the changes, no?
Seems like this topic is already being lost.
My question to Pierre is, can you give us a breakdown , six poles , overlapping or turning off as six more turn on, 3 north 3 south in an alternating fashion, at 600 switches a minute, 18 coils right 36 slots means 18 coils right, it takes 2 slots to make a coil right?
A simple commutator with adjustable speed could be used, if that is the only role the relays play.
I don't know
Just saying
artv
français
Est-ce que Pierre va continuer avec sa construction pas à pas dans ce sujet?
Luc, tu es en contact direct avec lui, qu'a-t-il à dire?
Pourquoi tout le monde essaie-t-il de changer la construction, de faire d'abord une réplication exacte, puis de faire les changements, non?
On dirait que ce sujet est déjà perdu.
Ma question à Pierre est, pouvez-vous nous donner une répartition, six pôles, chevaucher désactiver quan six pôles de plus s'allume, 3 nord 3 sud en alternance, à 600 commutateurs par minute. 18 bobines correct veux dire 36 fentes signifie 18 bobines correct? ça prend 2 fente pour faire une bobine correct?
Un simple commutateur à vitesse réglable pourrait être utilisé, si tel c'est le seul rôle joué par les relais.
Je ne sais pas
Je dis juste
Dear shylo,
Very difficult to translate what you wrote. Too many questions all grouped together!
Pierre is not going to answer all those. His participation is minimal, at most once a week and only through PM's directly to me.
Most of the information you need to build a test device is posted in the original topic: http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/#.WrXMK9YpDM0
We are not starting over here, this topic is a moderated continuation.
Regards
Luc
français
Cher shylo,
Très difficile de traduire ce que vous avez écrit. Trop de questions toutes groupées!
Pierre ne va pas répondre à toutes ces questions. Sa participation est minime, au plus une fois par semaine et uniquement par l'entremise des PM directement à moi.
La plupart des informations dont vous avez besoin pour construire un appareil est publiée dans le sujet d'origine: http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and- vidéo / #. WrXMK9YpDM0
Nous ne recommençons pas avec les détails de construction ici car nous avons tous obtenu ce dont nous avons besoin du sujet original. Ce nouveau sujet est une continuation modérée.
Cordialement
-
Is Pierre going to continue with his step by step build in this thread?
Luc your in direct contact with him, What does he have to say?
Why is everybody trying to change the build, do an exact replication first ,then make the changes, no?
Seems like this topic is already being lost.
My question to Pierre is, can you give us a breakdown , six poles , overlapping or turning off as six more turn on, 3 north 3 south in an alternating fashion, at 600 switches a minute, 18 coils right 36 slots means 18 coils right, it takes 2 slots to make a coil right?
A simple commutator with adjustable speed could be used, if that is the only role the relays play.
I don't know
Just saying
artv
français
Est-ce que Pierre va continuer avec sa construction pas à pas dans ce sujet?
Luc, tu es en contact direct avec lui, qu'a-t-il à dire?
Pourquoi tout le monde essaie-t-il de changer la construction, de faire d'abord une réplication exacte, puis de faire les changements, non?
On dirait que ce sujet est déjà perdu.
Ma question à Pierre est, pouvez-vous nous donner une répartition, six pôles, chevaucher désactiver quan six pôles de plus s'allume, 3 nord 3 sud en alternance, à 600 commutateurs par minute. 18 bobines correct veux dire 36 fentes signifie 18 bobines correct? ça prend 2 fente pour faire une bobine correct?
Un simple commutateur à vitesse réglable pourrait être utilisé, si tel c'est le seul rôle joué par les relais.
Je ne sais pas
Je dis juste
Shylo
I do not think the topic is being lost at all. Some of us just understand that replicating a device dose not mean that a red wire cant be blue,or one stator cant be smaller than the other.
Those that continue to make claims that a replication is not being made here,should also be able to explain what the operational difference will be between what Luc is building,and what Pierre has built.
Luc is building his replication using what he has at hand,and is simply a slightly smaller scale.
There will be no difference in the outcome between the two--both are creating a step charged rotating magnetic field around the stator core,which has a frequency of 60Hz.
What you should be asking is--how is this 60Hz frequency achieved with electro-mechanical relays?
To continue to say Luc is no replicating Pierre's device,but provide no explanation as to how or why the outcome will be different,is not the scientific method one should be using.
To replicate the effect,one would need to achieve the same step charged rotating magnetic field at the same frequency,using the same method.Luc's build will achieve this.
Here is where some here will get confused.
First you say -do an exact replication,and then in the same post you say--:
Quote: A simple commutator with adjustable speed could be used, if that is the only role the relays play.
Perhaps you will now understand as to why people like myself and Luc get frustrated.
My biggest concern with this is--how are these relays able to operate at 60 cycles per second?.
Brad
français
Shylo, je ne pense pas que le sujet soit perdu du tout. Certains d'entre nous comprennent simplement que la réplication d'un appareil ne signifie pas qu'un fil rouge ne peut pas être bleu, ou qu'un stator ne peut pas être plus petit que l'autre.
Ceux qui continuent d'affirmer qu'une réplication n'est pas faite ici devraient aussi être capables d'expliquer quelle sera la différence opérationnelle entre ce que Luc construit et ce que Pierre a construit. Luc construit sa réplique en utilisant ce qu'il a en main, et est simplement une échelle légèrement plus petite.
Il n'y aura pas de différence dans le résultat entre les deux - les deux créent une étape de champ magnétique tournant autour du noyau du stator, qui a une fréquence de 60Hz.
Ce que vous devriez demander est: comment cette fréquence de 60 Hz est-elle atteinte avec les relais électromécaniques?
Pour continuer à dire que Luc ne réplique pas l'appareil de Pierre, mais ne fournit aucune explication sur la façon dont ou pourquoi le résultat sera différent, n'est-ce pas la méthode scientifique que l'on devrait utiliser.
Pour reproduire l'effet, il faudrait atteindre la même étape chargée de champ magnétique tournant à la même fréquence, en utilisant la même méthode. La construction de Luc permettra d'atteindre cet objectif. Voici où certains ici seront confus. D'abord vous dites -d'une réplication exacte, et ensuite dans le même post vous dites Quote: Un simple commutateur à vitesse réglable pourrait être utilisé, si c'est le seul rôle que jouent les relais.
Vous comprendrez peut-être maintenant pourquoi les gens comme moi et Luc sont frustrés.
Ma plus grande préoccupation avec ceci est - comment ces relais peuvent-ils fonctionner à 60 cycles par seconde?
-
Brad,
Every relay only needs to switch once every 12 steps (each coil is switched every 6 steps, by switching the VDD relay once every 12 steps and the GND relay once every 12 steps with an offset of 6 steps between the two).
12 steps is equivalent to 60Hz, or 16.6ms. Each relay is on for 6 steps (8.3ms), then off for 6 steps (8.3ms). The relays can probably do this as their mechanical operation time is 10ms (just a delay and not relevant) and fall-off time 5ms which is smaller than 8.3ms.
PmgR
français
Brad, chaque relais n'a besoin de changer qu'une fois tous les 12 pas (chaque bobine est commutée tous les 6 pas, en commutant le relais VDD une fois tous les 12 pas et le relais GND une fois tous les 12 pas avec un décalage de 6 pas entre les deux).
12 étapes équivaut à 60Hz ou 16.6ms. Chaque relais est activé pendant 6 étapes (8,3 ms), puis désactivé pendant 6 étapes (8,3 ms). Les relais peuvent probablement le faire car leur temps de fonctionnement mécanique est de 10 ms (juste un retard et non pertinent) et le temps de chute est de 5 ms, ce qui est inférieur à 8,3 ms.
-
Après étude image par image de la première vidéo, je conclus que la séquence des LED bleues reboucle toutes les 4 secondes.
Soit 120 images. (à 1 image près). Chaque pas vaut 1/30 de seconde.
Comparaison à: 10:35:29, 10:39:28, 10:43:27, 10:47:25, 10:51:24, 10:55:23
After a frame by frame study of the first video, I conclude that the sequence of the blue LEDs loops every 4 seconds.
That's 120 images. (close to 1 image). Each step is 1/30 of a second.
Comparisons made for: 10:35:29, 10:39:28, 10:43:27, 10:47:25, 10:51:24, 10:55:23
-
Brad,
Every relay only needs to switch once every 12 steps (each coil is switched every 6 steps, by switching the VDD relay once every 12 steps and the GND relay once every 12 steps with an offset of 6 steps between the two).
12 steps is equivalent to 60Hz, or 16.6ms. Each relay is on for 6 steps (8.3ms), then off for 6 steps (8.3ms). The relays can probably do this as their mechanical operation time is 10ms (just a delay and not relevant) and fall-off time 5ms which is smaller than 8.3ms.
PmgR
Are you sure about that ?.
Here is what i see,and how i think it works.
Pierre has 36 coils and 72 relays.
The center coil (the output coil)is what gives the 60Hz AC output.
In order for that to happen,each coil on the stator has to be switched on twice per cycle--once to produce the top half of the AC sine,and once in the opposite polarity to produce the bottom half of the AC sine. Each coil has 2 relays assigned to it to perform this feat,one relay to switch the coil on in one polarity,and the 2nd relay to switch the coil on in the opposite polarity 180* through the cycle.
So every relay has to switch on and off every cycle,and it has to do this 60 times a second to achieve the 60Hz frequency.
Every single coil has to be switched on and off 120 times per second,where 60 times is of one polarity,and the other 60 times is of the opposite polarity.
So,knowing all this,we know that each relay must be able to switch on and off 60 times per second-cleanly.
This is the only way a clean AC sine can be produced in this device,and even then you would see the step charging in the sine wave via a scope.
Brad
français
Etes-vous sûr de cela? ... voici ce que je vois, et comment je pense que cela fonctionne. Pierre a 36 bobines et 72 relais. La bobine centrale (la bobine de sortie) est ce qui donne la sortie AC 60Hz. Pour que cela se produise, chaque bobine du stator doit être allumée deux fois par cycle - une fois pour produire la moitié supérieure de la sinusoïde AC, et une fois dans la polarité opposée pour produire la moitié inférieure de la sinusoïde AC. Chaque bobine a 2 relais qui lui sont assignés pour effectuer cette tâche, un relais pour allumer la bobine en une polarité, et le second relais pour allumer la bobine en polarité opposée 180 * pendant le cycle. Donc, chaque relais doit allumer et éteindre chaque cycle, et il doit le faire 60 fois par seconde pour atteindre la fréquence 60Hz. Chaque bobine doit être allumée et éteinte 120 fois par seconde, où 60 fois est d'une polarité, et l'autre 60 fois est de la polarité opposée. Donc, sachant tout cela, nous savons que chaque relais doit être capable d'allumer et d'éteindre 60 fois par seconde - proprement. C'est la seule façon de produire une sinusoïde AC propre dans cet appareil, et même alors, vous verriez l'étape de charge dans l'onde sinusoïdale via un osciloscope.
-
Il y a un chevauchement. Les relais sont actifs un peu plus longtemps.
Parfois 9 transistors sont actifs en même temps et non pas 6.
There is overlap. Relays are active a little longer
Sometimes 9 transistors are active at the same time and not 6.
Pierre a dit:
Pour éviter que le champ magnétique ne se coupe il faut a un certain moment avoir deux relais activés en même temps donc 5 bobines sur 6 fonctionnent réellement ex: relais 1 on ,relais 2 on ,relais 1 off ,relais 3 on ,relais 2 off etc. Cette séquence évite de couper le champ magnétique tout en changent la polarité des bobines: c'est une séquence assez complexe au niveau des transistors . Comme ma sortie de l'arduino est positive et que les relais s'activent avec du négatif alors il a été nécessaire de mettre des transistors pour pouvoir activer les relais .
Pierre said:
To prevent the magnetic field from being cut, it is necessary at a certain moment to have two relays activated at the same time so 5 coils out of 6 actually work eg: relay 1 on, relay 2 on, relay 1 off, relay 3 on, relay 2 off etc. This sequence avoids to cut the magnetic field while changing the polarity of the coils: it is a rather complex sequence at the level of the transistors. As my output from the arduino is positive and the relays activate with the negative then it was necessary to put transistors in order to activate the relays.
-
Tinman, I agree with you, here is my analysis:
The stator has 6 induction poles: 3 North + 3 South.
Every time a pole passes in front of the rotor (immobile here) there is an alternation.
For a complete wave, you need N-S then return to N.
In a complete rotation, we have N-S-N-S-N-S, that is 3 complete waves (considering that the cycle continues).
For 60 waves per second - 60 Hz - it takes 20 full rotations per second.
During a rotation, each relay is closed / open 3 times, if necessary see again the animation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8moN-nDHvzU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8moN-nDHvzU)
So each relay is actuated 3 X 20 = 60 times per second.
Français
Tinman, je suis d'accord avec vous, voici mon analyse :
Le stator possède 6 pôles d'induction : 3 Nord + 3 Sud.
Chaque fois qu'un pôle passe devant le rotor (immobile ici) il se produit une alternance.
Pour une onde complète, il faut N-S puis revenir à N.
Dans une rotation complète, nous avons N-S-N-S-N-S, soit 3 ondes complètes (en considérant que le cycle se poursuit).
Pour 60 ondes par secondes – 60 Hz – il faut 20 rotations complètes par seconde.
Pendant une rotation, chaque relais est fermé/ouvert 3 fois, si besoin revoir l'animation : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8moN-nDHvzU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8moN-nDHvzU)
Donc, chaque relais est actionné 3 X 20 = 60 fois par seconde.
-
@ MichelM
Did you agree to my analysis in post: Reply #9 ?
On time 1.39ms.
Regards Arne
français
@ MichelM
avez-vous accepté mon analyse dans le post: Réponse # 9?
temps allumer de 1.39ms.
Cordialement Arne
-
Je pense que le chevauchement se fait peut-être sur 3 bobines adjacentes à la fois:
L1 on, L 2 on, L3 on, L1 off, L4 on, L2 off, L5 on, L3 OFF, ...
Regarder cette séquence d'images : les flèches montrent les LED en train de s'allumer, pleinement allumés ou en train de s'éteindre.
Ceci expliquerait que les relais sont activés 2 fois plus longtemps et arrivent à suivre la cadence.
I think that the overlap may be on 3 coils adjacent to each other:
L1 on, L2 on, L3 on, L1 off, L4 on, L2 off, L5 on, L3 OFF, ...
Watch this sequence of images: the arrows show the LED lighting up, fully on or going off
This would explain that the relays are activated 2 times longer and can follow the tempo
-
cheors
What you see here is a Film frame taken in that moment a switch event takes place.
That's why you see tree (3) LED diodes lit instead of two.
You can also see that the intensity is different from some LEDs depending to the film exposure time.
When 3 leds are lit, always the ("fixed") LED in the middle is brighter.
My opinion.
Regards Arne
français
Ce que vous voyez ici est un cadre de film pris dans ce moment un événement de commutation a lieu.
C'est pourquoi vous voyez (3) LED diodes allumées au lieu de deux.
Vous pouvez également voir que l'intensité est différente de certaines LED en fonction du temps d'exposition du film.
Lorsque 3 LED sont allumés, la LED ("fixe") au milieu a toujours plus d'intensité lumineuse
Mon avis. Cordialement
-
@ MichelM
Did you agree to my analysis in post: Reply #9 ?
On time 1.39ms.
Regards Arne
français
@ MichelM
avez-vous accepté mon analyse dans le post: Réponse # 9?
temps allumer de 1.39ms.
Cordialement Arne
Seaad, je suis d'accord avec votre analyse, mais ma déduction est que les relais ne fonctionnent qu'à 60 Hz, ce qui est concevable.
Selon ma compréhension d'aujourd'hui, toutes les séquences de fermeture ou d'ouverture des relais ont le même timing.
Je le vérifierai lorsque je ferai le test, mais je conçois ceci :
- Lorsque le dispositif est déjà démarré, il y a une action simultanée sur 6 relais en même temps. Chaque commande agit sur 6 relais à la fois :
Considérons 6 relais (la référence) fermés [3 relais (+) et 3 (-)] ;
1/ - Les 6 précédents relais [3 relais (+) et 3 (-)] sont coupés ;
2/ - En suite, les 6 relais suivants [3 relais (+) et 3 (-)] sont mis sous tension pour une durée de 1.38 ms ;
Pendant ce cycle, les 6 relais de référence, restent passants, donc il n'y a pas de rupture des champs magnétiques.
Dans le cycle suivant, les 6 relais suivants deviennent les relais de référence, et le cycle se poursuit...
Dans cette description, chacun des 72 relais est toujours soumis à la même cadence de mise sous tension et de coupure, soit 60 fois par seconde (chaque 16.66 ms) :
- Mise sous tension pour une durée de 1.3888 ms ;
- Suivie d'une durée hors tension de 11 X 1.3888 = 15.2768 ms.
Donc, la fréquence d'utilisation de chaque relais n'est que de 60 Hz (16.66 ms).
English
Seaad, I agree with your analysis, but my deduction is that relays only work at 60 Hz, which is conceivable.
According to my understanding today, all the closing or opening sequences of the relays have the same timing.
I will check it when I do the test, but here is how I understand it:
- When the device is already started, there is simultaneous action on 6 relays at the same time. Each command acts on 6 relays at a time:
Consider 6 relays (the reference) closed [3 relays (+) and 3 (-)];
1 / - The 6 previous relays [3 relays (+) and 3 (-)] are off;
2 / - Next, the next 6 relays [3 relays (+) and 3 (-)] are energized for a duration of 1.38 ms;
During this cycle, the 6 relays of reference, remain passers, so there is no rupture of the magnetic fields.
In the next cycle, the next 6 relays become the reference relays, and the cycle continues ...
In this description, each of the 72 relays is always subjected to the same power-up and cut-off rate, ie 60 times per second (each 16.66 ms):
- Power on for a duration of 1.3888 ms;
- Followed by a power off time of 11 X 1.3888 = 15.2768 ms.
Therefore, the frequency of use of each relay is only 60 Hz (16.66 ms).
-
Anybody got the relay cards?? If so, can you perform a duty cycle test with the relays so we all know facts. Maximum speed with 50/50%, 10/ 90% and 90/10% pulse width.
Quelqu'un a eu les cartes relais? Si oui, pouvez-vous effectuer un test de cycle de service avec les relais afin que nous connaissions tous les faits. Vitesse maximale avec 50/50%, 10/90% et 90/10% de largeur d'impulsion.
Reply #29: ""Seaad, je suis d'accord avec votre analyse, mais ma déduction est que les relais ne fonctionnent qu'à 60 Hz, ce qui est concevable.""
Reply #29: ""Seaad, I agree with your analysis, but my deduction is that the relays only work at 60 Hz, which is conceivable.""
Reply #29: Thanks MichelM
Merci MichelM
But: It is impossible for those relays to be enabled for as short as 1.34 milliseconds! (with accuracy)
MAIS. Il est impossible que ces relais soient activés pour aussi peu que 1,34 millisecondes! (avec précision)
Regards Arne
-
J'ai procédé à un comptage du nombre d'impulsion sur la scoopshot de pierre voir l'image ci-dessous, et j'ai effectivement 72 impulsions pendant une sinusoïde, sachant qu'une rotation complète a fourni 3 ondes, le nombre d'impulsions nécessaires et donc de 216 impulsions / tour.
pour arrivée à une fréquence de 60hz il faut 20 tours / s, ce qui nécessite le nombre impressionnant de 4320 impulsions par seconde, 60 on, off / s pour chaque relais?
ceci confirme l'analyse de Tinman.
pour aller plus loin j'aimerais que quelqu'un nous donne la durée exacte d'un cycle de 360 °
maintenant je me demande s'il est possible que le fréquence-metre que pierre à utiliser peut
avoir détecter et compter le nombre d'impulsions plutôt que le nombre d'ondes sinusoïdales.
mosha
English
I proceeded to count the number of pulses on Pierre scope shot (image below), and I counted 72 pulses during one sine wave. Knowing that a complete rotation provided 3 sine waves, so the number of pulses is therefore 216 pulses per turn.
To get to 60Hz frequency it takes 20 turns per second, which requires the impressive 4320 pulses per second, 60 on, off per second to each relay?
This confirms Tinman's analysis.
Before going any further it would be nice if someone knows the exact duration of one 360° cycle.
I'm now wondering if it's possible that the frequency meter Pierre used could of detected and counted the number of pulses rather than the number of sine waves?
-
maintenant je me demande s'il est possible que le fréquence-metre que pierre à utiliser peut
avoir détecter et compter le nombre d'impulsions plutôt que le nombre d'ondes sinusoïdales.
Now I'm wondering if it's possible that the frequency meter Pierre used could of detected and counted the number of pulses rather than the number of sine waves?
mosha
Clever idea, Idée brillante
But how to run a Microwave Oven on a too low frequency ?? , Mais comment faire fonctionner un four à micro-ondes sur une fréquence trop basse?
Anyhow I could see that the Coffee mug was turning normally in the second film. (Rotation from a shaded pole motor) , De toute façon je pouvais voir que la tasse de café tournait normalement dans le deuxième film (Rotation à partir d'un moteur à pôle ombré).
You can clearly hear the rhythm from the relays in the first beginning of the second movie. Or at 8 min. 29 sec. first film. It sounds like a multi cylinder engine running on idle.
The frequency is absolutely below 10 Hertz.
I can easily count to four between every second heard from my clock. With 3 magnets virtually rotating that makes about12Hz from the output coil.
Fr: Vous pouvez clairement entendre le rythme des relais dans le premier début du deuxième film. Ou à 8 min. 29 sec. premier film. Cela ressemble à un moteur à plusieurs cylindres fonctionnant au ralenti.
La fréquence est absolument inférieure à 10 Hertz.
Je peux facilement compter jusqu'à quatre entre chaque seconde entendu de mon horloge. Avec 3 aimants tournant virtuellement qui font environ 12Hz de la bobine de sortie
-
cheors
What you see here is a Film frame taken in that moment a switch event takes place.
That's why you see tree (3) LED diodes lit instead of two.
You can also see that the intensity is different from some LEDs depending to the film exposure time.
When 3 leds are lit, always the ("fixed") LED in the middle is brighter.
My opinion.
Regards Arne
You are probably right, may be i am
We need the arduino program to konw the truth
Vous avez probablement raison, Mais c'est peut=être moi.
Il nous faut le programme Arduino pour savoir la vérité.
-
Seaad
quot
"Clever idea, Idée brillante
But how to run a Microwave Oven on a too low frequency ?? , Mais comment faire fonctionner un four à micro-ondes sur une fréquence trop basse?"
FR:je n'en sais rien ,mais je me suis poser la question si c'était possible que le Micro onde aurait une alimentation à convertisseur capable de convertir ce type d'onde .
EN:I do not know, but I wondered if it was possible that the Microwave would have a
converter power supply capable of converting this type of wave.
quot
Fr:" Vous pouvez clairement entendre le rythme des relais dans le premier début du deuxième film. Ou à 8 min. 29 sec. premier film. Cela ressemble à un moteur à plusieurs cylindres fonctionnant au ralenti.
La fréquence est absolument inférieure à 10 Hertz."
FR:la plage des 10hz me semble tout à fait correcte
EN:the beach of 10hz seems to me quite correct
-
MAIS. Il est impossible que ces relais soient activés pour aussi peu que 1,34 millisecondes! (avec précision)
Je vais approfondir mes connaissances avec Arduino pour notre projet, mais je vois que Arduino offre une fonction qui gère le temps en microcecondes, avec une précision allant jusqu'à 3 µs.
Cette fonction est la suivante : delayMicroseconds()
Je pense que c'est celle qu'il faut utiliser.
Voir cette page : http://www.mon-club-elec.fr/pmwiki_reference_arduino/pmwiki.php?n=Main.DelayMicroseconds (http://www.mon-club-elec.fr/pmwiki_reference_arduino/pmwiki.php?n=Main.DelayMicroseconds)
Exemple de code minimaliste qui utilise la méthode :
// Pour notre exemple, nous avons besoin d'une interruption du relais 1340 microsecondes (µs) après sa mise sous tension
// Evidemment, il faudra ajuster en tenant compte de son propre temps de reaction à la fermeture et à l'ouverture
int pinRelay_8 = 8; // utilise la broche numérique n°8
void setup()
{
pinMode(pinRelay_8, OUTPUT); // configure la broche n° 8 en sortie
}
void loop() // boucle tous les 16666 microsecondes correspondant au cycle de fermeture du relais à 60 Hz
// il faut soustraire la pause de 1340 microsecondes de la méthode actionRelay, qui est blocante. Cela fait 16666 - 1340 = 15326 μs
{
actionRelay(pinRelay_8); // appelle la méthode qui ferme le relais pendant 1340 microsecondes
delayMicroseconds(15326); // pause de 15326 microsecondes avant une nouvelle fermeture du relais
}
void actionRelay(int relayNumber)
{
digitalWrite(relayNumber, HIGH); // Fermeture du relais
delayMicroseconds(1340); // pause de 1340 microsecondes
digitalWrite(relayNumber, LOW); // Ouverture du relais
}
English
I will deepen my knowledge with Arduino for our project, but I see that Arduino offers a function that manages time in microconds, with a precision of up to 3 μs.
This function is: delayMicroseconds ()
I think it's the one to use.
See this page: http://www.mon-club-elec.fr/pmwiki_reference_arduino/pmwiki.php?n=Main.DelayMicroseconds
Example of a minimalist code that uses the method:
// For our example, we need a 1340 microsecond (μs) relay interrupt after it is powered up
// Obviously, it will be necessary to adjust taking into account its own reaction time at closing and opening
int pinRelay_8 = 8; // use digital pin n ° 8
void setup ()
{
pinMode (pinRelay_8, OUTPUT); // configure pin 8 output
}
void loop () // loop every 16666 microseconds corresponding to the closing cycle of the 60 Hz relay
// We must subtract the pause of 1340 microseconds from the actionRelay method, which is blocking. This done 16666 - 1340 = 15326 μs
{
actionRelay (pinRelay_8); // call the method that closes the relay for 1340 microseconds
delayMicroseconds (15326); // pause 15326 microseconds before releasing the relay again
}
void actionRelay (int relayNumber)
{
digitalWrite (relayNumber, HIGH); // Closing the relay
delayMicroseconds (1340); // break 1340 microseconds
digitalWrite (relayNumber, LOW); // Opening the relay
}
-
-->ArtMosart, All
Quote: "I do not know, but I wondered if it was possible that the Microwave would have a
converter power supply capable of converting this type of wave."
I can't answer that. No knowledge.
My question is, however: Why does Pierre's Microwave Oven consumes about 1600W? Mine consumes 800W. Different types??
Fr:
Je ne peux pas répondre ça. Pas de connaissances.
Ma question est, cependant: Pourquoi le micro-ondes de Pierre consomme environ 1600W? Le mien consomme environ 800W. Différents types??
Arne
-
Je vais approfondir mes connaissances avec Arduino pour notre projet, mais je vois que Arduino offre une fonction qui gère le temps en microcecondes, avec une précision allant jusqu'à 3 µs.
Cette fonction est la suivante : delayMicroseconds()
Je pense que c'est celle qu'il faut utiliser.
Voir cette page : http://www.mon-club-elec.fr/pmwiki_reference_arduino/pmwiki.php?n=Main.DelayMicroseconds (http://www.mon-club-elec.fr/pmwiki_reference_arduino/pmwiki.php?n=Main.DelayMicroseconds)
I don't understand what you posted until it's translated.
But if you're asking me about Arduino then I'm lost. I don't use it. I'm using mechanical circuits at this time.
Regards Arne
français
Je ne comprends pas ce que vous avez posté jusqu'à ce qu'il soit traduit.
Mais si vous me posez des questions sur Arduino, je suis perdu. Je ne l'utilise pas. J'utilise des circuits mécaniques en ce moment.
Cordialement Arne
-
français
Je ne comprends pas ce que vous avez posté jusqu'à ce qu'il soit traduit.
Mais si vous me posez des questions sur Arduino, je suis perdu. Je ne l'utilise pas. J'utilise des circuits mécaniques en ce moment.
Cordialement Arne
chez GM les micro onde consomme jusqu'à 1000w environ ,les 1600W me parait une estimation baser sur les données prélevées sur le rotor fixe , vue la forme d'onde cela suppose une imprécision de taille .
cependant même à 800W ça reste très performant .
cordialement ,Mosha
at GM the microwave consumes up to 1000w, the 1600W seems to me an estimate based on the data taken from the fixed rotor , given the waveform this assumes a size inaccuracy. however even at 800W it remains very powerful.
-
In the U.S. many commercial microwaves consume about 1500 - 1600 watts.
Garry
français
Aux États-Unis, de nombreux micro-ondes commerciales consomment environ 1500 à 1600 watts.
Garry
-
In the U.S. many commercial microwaves consume about 1500 - 1600 watts.
Garry
français
Aux États-Unis, de nombreux micro-ondes commerciales consomment environ 1500 à 1600 watts.
Garry
Specification example of such an oven.
http://products.geappliances.com/appliance/gea-specs/JES1142SJ (http://products.geappliances.com/appliance/gea-specs/JES1142SJ)
Regards
L192
français
Exemple de spécification d'un tel four.
http://products.geappliances.com/appliance/gea-specs/JES1142SJ (http://products.geappliances.com/appliance/gea-specs/JES1142SJ)
Cordialement
-
all,
je me demande si les moteur universel comme sur l'image ci dessous ne pourrait pas convenir pour ce type d'expérimentation ,il ont l'avantage d'être déjà bobiner comme il est indiquer ,en plus iles sont plus facile à trouver.pratiquement il suffit de piloter le rotor de façon à créer un champ tournant vers les bobine
du stator ,le rotor étant maintenu physiquement fixe .les bobine du stator serviront de sortie .
en plus on trouve facilement des moteur à rotor de 36 poles.
pour ceux qui serais intéresser ,on peut aussi les piloter mécaniquement très facilement .
juste une idée ;)
all, I wonder if the universal motor as in the picture below could not be suitable for this type of experimentation, it have the advantage of being already wound as it is indicated, in addition they are easier to find. it is enough to control the rotor so as to create a field rotating towards the coil of the stator, the rotor being held physically fixed .the stator coil will serve as an output. in addition, it is easy to find 36-pole rotor motors. for those who would be interested, we can also drive mechanically very easily. just an idea
-
As I was falling asleep the other night I was imagining Pierre's DZ generator at works in a semiconscious state.
I saw clearly that choppy sign wave, caused by the low speed relay contacts and everything else seemed to be just fine, like N & S pole orientations.
If you are planning to replicate this generator it might be a good idea use relays at first, and once you achieve similar success like Pierre, then you can switch to solid state devices to replace relays.
Being able to power the coils with IGBT's, Mosfet's or transistors etc. will produce a cleaner sign wave and give you adjustable frequency similar to VFD (Variable Frequency Drives)
The ultimate solution for DZ Generator power supply would be If some one can design a "Multi channel output regenerative VFD"
français
Alors que je m'endormais l'autre soir, j'imaginais le générateur DZ de Pierre à des œuvres dans un état semi-conscient.
J'ai vu clairement que l'onde de signe saccadée, causée par les contacts de relais à basse vitesse et tout le reste semblait être très bien, comme les orientations de pôle N & S.
Si vous envisagez de reproduire ce générateur, il peut être judicieux d'utiliser des relais au début, et une fois que vous avez obtenu un succès similaire à celui de Pierre, vous pouvez passer à des dispositifs à semi-conducteurs pour remplacer les relais.
Etre capable d'alimenter les bobines avec des IGBT, des Mosfet ou des transistors etc. produira une onde de signe plus propre et vous donnera une fréquence ajustable similaire à celle des VFD (Variable Frequency Drives)
La solution ultime pour l'alimentation du générateur DZ serait Si quelqu'un peut concevoir un «VFD régénératif à sortie multicanaux»
-
Update: https://youtu.be/3-HHaPDOWAM
-
--> mosha
Good idea I'm also a fan of to find the "EFFECT".
But maybe You should take that motor idea to the parallel thread instead.
http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video#.Wra2GC7wapo
I suspect that many here wants to replicate Pierres version.
Fr:
Bonne idée je suis aussi fan de trouver "l'EFFET".
Mais peut-être que vous devriez prendre cette idée de moteur au fil parallèle à la place.
http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video#.Wra2GC7wapo
Je soupçonne que beaucoup d'entre nous veulent répliquer la version de Pierres.
Best regards Arne
-
luc
ta réalisation et excellente ,ça fait très plaisir à voir ,bravo.
Mosha
English
your design is excellent, it's a very nice layout, bravo.
-
Update: https://youtu.be/3-HHaPDOWAM (https://youtu.be/3-HHaPDOWAM)
Star generator. Stargen. lol
Man, that looks really good!!!!
français
Générateur d'étoiles. Stargen ;D
ça a l'air vraiment bien mon homme!!!!
-
You can clearly hear the rhythm from the relays in the first beginning of the second movie. Or at 8 min. 29 sec. first film. It sounds like a multi cylinder engine running on idle.
The frequency is absolutely below 10 Hertz.
seaad,
totally agree with that!
I just tested the Arduino program I posted in my # 35.
At this rate, there is no visible blinking of the led. We perceive a constant light.
So, I share your opinion, the meter Pierre used does not measure the frequency of the current, but rather must measure the frequency of the pulses.
If this is the case, the current frequency of his device should be only 5 Hz.
At this frequency, each relay is contacted every 200 ms only.
I just set my program at 5 Hz, and the flashing is identical to that of the leds in Pierre's video.
Français
tout à fait d'accord avec cela !
Je viens de tester le programme Arduino que j'ai posté dans mon # 35.
A ce rythme, il n'y a plus de clignotement perceptible de la led. On perçoit une lumière constante.
Donc, je partage votre avis, le voltmètre de Pierre ne mesure pas la fréquence du courant, mais doit plutôt mesurer la fréquence des impulsions.
Si c'est le cas, la fréquence du courant de son dispositif doit être de 5 Hz seulement.
A cette fréquence, chaque relais n'est sollicité que toutes les 200 ms.
Je viens de régler mon programme à 5 Hz, et le clignotement est identique à celui des leds de Pierre.
-
MichelM
:)
8) 8) 200ms! That gives the short on time to the relays: 200/12 = 16.7 ms.
So the Microwave Oven runs on the "trash" pulses ??
Fr: 200ms! Cela donne un temps court de fonctionnement du relais: 200/12 = 16,7 ms.
Donc, le four micro-ondes fonctionne sur les impulsions "merde" ??
-
To everyone
I have some good news which I've been holding on for some days until we had it tested and confirmed to work.
Forum member Chet made arrangements with slider2732 (member of our group) to write an Arduino switching sequence program for me since I don't know how to do that.
However, Pierre sent me his program he used in his demonstrated device. So I sent the program to slider2732 for testing. He was happy to report it was a much simpler program then he was writing. He loaded it in his Mega 2560 and the program worked right away.
He even made a demo video to show it working: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPZn3CcdVVc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPZn3CcdVVc)
Pierre requested I share the program with serious builders only. This will be your gift from Pierre once you get to the point of needing it.
So please stop trying to figure out how the Mega 2560 Arduino will work since we have already confirmed it works.
If you want to receive the program, then you have to build it to the point that only the program is needed. Once I see your video demo to confirm you are ready then I will send you the program.
Please don't ask for it otherwise. I am only following Pierre's request.
Regards
Luc
français
À tout le monde
J'ai quelques bonnes nouvelles que j'ai tenues pendant quelques jours jusqu'à ce que nous l'ayons testé et confirmé fonctionnel.
Le membre du forum Chet a fait des arrangements avec slider2732 (membre de notre groupe) pour écrire un programme de séquence de commutation Arduino pour moi car je ne sais pas comment faire.
Cependant, Pierre m'a envoyé son programme qu'il a utilisé dans son appareil démontré. J'ai donc envoyé le programme à slider2732 pour le tester. Il était heureux de rapporter que c'était un programme beaucoup plus simple qu'il essayait d'écrire. Il a chargé le programme dans son Mega 2560 et sa fonctionné tout de suite.
Il a même fait une vidéo de démonstration pour le montrer fonctionner: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPZn3CcdVVc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPZn3CcdVVc)
Pierre a demandé que je partage le programme avec des constructeurs sérieux seulement. Ce sera votre cadeau de Pierre une fois que vous en aurez besoin.
Alors s'il vous plaît arrêter d'essayer de comprendre comment le Mega 2560 Arduino va fonctionner puisque nous avons déjà confirmé que cela fonctionne.
Si vous voulez recevoir le programme, vous devez construire au point que seul le programme est nécessaire. Une fois que je vois votre vidéo démo pour confirmer que vous êtes prêt, je vous enverrai le programme.
S'il vous plaît ne le demandez pas autrement. Je ne fais que suivre la demande de Pierre.
Cordialement
Luc
-
To everyone
I have some good news which I've been holding on for some days until we had it tested and confirmed to work.
Forum member Chet made arrangements with slider2732 (member of our group) to write an Arduino switching sequence program for me since I don't know how to do that.
However, Pierre sent me his program he used in his demonstrated device. So I sent the program to slider2732 for testing. He was happy to report it was a much simpler program then he was writing. He loaded it and the program worked right away.
He even made a demo video to show it working: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPZn3CcdVVc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPZn3CcdVVc)
Pierre requested I share the program with serious builders only. This will be your gift from Pierre once you get to the point of needing it.
So please stop trying to figure out how the Mega 2560 Arduino will work since we have already confirmed it works.
If you want to receive the program, then you have to build it to the point that only the program is needed. Once I see your video demo to confirm you are ready then I will send you the program.
Please don't ask for it otherwise. I am only following Pierre's request.
Regards
Luc
français
À tout le monde
J'ai quelques bonnes nouvelles que j'ai tenues pendant quelques jours jusqu'à ce que nous l'ayons testé et confirmé fonctionnel.
Le membre du forum Chet a fait des arrangements avec slider2732 (membre de notre groupe) pour écrire un programme de séquence de commutation Arduino pour moi car je ne sais pas comment faire.
Cependant, Pierre m'a envoyé son programme qu'il a utilisé dans son appareil démontré. J'ai donc envoyé le programme à slider2732 pour le tester. Il était heureux de rapporter que c'était un programme beaucoup plus simple qu'il écrivait. Il l'a chargé et le programme a fonctionné tout de suite.
Il a même fait une vidéo de démonstration pour le montrer fonctionner: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPZn3CcdVVc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPZn3CcdVVc)
Pierre a demandé que je partage le programme avec des constructeurs sérieux seulement. Ce sera votre cadeau de Pierre une fois que vous en aurez besoin.
Alors s'il vous plaît arrêter d'essayer de comprendre comment le Mega 2560 Arduino va fonctionner puisque nous avons déjà confirmé que cela fonctionne.
Si vous voulez recevoir le programme, vous devez le construire au point que seul le programme est nécessaire. Une fois que je vois votre démo vidéo pour confirmer que vous êtes prêt, je vous enverrai le programme.
S'il vous plaît ne le demandez pas autrement. Je ne fais que suivre la demande de Pierre.
Cordialement
Luc
Luc,
Wow Pierre is truly a noble man.
français
Wow Pierre est vraiment un homme noble.
-
Pierre just posted a video of his code: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TACAVCU2fIY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TACAVCU2fIY)
Looks like his potentiometer value is mapped to a range from x=1 to 10ms. He sets three outputs high at a time and then issues a delay(x) and then turns the next three coils on, delay(x), turn the first three coils off, etc.
Each relay stays on for 3*x ms, then remains off for 33*x ms. Switching 12 succeeding relays in sequence takes 36*x ms. His program describes one cycle (of the three per full rotation), then repeats.
loop {
1 on 13 on 25 on
delay(x)
(bug, see below: bold lines below should actually go here)
2 on 14 on 26 on
delay(x)
1 off 13 off 25 off
delay(x)
3 on 15 on 27 on
delay(x)
2 off 14 off 26 off
delay(x)
etc..
delay(x)
12 on 24 on 36 on
delay(x)
11 off 23 off 35 off
delay(x)
12 off 24 off 36 off
delay (x)
}
I do note he might have a bug in his code wrapping the loop: this last line should have been positioned after the very first two lines :
1 on 13 on 25 on
delay(x)
12 off 24 off 36 off
delay (x)
2 on 14 on 26 on
delay(x)
But hey, maybe this is what causes overunity ;) (just kidding).
PmgR
français
Pierre vient de poster une vidéo de son code: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TACAVCU2fIY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TACAVCU2fIY)
On dirait que sa valeur de potentiomètre est mappée sur une plage de x = 1 à 10ms. Il règle trois sorties à la fois, puis émet un retard (x), puis active les trois bobines suivantes, retarde (x), éteint les trois premières bobines, etc.
Chaque relais reste allumé pendant 3 * x ms, puis reste éteint pendant 33 * x ms. La commutation de 12 relais successifs en séquence prend 36 * x ms. Son programme décrit un cycle (des trois par rotation complète), puis répète.
(bug, voir ci-dessous: les lignes en gras ci-dessous devraient effectivement aller ici)
Je note qu'il pourrait avoir un bug dans son code qui encapsule la boucle: cette dernière ligne aurait dû être positionnée après les deux premières lignes:
Mais bon, c'est peut-être ce qui cause la surunité ;) (je plaisante).
-
More news
I just checked with Pierre to see if the program can now go public and he replied YES! so here it is.
français
Plus de nouvelles
Je viens de vérifier avec Pierre pour voir si le programme peut maintenant être rendu public et il a répondu OUI! donc c'est ici.
/*
Blink This example code is in the public domain.
modified 8 May 2014
by Scott Fitzgerald
*/
// the setup function runs once when you press reset or power the board
void setup() {
// initialize digital pin 13 as an output.
pinMode(1, OUTPUT);
pinMode(2, OUTPUT);
pinMode(3, OUTPUT);
pinMode(4, OUTPUT);
pinMode(5, OUTPUT);
pinMode(6, OUTPUT);
pinMode(7,OUTPUT);
pinMode(8, OUTPUT);
pinMode(9, OUTPUT);
pinMode(10, OUTPUT);
pinMode(11, OUTPUT);
pinMode(12, OUTPUT);
pinMode(13, OUTPUT);
pinMode(14,OUTPUT);
pinMode(15, OUTPUT);
pinMode(16, OUTPUT);
pinMode(17, OUTPUT);
pinMode(18, OUTPUT);
pinMode(19, OUTPUT);
pinMode(20, OUTPUT);
pinMode(21, OUTPUT);
pinMode(22, OUTPUT);
pinMode(23,OUTPUT);
pinMode(24, OUTPUT);
pinMode(25, OUTPUT);
pinMode(26, OUTPUT);
pinMode(27, OUTPUT);
pinMode(28, OUTPUT);
pinMode(29, OUTPUT);
pinMode(30,OUTPUT);
pinMode(31, OUTPUT);
pinMode(32, OUTPUT);
pinMode(33, OUTPUT);
pinMode(34, OUTPUT);
pinMode(35,OUTPUT);
pinMode(36, OUTPUT);
pinMode(37, OUTPUT);
}
int x = 0;
// the loop function runs over and over again forever
void loop(){
int y= analogRead(0); // transforme x en une valeur de 0 à 20 (millisecondes)
x= map(y,0,1000 ,1,100);
digitalWrite(1,HIGH), digitalWrite(13,HIGH), digitalWrite(25,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(2,HIGH), digitalWrite(14,HIGH), digitalWrite(26,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(1,LOW), digitalWrite(13,LOW), digitalWrite(25,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(3,HIGH), digitalWrite(15,HIGH), digitalWrite(27,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(2,LOW), digitalWrite(14,LOW), digitalWrite(26,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(4,HIGH), digitalWrite(16,HIGH), digitalWrite(28,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(3,LOW), digitalWrite(15,LOW), digitalWrite(27,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(5,HIGH), digitalWrite(17,HIGH), digitalWrite(29,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(4,LOW), digitalWrite(16,LOW), digitalWrite(28,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(6,HIGH), digitalWrite(18,HIGH), digitalWrite(30,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(5,LOW), digitalWrite(17,LOW), digitalWrite(29,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(7,HIGH), digitalWrite(19,HIGH), digitalWrite(31,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(6,LOW), digitalWrite(18,LOW), digitalWrite(30,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(8,HIGH), digitalWrite(20,HIGH), digitalWrite(32,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(7,LOW), digitalWrite(19,LOW), digitalWrite(31,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(9,HIGH), digitalWrite(21,HIGH), digitalWrite(33,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(8,LOW), digitalWrite(20,LOW), digitalWrite(32,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(10,HIGH), digitalWrite(22,HIGH), digitalWrite(34,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(9,LOW), digitalWrite(21,LOW), digitalWrite(33,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(11,HIGH), digitalWrite(23,HIGH), digitalWrite(35,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(10,LOW), digitalWrite(22,LOW), digitalWrite(34,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(12,HIGH), digitalWrite(24,HIGH), digitalWrite(36,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(11,LOW), digitalWrite(23,LOW), digitalWrite(35,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(12,LOW), digitalWrite(24,LOW), digitalWrite(36,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
}
-
seaad,
totally agree with that!
I just tested the Arduino program I posted in my # 35.
At this rate, there is no visible blinking of the led. We perceive a constant light.
So, I share your opinion, the meter Pierre used does not measure the frequency of the current, but rather must measure the frequency of the pulses.
If this is the case, the current frequency of his device should be only 5 Hz.
At this frequency, each relay is contacted every 200 ms only.
I just set my program at 5 Hz, and the flashing is identical to that of the leds in Pierre's video.
Français
tout à fait d'accord avec cela !
Je viens de tester le programme Arduino que j'ai posté dans mon # 35.
A ce rythme, il n'y a plus de clignotement perceptible de la led. On perçoit une lumière constante.
Donc, je partage votre avis, le voltmètre de Pierre ne mesure pas la fréquence du courant, mais doit plutôt mesurer la fréquence des impulsions.
Si c'est le cas, la fréquence du courant de son dispositif doit être de 5 Hz seulement.
A cette fréquence, chaque relais n'est sollicité que toutes les 200 ms.
Je viens de régler mon programme à 5 Hz, et le clignotement est identique à celui des leds de Pierre.
Nice find. I wondered about that also. If the actual freq of the led run were 60 hz we wouldnt see it as we 'see' it. Im following a bit but have so much other stuff going on that I cant think deeply on this at the moment. I hope it all works out for everyone. ;)
Not sure why it wouldnt be allowed for all to see and have, but Id like to see the arduino sketch. Not a lot of people do arduino programing and if it were available, others that are proficient with the programing may have an opportunity to possibly enhance or make mods in the future as this project develops, once they have a clear understanding of the original sunk in.
Mags
français
Belle trouvaille. Je me demandais à ce sujet aussi. Si la fréquence réelle de la led était de 60 hz nous ne le verrions pas comme nous le «voyons». Je suis en train de suivre un peu mais j'ai tellement d'autres choses que je ne peux pas vraiment y penser en ce moment. J'espère que tout fonctionne pour tout le monde. ;)
Je ne sais pas pourquoi il ne serait pas permis à tous de voir et d'avoir, mais j'aime voir le croquis arduino. Peu de gens font de la programmation en Arduino et si elle était disponible, d'autres qui maîtrisent la programmation pourraient avoir l'opportunité d'améliorer ou de faire des mods à l'avenir au fur et à mesure que ce projet se développera, une fois qu'ils auront compris.
-
In MichelM s film https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8moN-nDHvzU&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8moN-nDHvzU&feature=youtu.be)
he shows how one energized (interleaved) coil is shorted for a short while in each
step. Because the windings is interleaved in neighbor slots we probably also can expect
some transformer effect.
Is it this short shortcut that makes the magnetic field seems to be "flowing" seen from the output coils view ??
Fr:
Dans le film de MichelM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8moN-nDHvzU&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8moN-nDHvzU&feature=youtu.be)
il montre comment une bobine excitée (entrelacée) est court-circuitée pendant un court moment dans chaque
étape. Parce que les enroulements sont entrelacés dans des fentes voisinne, nous pouvons également nous attendre
un effet de transformateur.
Est-ce ce court-circuit qui fait que le champ magnétique semble "coulent" vu de la bobines de sortie?
Arne
PS: even Figuera talks in his patent about "and always in contact with more than one
contact, rotates a brush “O" "
-
The code's author.... Fr. L'auteur du code ....
https://bastiaanvanhengel.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/arduino_projects_book.pdf (https://bastiaanvanhengel.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/arduino_projects_book.pdf)
-
Am glad Pierre has posted the code...that's the right way forward and a good honest gesture :D
Btw, my own version of the code is in the other thread, a few pages back. It was likely missed because, being a new member, the post was held back for moderator approval and the thread was moving quickly.
But now that the real code is available, excellent !
Oh, have just seen Stargate's post above.
It seems that Pierre has based it on the Blink sketch, a simple method to flash an LED on and off and the usual first program that people will upload to their Arduino. Scott Fitzgerald being the author of that famous sketch and Pierre has left a nod in an appreciative direction to that author for the start point of his own program.
Really, it's a big extraction of that sketch (Arduino language for program code), with the output pins all being listed and then the individual switchings on and off of the LEDs themselves. He also has a section that runs every loop, that sees where a variable pot is positioned, to change the speed of running if needed.
français
Je suis content que Pierre ait posté le code ... c'est la bonne voie à suivre et un bon geste honnête :D
Ma propre version du code est dans l'autre sujet, quelques pages en arrière. Il a probablement été manqué parce que, étant un nouveau membre, le poste a été retenu pour l'approbation du modérateur et le sujet se déplaçait rapidement. Mais maintenant que le vrai code est disponible, excellent!
Oh, viens de voir le post de Stargate ci-dessus. Il semble que Pierre l'ait basé sur le croquis de Blink, une méthode simple pour allumer et éteindre une LED et le premier programme habituel que les gens vont télécharger sur leur Arduino. Scott Fitzgerald étant l'auteur de ce célèbre sketch et Pierre a laissé un signe de tête dans une direction appréciative à cet auteur pour le point de départ de son propre programme. Vraiment, c'est une grande extraction de cette esquisse (langage Arduino pour le code de programme), avec les broches de sortie qui sont toutes listées, puis les commutations individuelles des LED elles-mêmes. Il a également une section qui exécute chaque boucle, qui voit où un pot variable est positionné, pour changer la vitesse de course si nécessaire.
-
That's right, there is nothing remarkable in that sketch, it does essentially exactly the same thing that Slider's sketches do.
BUT... there seems to be something special about the timing. Is this an error or is it deliberate?
The sketch basically switches 12 groups of 3 LEDs on and off in overlapping sequence. There is a timing interval between each group On or Off command.
Group 1 is turned ON, TWO timing intervals pass, Group 1 is turned OFF.
Group 2 is turned ON... THREE timing intervals pass, group 2 is turned OFF.
Group 3 is turned ON... THREE intervals pass, Group 3 is turned OFF.
Group 4 is turned ON... THREE intervals pass, Group 4 is turned OFF.
Group 5 is turned ON... THREE intervals pass, Group 5 is turned OFF.
Group 6 is turned ON... THREE intervals pass, Group 6 is turned OFF.
and so on until...
Group 12 is turned ON... TWO intervals pass, Group 12 is turned OFF.
So Groups 1 and 12 are only on for TWO timing intervals, the other 10 groups are on for THREE timing intervals.
Is this deliberate? Did I miscount?
français
C'est vrai, il n'y a rien de remarquable dans ce croquis, il fait essentiellement exactement la même chose que les croquis de Slider.
MAIS ... il semble y avoir quelque chose de spécial à propos du timing. Est-ce une erreur ou est-ce délibéré?
Le croquis bascule 12 groupes de 3 LED allumés et éteints dans une séquence de chevauchement. Il y a un intervalle de temps entre chaque commande On ou Off du groupe.
Le groupe 1 est activé, DEUX intervalles de synchronisation passent, le groupe 1 est désactivé.
Le groupe 2 est activé ... TROIS intervalles de synchronisation passent, le groupe 2 est désactivé.
Le groupe 3 est activé ... TROIS intervalles passent, le groupe 3 est désactivé.
Le groupe 4 est allumé ... Trois intervalles passent, le groupe 4 est désactivé.
Le groupe 5 est activé ... TROIS intervalles passent, le groupe 5 est désactivé.
Le groupe 6 est allumé ... Trois intervalles passent, le groupe 6 est désactivé.
et ainsi de suite jusqu'à ...
Le groupe 12 est activé ... DEUX intervalles passent, le groupe 12 est désactivé.
Ainsi, les groupes 1 et 12 ne sont activés que pour DEUX intervalles de temps, les 10 autres groupes sont activés pour TROIS intervalles de temps.
Est-ce délibéré? Ai-je mal compté?
-
Here's Pierre's sketch altered for Luc's 30-slot stator. I followed the original pattern but with 10 instead of 12 pins between each group member.
Please check my work!
Now we have 10 groups of 3 output pins, in overlapping sequence.
I've preserved the odd timing of the original (groups 1 and 10 only on for 2 timing intervals instead of 3.)
I also compressed the pin declarations into a for loop and changed some variable names and comments to make it clearer.
français
Voici le croquis de Pierre modifiée pour le stator à 30 emplacements de Luc. J'ai suivi le modèle original mais avec 10 broches au lieu de 12 entre chaque membre du groupe.
S'il vous plaît vérifier mon travail!
Maintenant, nous avons 10 groupes de 3 broches de sortie, en séquence de chevauchement.
J'ai conservé le timing étrange de l'original (groupes 1 et 10 seulement sur 2 intervalles de temps au lieu de 3.)
J'ai également compressé les déclarations de broche dans une boucle for et changé quelques noms de variables et commentaires pour le rendre plus clair.
/*
Pierre's Original Sketch
Modded by TK 24 Mar 2018
altered for 30-slot stator (gotoluc)
Speed control pot: connect wiper to Analog 0, legs of pot to +5v and GND
*/
int stepspeed = 0, rawspeed = 0;
void setup() {
// initialize all needed digital pins as OUTPUT
int pin = 1;
for (pin = 1; pin <= 31; pin ++)
pinMode(pin, OUTPUT);
pinMode(A0, INPUT);
}
void loop() {
rawspeed = analogRead(0); // read speedpot on Analog Pin 0
stepspeed = map(rawspeed,0,1023,1,100); //transforme rawspeed en une valeur de 0 à 100 (millisecondes)
digitalWrite(1,HIGH), digitalWrite(11,HIGH), digitalWrite(21,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(stepspeed); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
digitalWrite(2,HIGH), digitalWrite(12,HIGH), digitalWrite(22,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(stepspeed); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
digitalWrite(1,LOW), digitalWrite(11,LOW), digitalWrite(21,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(stepspeed); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
digitalWrite(3,HIGH), digitalWrite(13,HIGH), digitalWrite(23,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(stepspeed); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
digitalWrite(2,LOW), digitalWrite(12,LOW), digitalWrite(22,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(stepspeed); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
digitalWrite(4,HIGH), digitalWrite(14,HIGH), digitalWrite(24,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(stepspeed); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
digitalWrite(3,LOW), digitalWrite(13,LOW), digitalWrite(23,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(stepspeed); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
digitalWrite(5,HIGH), digitalWrite(15,HIGH), digitalWrite(25,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(stepspeed); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
digitalWrite(4,LOW), digitalWrite(14,LOW), digitalWrite(24,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(stepspeed); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
digitalWrite(6,HIGH), digitalWrite(16,HIGH), digitalWrite(26,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(stepspeed); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
digitalWrite(5,LOW), digitalWrite(15,LOW), digitalWrite(25,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(stepspeed); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
digitalWrite(7,HIGH), digitalWrite(17,HIGH), digitalWrite(27,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(stepspeed); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
digitalWrite(6,LOW), digitalWrite(16,LOW), digitalWrite(26,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(stepspeed); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
digitalWrite(8,HIGH), digitalWrite(18,HIGH), digitalWrite(28,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(stepspeed); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
digitalWrite(7,LOW), digitalWrite(17,LOW), digitalWrite(27,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(stepspeed); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
digitalWrite(9,HIGH), digitalWrite(19,HIGH), digitalWrite(29,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(stepspeed); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
digitalWrite(8,LOW), digitalWrite(18,LOW), digitalWrite(28,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(stepspeed); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
digitalWrite(10,HIGH), digitalWrite(20,HIGH), digitalWrite(30,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(stepspeed); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
digitalWrite(9,LOW), digitalWrite(19,LOW), digitalWrite(29,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(stepspeed); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
// digitalWrite(11,HIGH), digitalWrite(21,HIGH), digitalWrite(31,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
// delay(stepspeed); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
digitalWrite(10,LOW), digitalWrite(20,LOW), digitalWrite(30,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(stepspeed); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
}
-
It would be nice if Stefan could enable the
"code" BBCode tag.....
fr. Ce serait bien si Stefan pouvait activer le "code" BBCode tag.....
-
BUT... there seems to be something special about the timing. Is this an error or is it deliberate?
The sketch basically switches 12 groups of 3 LEDs on and off in overlapping sequence. There is a timing interval between each group On or Off command.
Group 1 is turned ON, TWO timing intervals pass, Group 1 is turned OFF.
Group 2 is turned ON... THREE timing intervals pass, group 2 is turned OFF.
Group 3 is turned ON... THREE intervals pass, Group 3 is turned OFF.
Group 4 is turned ON... THREE intervals pass, Group 4 is turned OFF.
Group 5 is turned ON... THREE intervals pass, Group 5 is turned OFF.
Group 6 is turned ON... THREE intervals pass, Group 6 is turned OFF.
and so on until...
Group 12 is turned ON... TWO intervals pass, Group 12 is turned OFF.
So Groups 1 and 12 are only on for TWO timing intervals, the other 10 groups are on for THREE timing intervals.
Is this deliberate? Did I miscount?
fr.
MAIS ... il semble y avoir quelque chose de spécial à propos du timing. Est-ce une erreur ou est-ce délibéré?
Le croquis bascule 12 groupes de 3 LED allumés et éteints dans une séquence de chevauchement. Il y a un intervalle de temps entre chaque commande On ou Off du groupe.
Le groupe 1 est activé, DEUX intervalles de synchronisation passent, le groupe 1 est désactivé.
Le groupe 2 est activé ... TROIS intervalles de synchronisation passent, le groupe 2 est désactivé.
Le groupe 3 est activé ... TROIS intervalles passent, le groupe 3 est désactivé.
Le groupe 4 est allumé ... Trois intervalles passent, le groupe 4 est désactivé.
Le groupe 5 est activé ... TROIS intervalles passent, le groupe 5 est désactivé.
Le groupe 6 est allumé ... Trois intervalles passent, le groupe 6 est désactivé.
et ainsi de suite jusqu'à ...
Le groupe 12 est activé ... DEUX intervalles passent, le groupe 12 est désactivé.
Ainsi, les groupes 1 et 12 ne sont activés que pour DEUX intervalles de temps, les 10 autres groupes sont activés pour TROIS intervalles de temps.
Est-ce délibéré? Ai-je mal compté?
You didn't miscount. That is what I noticed as well and mentioned in my earlier post. I think it is just a "bug". Those last lines should have been inserted at the start, see my previous post #51.
PmgR
fr. Vous n'avez pas mal calculé. C'est ce que j'ai remarqué et mentionné dans mon poste précédent. Je pense que c'est juste un "bug". Ces dernières lignes auraient dû être insérées au début, voir mon poste # 51.
-
Just a quick note about your changes TK.
The curled brackets are missing in the pins loop.
So it should read:
for (pin = 1; pin <= 31; pin ++)
{ pinMode(pin, OUTPUT); }
fr. Juste une petite note sur vos changements TK.
Les accolades manques dans la boucle des broches.
Donc, il devrait lire:
for (pin = 1; pin <= 31; pin ++)
{ pinMode(pin, OUTPUT); }
-
Ya, thanks, you are right the curly brackets should be used even if there is only a single statement in the for loop.
At any rate... here is the sketch modified for Luc's 30 slot stator, with the timing "bug-error-OUSecret" corrected so
that there is a smooth flow around the outputs. I think.
fr. Oui merci, vous avez raison, les accolades doivent être utilisées même s'il n'y a qu'une seule instruction dans la boucle for.
En tout cas ... voici l'esquisse modifiée pour le stator à 30 slots de Luc, avec le timing "bug-error-OUSecret" corrigé donc
qu'il y a un flux fluide autour des sorties. Je pense.
/************************************************
Pierre's Original Sketch
Modded by TK 24 Mar 2018
altered for 30-slot stator (gotoluc)
TKTest Version using pins 2-11,12-21,22-31
************************************************/
// int stepspeed = 0, rawspeed = 0; // not used
void setup() {
// initialize all needed digital pins as OUTPUT, plus a couple extras
int pin = 1;
for (pin = 1; pin <= 33; pin ++) {
pinMode(pin, OUTPUT);
}
pinMode(A0, INPUT); // speed potentiometer wiper pin
}
void loop() {
// rawspeed = analogRead(0); // read speedpot on Analog Pin 0
// stepspeed = map(rawspeed,0,1023,1,200); //transforme rawspeed en une valeur de 0 à 200 (millisecondes)
//
// (better to read pot after each switch command for real-time speed control, as below)
digitalWrite(11,LOW), digitalWrite(21,LOW), digitalWrite(31,LOW); // turn the LED off
delay(map(analogRead(0),0,1023,1,200)); // wait for stepspeed value in milliseconds
digitalWrite(3,HIGH), digitalWrite(13,HIGH), digitalWrite(23,HIGH); // turn the LED on
delay(map(analogRead(0),0,1023,1,200)); // wait
digitalWrite(2,LOW), digitalWrite(12,LOW), digitalWrite(22,LOW); // turn the LED off
delay(map(analogRead(0),0,1023,1,200)); // wait
digitalWrite(4,HIGH), digitalWrite(14,HIGH), digitalWrite(24,HIGH); // turn the LED on
delay(map(analogRead(0),0,1023,1,200)); // wait
digitalWrite(3,LOW), digitalWrite(13,LOW), digitalWrite(23,LOW); // turn the LED off
delay(map(analogRead(0),0,1023,1,200)); // wait
digitalWrite(5,HIGH), digitalWrite(15,HIGH), digitalWrite(25,HIGH); // turn the LED on
delay(map(analogRead(0),0,1023,1,200)); // wait
digitalWrite(4,LOW), digitalWrite(14,LOW), digitalWrite(24,LOW); // turn the LED off
delay(map(analogRead(0),0,1023,1,200)); // wait
digitalWrite(6,HIGH), digitalWrite(16,HIGH), digitalWrite(26,HIGH); // turn the LED on
delay(map(analogRead(0),0,1023,1,200)); // wait
digitalWrite(5,LOW), digitalWrite(15,LOW), digitalWrite(25,LOW); // turn the LED off
delay(map(analogRead(0),0,1023,1,200)); // wait
digitalWrite(7,HIGH), digitalWrite(17,HIGH), digitalWrite(27,HIGH); // turn the LED on
delay(map(analogRead(0),0,1023,1,200)); // wait
digitalWrite(6,LOW), digitalWrite(16,LOW), digitalWrite(26,LOW); // turn the LED off
delay(map(analogRead(0),0,1023,1,200)); // wait
digitalWrite(8,HIGH), digitalWrite(18,HIGH), digitalWrite(28,HIGH); // turn the LED on
delay(map(analogRead(0),0,1023,1,200)); // wait
digitalWrite(7,LOW), digitalWrite(17,LOW), digitalWrite(27,LOW); // turn the LED off
delay(map(analogRead(0),0,1023,1,200)); // wait
digitalWrite(9,HIGH), digitalWrite(19,HIGH), digitalWrite(29,HIGH); // turn the LED on
delay(map(analogRead(0),0,1023,1,200)); // wait
digitalWrite(8,LOW), digitalWrite(18,LOW), digitalWrite(28,LOW); // turn the LED off
delay(map(analogRead(0),0,1023,1,200)); // wait
digitalWrite(10,HIGH), digitalWrite(20,HIGH), digitalWrite(30,HIGH); // turn the LED on
delay(map(analogRead(0),0,1023,1,200)); // wait
digitalWrite(9,LOW), digitalWrite(19,LOW), digitalWrite(29,LOW); // turn the LED off
delay(map(analogRead(0),0,1023,1,200)); // wait
digitalWrite(11,HIGH), digitalWrite(21,HIGH), digitalWrite(31,HIGH); // turn the LED on
delay(map(analogRead(0),0,1023,1,200)); // wait
digitalWrite(10,LOW), digitalWrite(20,LOW), digitalWrite(30,LOW); // turn the LED off
delay(map(analogRead(0),0,1023,1,200)); // wait
digitalWrite(2,HIGH), digitalWrite(12,HIGH), digitalWrite(22,HIGH); // turn the LED on
delay(map(analogRead(0),0,1023,1,200)); // wait
}
-
That's very kind of you TK. Thanks for helping out :)
Luc
fr. C'est très gentil de votre part TK. Merci de votre aide.
-
Hi everyone, does any one knows to what happened to Pierre's You Tube channel? Looks like it's shut down.
Fr: Salut tout le monde, est-ce que quelqu'un sait ce qui est arrivé aux canal You Tube de Pierre? On dirait que c'est fermé.
-
J'ai reçu un très mauvais message de Pierre :
c'est seulement pour faire tourner le champ magnétique vous n'obtiendrai pas beaucoup voltage avec cela il y a autre chose que je garde secret c'est comme un moteur qui n'as pas de piston il ne démarras pas c'est la même chose pour le dz générateur l'important n'est pas ce que l'on voit mais plutôt ce que l'on ne voit pas j'ai vue trop de gens qui veulent prendre le mérite a ma place alors ma contribution va s'arrêter ici maintenant il vous feras découvrir le reste par vous même et je peut vous dire que ce n'est pas gagné il m'as fallu près de 2 ans pour trouver la solution la rotation n'est qu'un aspect du dz c'est vraiment plus complique que cela au moins les gens vont pouvoir apprendre a faire tourner un champ magnétique mais ça va s'arrêter la ils n'obtiendront pas les résultat que j'ai eu ,il me reste encore des problème a régler mais je pense tout régler ses problèmes avec le deuxième prototype qui est en fabrication j'en ai pour plusieurs mois il me faut tout recommencer du début nouveau circuit nouvelle bobine plus puissante et une toute nouvelle programmation qui s'annonce assez complique a séquencer alors je vous souhaite la meilleur des chance pour la suite et méfier vous de ceux qui tente de garder les information pour eu il veulent tout les renseignement pour eux et ne dévoile rien au autre je me demande bien pourquoi humm, quand j'aurai fait une demande de brevet je pourrai vous montrez la suite du dz générateur version 2 mais pas avant merci .
I received a very bad message from Pierre:
it only rotates a magnetic field, you will not get much voltage with it as there's something else I kept secret. It's like an engine with no pistons, it won't start. It's the same thing for the dz generator, the important thing is not what we see but rather what you don't see. I have seen too many people who want to take credit in my place. So my contribution stops here. You'll have to discover the rest on your own. I can tell you it's not easy to achieve, it took me nearly 2 years to find the solution as rotation is only one aspect of the dz, it's really more complicated than that. At least people will be able to learn how to rotate a magnetic field but it will stop there, they won't get the result I have. I even still have issues to fix but I think I can solve everything with my second prototype that's presently being built and will take several months. It all need to be started from the beginning, new circuit, new more powerful coils and a new sequence program that looks to be complicated. So I wish you the best of luck with the continuation and beware of those who try to keep the information for themselves and don't reveal anything else. I wonder why, humm
When I've applied for a patent I can show you the rest of the version 2 dz generator but not before. Thank you.
-
Is this translation automated or exact ?
Edit: No, it was a automated translation. I have now translated it to be exact and updated it above. Luc
-
Just some evil words;
Everytime I hear that type of background music on YouTube together with film showing some (suspect) free energy experiment something bogus is going on. 8) 8) 8)
If I had succeeded with an OU experiment and I wanted to show that on YouTube I would never ever add background music to that. :'(
fr.
Juste quelques mots mauvais;
Chaque fois que j'entends ce type de musique de fond sur YouTube avec un film montrant une expérience d'énergie libre (suspecte), il se passe quelque chose de faux.
Si j'avais réussi avec une expérience OU et que je voulais montrer cela sur YouTube, je n'y ajouterais jamais de musique de fond.
But I'm still going to experiment with this kind of unit more or less the Figuera Style so maybe I'm going to post some thing here in the future or in the parallel thread to this.
The best test result I got from this type of unit was 13% output power compared with the hundred percent input power.
Regards / Arne
fr.
Mais je vais encore expérimenter avec ce dispositif, plus ou moins le style Figuera alors peut-être que je vais poster quelque chose ici dans le futur ou dans le sujet parallèle à cela.
Le meilleur résultat de test que j'ai obtenu avec ce type d'unité était une puissance de sortie de 13% par rapport à la puissance d'entrée de cent pour cent.
Cordialement
-
seaad
Well it could be real, I believe it's real. IMHO it's better if Pierre would patent it (less evil I would say), then somebody who just replicated his discovery recently (yeah they are lurking here).
fr.
seaad
Eh bien, ça pourrait être réel, je crois que c'est réel. À mon avis, il vaut mieux que Pierre brevete (moins de mal je dirais), que quelqu'un reproduit sa découverte récemment (oui, ils se cachent ici).
-
Thanks forest
Hope is the last thing that abandons man!
Keep on trying. ;) ;)
Thanks luc and others
B Regards Arne
fr.
Merci forêt
L'espoir est la dernière chose qui abandonne l'homme!
Continuer à essayer.
Merci Luc et les autres
B Cordialement Arne
-
Hi, my two cents on the arduino code.
Using the delay function is not always a good option because the Arduino actually stops everything while in "delay".
You might want to use the millis() command and or a timer library.
fr.
Salut, mes deux cents sur le code arduino.
L'utilisation de la fonction de délai n'est pas toujours une bonne option, car l'Arduino arrête réellement tout en "retard".
Vous pouvez utiliser la commande millis () et / ou une bibliothèque de minuterie.
-
I just did a simple search and look how we are walking in circle around the topic being closer and closer to the solution each year.
Just one example here:
http://overunity.com/6774/tesla-patent-382282-and-all-related-to-his-transformersconverters/msg160918/#msg160918 (http://overunity.com/6774/tesla-patent-382282-and-all-related-to-his-transformersconverters/msg160918/#msg160918)
The big problem is that no scientific labs are interested in investigating such concepts which can dump the profits of corporations and governments .
fr.
J'ai juste fait une recherche simple et regarde comment nous marchons en cercle autour du sujet étant de plus en plus proche de la solution chaque année.
Juste un exemple ici:
http://overunity.com/6774/tesla-patent-382282-and-all-related-to-his-transformersconverters/msg160918/#msg160918 (http://overunity.com/6774/tesla-patent-382282-and-all-related-to-his-transformersconverters/msg160918/#msg160918)
Le gros problème est qu'aucun laboratoire scientifique n'est intéressé à enquêter sur de tels concepts qui peuvent vider les bénéfices des entreprises et des gouvernements.
-
I notice that with L298n it needs 3 outputs (pin) for 1 coil.
1.right (forward)
2.stop
3.left (back)
It's too much for the MEGA 2560.
It can use two more MEGA 2560 and control the other in the program.
or group coils 3 together then we will need 36 pins.
3 coils switched together at once.
fr.
Je remarque qu'avec L298n il faut 3 sorties (broche) pour 1 bobine.
1. droit (avant)
2.stop
3.left (arrière)
C'est trop pour le MEGA 2560.
Il peut utiliser deux autres MEGA 2560 pour contrôler l'autre programme ou groupe bobines 3 ensemble alors nous aurons besoin de 36 broches.
3 bobines commutées ensemble à la fois.
-
Hi
The code of Pierre's doesn't look quite the same with what he had described. The poles are consist of 6 coils each and poles are moving around. Sketch shows only two coils per pole that move sequentially. What i would expect is something like:
1 on,
2 on
3 on
4 on
5 on
6 on
1 off
7 on
2 off
8 on
3 off
9 on
4 off
10 on
...etc
And that is only for one of the six magnetic poles.
If we could estimate the rotations per second of Pierre's drill, then this could reveal his actual current frequency. Looks like way less than 60Hz. What do you think guys?
fr.
Le code de Pierre ne ressemble pas du tout à ce qu'il a décrit. Les pôles sont constitués de 6 bobine chacune et les pôles se déplacent. Croquis montre seulement deux bobines par pôle qui se déplacent séquentiellement. Ce que je m'attendrais à quelque chose comme:
1 on,
2 on
3 on
4 on
5 on
6 on
1 off
7 on
2 off
8 on
3 off
9 on
4 off
10 on
...etc
Et ce n'est que pour l'un des six pôles magnétiques.
Si nous pouvions estimer les rotations par seconde de l'exercice de Pierre, cela pourrait révéler sa fréquence actuelle. On dirait bien moins que 60Hz. Que pensez-vous les gars?
-
I tried to made the Arduino code a little more efficient. And easier to modify if there will be changes in the future.
I took out the delay() function as it stops your arduino.
Note: I'm no programmer , so feel free to correct, add or to dismiss this all together.
It compiles on my Arduino Mega, but i'm not sure if it will do what you guys want.
fr. J'ai essayé de rendre le code Arduino un peu plus efficace. Et plus facile à modifier s'il y aura des changements dans le futur.
J'ai retiré la fonction delay () car elle arrête votre Arduino. Note: Je ne suis pas un programmeur, alors n'hésitez pas à corriger, ajouter ou rejeter tout cela ensemble.
Il compile sur mon Arduino Mega, mais je ne suis pas sûr que ça fera ce que vous voulez.
/************************************************
Pierre's Original Sketch
Modded by CM 25 Mar 2018
Modded by TK 24 Mar 2018
altered for 30-slot stator (gotoluc)
TKTest Version using pins 2-11,12-21,22-31
************************************************/
unsigned long timeStart = 0;
unsigned long currentTime = 0;
int waitTime = 0;
bool coilState = HIGH;
int coilSequence[] = { 11, 3, 2, 4, 3, 5, 4, 6, 5, 7, 6, 8, 7, 9, 8, 10, 9, 11, 10, 2 }; // set the firing order
int x = 0;
void setup() // initialize all needed digital pins as OUTPUT, plus a couple extras
{
int pin = 1;
for (pin = 1; pin <= 33; pin ++)
{
pinMode(pin, OUTPUT);
}
pinMode(A0, INPUT); // speed potentiometer wiper pin
}
void loop()
{
for (int x = 0; x < 20;); // loop for going true the coilSequence array
{
readAnalog (); // reads the pot for wait value
currentTime = millis(); // set current time in milli seconds
if (currentTime - timeStart > waitTime) // checks if wait time has passed
{
coilState = ! coilState ; // switch state
coilSet ();
timeStart = currentTime ; // reset start time
x++; // go to the next array number
}
}
}
void readAnalog ()
{
waitTime = map(analogRead(0), 0, 1023, 1, 200); // reads pot and maps it to a range of 1 to 200 milli seconds
}
void coilSet ()
{
digitalWrite(coilSequence[x], coilState), digitalWrite((coilSequence[x] + 10), coilState), digitalWrite((coilSequence[x] + 20), coilState); // turn the LED on or off and uses the array as defined in coilSequence
}
EDIT: I corrected a little mistake i made.
fr. EDIT: J'ai corrigé une petite erreur que j'ai faite.
-
I notice that with L298n it needs 3 outputs (pin) for 1 coil.
1.right (forward)
2.stop
3.left (back)
It's too much for the MEGA 2560.
It can use two more MEGA 2560 and control the other in the program.
or group coils 3 together then we will need 36 pins.
3 coils switched together at once.
fr.
Je remarque qu'avec L298n il faut 3 sorties (broche) pour 1 bobine.
1. droit (avant)
2.stop
3.left (arrière)
C'est trop pour le MEGA 2560.
Il peut utiliser deux autres MEGA 2560 pour contrôler l'autre programme ou groupe bobines 3 ensemble alors nous aurons besoin de 36 broches.
3 bobines commutées ensemble à la fois.
Hi r2fpl
For those that want to implement the half bridge ladder scheme that Pierre uses, tie together OUT 1 and OUT 2 and tie together In1 and In2.
Repeat for other side of L298N.
This now gives you two independent half bridges, with each Enable input turning off both transistors.
So only 2 arduino outputs are required for each half bridge.
Regards
L192
fr. Salut r2fpl
Pour ceux qui veulent mettre en œuvre le schéma d'échelle de demi-pont que Pierre utilise, reliez OUT 1 et OUT 2 et reliez In1 et In2.
Répétez pour l'autre côté de L298N. Cela vous donne maintenant deux demi-ponts indépendants, chaque entrée Enable désactivant les deux transistors.
Donc, seulement 2 sorties Arduino sont requises pour chaque demi-pont.
Cordialement
-
L191, please have a closer look at the picture you're referring. I'm quite sure it's a 30 slots. The welds and shape looks exactly like my 30 slots stator and the rotor looks the same as well.
However, I would agree with you that the larger 5 kW or more may have 36 slots.
Regards
Luc
français
L191, regardez de plus près la photo dont vous parlez. Je suis tout à fait sûr que c'est un 30 fentes. Les soudures et la forme ressemble exactement à mon stator à 30 fentes et le rotor a la même apparence.
Cependant, je suis d'accord avec vous que les 5 kW ou plus peuvent avoir 36 fentes.
Cordialement
Luc
Hi Gotoluc,
Well the burnt out 6KW 3 phase generator I was given, has a 30 slot stator, although I was told it was 36 slot, so I guess its a gamble as to whether you get a 30 or 36 slot machine.
So I will proceed like yourself with 30 slots .
36 slot induction motors may be easier to find but then you have to find a rotor to fit.
I could CNC cut M400 sheet and make a rotor, though it just pushes the cost up, as the sheets are expensive.
Regards
L192
fr. Bonjour Gotoluc,
Eh bien, le générateur 6KW triphasé qui m'a été donné a un stator de 30 fente, bien qu'on m'ait dit qu'il était à 36 fente, donc je suppose que c'est un pari de savoir si vous obtenez un stator de 30 ou 36 fente. Je vais donc procéder comme vous avec votre 30 fente. Un moteurs à induction de 36 fente peuvent être plus faciles à trouver, mais alors vous devez trouver un rotor pour s'adapter. Je pourrais couper en CNC des feuilles de M400 et faire un rotor, mais sa pousse le coût de plus, les feuilles sont chères.
Cordialement
-
Attached is a photo of a screw connector shield for the 2560, for those not aware of the board.
This provides more convenient output connection changes when experimenting.
L192
fr. Ci-joint est une photo d'un bouclier de connecteur à vis pour le 2560, pour ceux qui ne connaissent pas cette carte.
Cela fournit des changements de connexion de sortie plus pratiques lors de l'expérimentation.
-
Hi r2fpl
For those that want to implement the half bridge ladder scheme that Pierre uses, tie together OUT 1 and OUT 2 and tie together In1 and In2.
Repeat for other side of L298N.
This now gives you two independent half bridges, with each Enable input turning off both transistors.
So only 2 arduino outputs are required for each half bridge.
Regards
L192
fr. Salut r2fpl
Pour ceux qui veulent mettre en œuvre le schéma d'échelle de demi-pont que Pierre utilise, reliez OUT 1 et OUT 2 et reliez In1 et In2.
Répétez pour l'autre côté de L298N. Cela vous donne maintenant deux demi-ponts indépendants, chaque entrée Enable désactivant les deux transistors.
Donc, seulement 2 sorties Arduino sont requises pour chaque demi-pont.
Cordialement
2 x 36 or 2 x 30 still to much.
I think don't join OUT1 and OUT2 together because must reverse polarity after 5 steps (for 36) ; right ?
fr. 2 x 36 ou 2 x 30 encore trop.
Je pense ne pas joindre ensemble OUT1 et OUT2, car il faut inverser la polarité après 5 étapes (pour 36); correct?
-
Well, that's unfortunate to loose Pierre's trust. I knew something was up but I didn't want to alarm the group. I thought once we had this new moderated topic and Pierre could see we are serious researchers and truly want to work together with him to understand the effect and then further improve it, in time would come to understand that Erfinder's information was all a purposeful sabotage to stop the research.
I'm quite sure Pierre has lost trust in me (mentioning Patent) with all the misinformation Erfinder posted about me in the first topic which none of it was translated and if Pierre used google translate that would causes even more confusion as it does a really bad job from English to French.
What Erfinder did It's an old tactic call divide and conquer. You must all remember how Arron did the same thing to get Eric Dollard to himself.
Anyways, what can we do other then move forward with what we have. Maybe if Pierre sees we don't give up and work together he will understand that all that was misinformation purposely done to divide us so we give up and go our separate ways.
So, the question now is will you guys let that happen? or will we stay and work together?
Please post your truthful replies as I'm sure Pierre is reading what's going on.
Kind regards
Luc
français
Eh bien, c'est dommage de perdre la confiance de Pierre. Je savais qu'il se passait quelque chose mais je ne voulais pas alarmer le groupe. Je pensais qu'une fois nous aurions ce nouveau sujet modéré sous notre contrôle et Pierre pourrait voir que nous sommes tous des chercheurs sérieux et que nous voulons vraiment travailler avec lui pour comprendre l'effet et ensuite l'améliorer ensemble et avec le temps Pierre viendrait à comprendre que l'information d'Erfinder était tout un sabotage intentionnel pour arrêter la recherche. Je suis tout à fait sûr que Pierre a perdu confiance en moi (mentionnant Brevet) avec toute la désinformation que Erfinder a posté de moi dans le premier sujet dont aucun n'a été traduit, et si Pierre a utilisé traduction google ça causerait encore plus de confusion comme ça fait un très mauvais travail de traduction de l'anglais aux français.
Ce que Erfinder a fait est une vieille tactique qui consiste à diviser pour régner. Vous devez tous vous rappeler comment Arron a fait la même chose pour se procurer de Eric Dollard pour lui-même.
Quoi qu'il en soit, que pouvons-nous faire d'autre alors aller de l'avant avec ce que nous avons. Peut-être que si Pierre voit que nous n'abandonnons pas et ne travaillons ensemble, Pierre viendrait à comprendre que tout ça était de la désinformation volontairement fait pour nous diviser, pour que nous abandonnons et nous nous séparons.
Alors, la question maintenant est: allons-nous laisser cela se produire? ou allons-nous rester et travailler ensemble?
Veuillez poster vos réponses véridiques car je suis sûr que Pierre lit ce qui se passe.
Sincères amitiés
-
Very sad it :'(
I will try. This is my stator.
fr. C'est très triste :'( . Je vais essayer. C'est mon stator.
-
2 x 36 or 2 x 30 still to much.
I think don't join OUT1 and OUT2 together because must reverse polarity after 5 steps (for 36) ; right ?
fr. 2 x 36 ou 2 x 30 encore trop.
Je pense ne pas joindre ensemble OUT1 et OUT2, car il faut inverser la polarité après 5 étapes (pour 36); correct?
Hi r2fpl,
When you join Out1 and out 2 together you just parallel the top and parallel the bottom set of transistors.
The In1 and In2 paralleled then either turns on the top or bottom set of transistors depending on if Hi or Lo. The Enable input either allows the half bridge transistors to turn on or keeps both sets of transistors off.
Regards
L192
fr.Hi r2fpl,
Quand vous reliez out1 et out 2 ensemble, vous venez de mettre en parallèle le haut et le parallèle des transistors du bas.
Le In1 et In2 en parallèle puis tourne sur le jeu de transistors haut ou bas en fonction de si Hi ou Lo. L'entrée Enable permet aux transistors de demi-pont de s'allumer ou de désactiver les deux ensembles de transistors.
Cordialement
-
Well, that's unfortunate to loose Pierre's trust. I knew something was up but I didn't want to alarm the group. I thought once we had this new moderated topic and Pierre could see we are serious researchers and truly want to work together with him to understand the effect and then further improve it, in time would come to understand that Erfinder's information was all a purposeful sabotage to stop the research.
I'm quite sure Pierre has lost trust in me (mentioning Patent) with all the misinformation Erfinder posted about me in the first topic which none of it was translated and if Pierre used google translate that would causes even more confusion as it does a really bad job from English to French.
What Erfinder did It's an old tactic call divide and conquer. You must all remember how Arron did the same thing to get Eric Dollard to himself.
Anyways, what can we do other then move forward with what we have. Maybe if Pierre sees we don't give up and work together he will understand that all that was misinformation purposely done to divide us so we give up and go our separate ways.
So, the question now is will you guys let that happen? or will we stay and work together?
Please post your truthful replies as I'm sure Pierre is reading what's going on.
Kind regards
Luc
français
Eh bien, c'est dommage de perdre la confiance de Pierre. Je savais qu'il se passait quelque chose mais je ne voulais pas alarmer le groupe. Je pensais qu'une fois nous aurions ce nouveau sujet modéré sous notre contrôle et Pierre pourrait voir que nous sommes tous des chercheurs sérieux et que nous voulons vraiment travailler avec lui pour comprendre l'effet et ensuite l'améliorer ensemble et avec le temps Pierre viendrait à comprendre que l'information d'Erfinder était tout un sabotage intentionnel pour arrêter la recherche. Je suis tout à fait sûr que Pierre a perdu confiance en moi (mentionnant Brevet) avec toute la désinformation que Erfinder a posté de moi dans le premier sujet dont aucun n'a été traduit, et si Pierre a utilisé traduction google ça causerait encore plus de confusion comme ça fait un très mauvais travail de traduction de l'anglais aux français.
Ce que Erfinder a fait est une vieille tactique qui consiste à diviser pour régner. Vous devez tous vous rappeler comment Arron a fait la même chose pour se procurer de Eric Dollard pour lui-même.
Quoi qu'il en soit, que pouvons-nous faire d'autre alors aller de l'avant avec ce que nous avons. Peut-être que si Pierre voit que nous n'abandonnons pas et ne travaillons ensemble, Pierre viendrait à comprendre que tout ça était de la désinformation volontairement fait pour nous diviser, pour que nous abandonnons et nous nous séparons.
Alors, la question maintenant est: allons-nous laisser cela se produire? ou allons-nous rester et travailler ensemble?
Veuillez poster vos réponses véridiques car je suis sûr que Pierre lit ce qui se passe.
Sincères amitiés
Hi Gotoluc,
I don't understand this at all. If you public domain something like Pierre has done, even if it was the whole answer, someone can then patent and steal the idea.
Even reading through the previous posts, who was indicating that they would attempt to steal the idea and patent it? I cant see where this was either said or implied.. perhaps I missed it?
All I saw were some people that thought the OU was faked?
Regards
L192
fr.Hi Gotoluc,
Je ne comprends pas ça du tout. Si quelque chose est partagé dans le domaine public comme Pierre a fait, même si c'était toute la réponse, quelqu'un peut le breveter et voler votre idée?
Même en lisant les messages précédents, qui a indiqué qu'ils tenteraient de voler l'idée et de la breveter? Je ne peux pas voir où cela a été dit ou implicite .. peut-être que je l'ai manqué?
Tout ce que j'ai vu, ce sont des gens qui pensaient que la surunité était fausse?
Cordialement
-
The below is my translation of Pierre's message cheors post #65
it only rotates a magnetic field, you will not get much voltage with it as there's something else I kept secret. It's like an engine with no pistons, it won't start. It's the same thing for the dz generator, the important thing is not what we see but rather what you don't see. I have seen too many people who want to take credit in my place. So my contribution stops here. You'll have to discover the rest on your own. I can tell you it's not easy to achieve, it took me nearly 2 years to find the solution as rotation is only one aspect of the dz, it's really more complicated than that. At least people will be able to learn how to rotate a magnetic field but it will stop there, they won't get the result I have. I even still have issues to fix but I think I can solve everything with my second prototype that's presently being built and will take several months. It all need to be started from the beginning, new circuit, new more powerful coils and a new sequence program that looks to be complicated. So I wish you the best of luck with the continuation and beware of those who try to keep the information for themselves and don't reveal anything else. I wonder why, humm
When I've applied for a patent I can show you the rest of the version 2 dz generator but not before. Thank you.
Fr. c'est seulement pour faire tourner le champ magnétique vous n'obtiendrai pas beaucoup voltage avec cela il y a autre chose que je garde secret c'est comme un moteur qui n'as pas de piston il ne démarras pas c'est la même chose pour le dz générateur l'important n'est pas ce que l'on voit mais plutôt ce que l'on ne voit pas j'ai vue trop de gens qui veulent prendre le mérite a ma place alors ma contribution va s'arrêter ici maintenant il vous feras découvrir le reste par vous même et je peut vous dire que ce n'est pas gagné il m'as fallu près de 2 ans pour trouver la solution la rotation n'est qu'un aspect du dz c'est vraiment plus complique que cela au moins les gens vont pouvoir apprendre a faire tourner un champ magnétique mais ça va s'arrêter la ils n'obtiendront pas les résultat que j'ai eu ,il me reste encore des problème a régler mais je pense tout régler ses problèmes avec le deuxième prototype qui est en fabrication j'en ai pour plusieurs mois il me faut tout recommencer du début nouveau circuit nouvelle bobine plus puissante et une toute nouvelle programmation qui s'annonce assez complique a séquencer alors je vous souhaite la meilleur des chance pour la suite et méfier vous de ceux qui tente de garder les information pour eu il veulent tout les renseignement pour eux et ne dévoile rien au autre je me demande bien pourquoi humm, quand j'aurai fait une demande de brevet je pourrai vous montrez la suite du dz générateur version 2 mais pas avant merci.
-
Very sad it :(
I will try. This is my stator.
Hi r2fpl,
What is the diameter of the rotor that was in that stator?
Thanks
Regards
L192
fr. Salut r2fpl,
Quel est le diamètre du rotor qui était dans ce stator?
Merci
Cordialement
-
This sentence..
"I have seen too many people who want to take credit in my place."
What does this mean exactly, if Pierre quoted an example perhaps we could understand?
L192
fr. Cette phrase..
"j'ai vue trop de gens qui veulent prendre le mérite a ma place"
Qu'est-ce que cela signifie exactement, si Pierre citait un exemple que nous pourrions peut-être comprendre?
-
Hi Gotoluc,
I don't understand this at all. If you public domain something like Pierre has done, even if it was the whole answer, someone can then patent and steal the idea.
Even reading through the previous posts, who was indicating that they would attempt to steal the idea and patent it? I cant see where this was either said or implied.. perhaps I missed it?
All I saw were some people that thought the OU was faked?
Regards
L192
fr.Hi Gotoluc,
Je ne comprends pas ça du tout. Si quelque chose est partagé dans le domaine public comme Pierre a fait, même si c'était toute la réponse, quelqu'un peut le breveter et voler votre idée?
Même en lisant les messages précédents, qui a indiqué qu'ils tenteraient de voler l'idée et de la breveter? Je ne peux pas voir où cela a été dit ou implicite .. peut-être que je l'ai manqué?
Tout ce que j'ai vu, ce sont des gens qui pensaient que la surunité était fausse?
Cordialement
Sorry L192 for the delay in reply. I first had to translate all the previous posts that had pilled up since yesterday. Bigger job then most would want to do!
Yes, it can be confusing I know. The problem started in the previous topic. Erfinder posted false information about me he read and believed from another forum.
So, it looks like Pierre has translated some of that information and probably thinks I'm trying to steal his device and patent it, which is completely false.
As you can clearly see, I'm trying to replicate study and share with as many serious researchers as possible and why I'm putting all the efforst in translation to include everyone.
Regards
Luc
fr. Désolé L192 pour le retard dans la réponse. J'ai d'abord dû traduire tous les messages précédents qui s'étaient accumulés depuis hier. Plus grand travail que la plupart voudraient faire!
Oui, ça peut être déroutant, je sais. Le problème a commencé dans le sujet précédent. Erfinder posté de fausses informations sur moi, qu'il a lu et cru d'un autre forum.
Donc, on dirait que Pierre a traduit certaines de ces informations et pense probablement que j'essaie de voler son appareil et de le breveter, ce qui est complètement faux.
Comme vous pouvez le voir clairement, j'essaie de reproduire l'étude et de partager avec autant de chercheurs sérieux que possible et pourquoi je mets tous les efforts en traduction pour inclure tout le monde.
Cordialement
Luc
-
Well, that's unfortunate to loose Pierre's trust. I knew something was up but I didn't want to alarm the group. I thought once we had this new moderated topic and Pierre could see we are serious researchers and truly want to work together with him to understand the effect and then further improve it, in time would come to understand that Erfinder's information was all a purposeful sabotage to stop the research.
I'm quite sure Pierre has lost trust in me (mentioning Patent) with all the misinformation Erfinder posted about me in the first topic which none of it was translated and if Pierre used google translate that would causes even more confusion as it does a really bad job from English to French.
What Erfinder did It's an old tactic call divide and conquer. You must all remember how Arron did the same thing to get Eric Dollard to himself.
Anyways, what can we do other then move forward with what we have. Maybe if Pierre sees we don't give up and work together he will understand that all that was misinformation purposely done to divide us so we give up and go our separate ways.
So, the question now is will you guys let that happen? or will we stay and work together?
Please post your truthful replies as I'm sure Pierre is reading what's going on.
Kind regards
Luc
français
Eh bien, c'est dommage de perdre la confiance de Pierre. Je savais qu'il se passait quelque chose mais je ne voulais pas alarmer le groupe. Je pensais qu'une fois nous aurions ce nouveau sujet modéré sous notre contrôle et Pierre pourrait voir que nous sommes tous des chercheurs sérieux et que nous voulons vraiment travailler avec lui pour comprendre l'effet et ensuite l'améliorer ensemble et avec le temps Pierre viendrait à comprendre que l'information d'Erfinder était tout un sabotage intentionnel pour arrêter la recherche. Je suis tout à fait sûr que Pierre a perdu confiance en moi (mentionnant Brevet) avec toute la désinformation que Erfinder a posté de moi dans le premier sujet dont aucun n'a été traduit, et si Pierre a utilisé traduction google ça causerait encore plus de confusion comme ça fait un très mauvais travail de traduction de l'anglais aux français.
Ce que Erfinder a fait est une vieille tactique qui consiste à diviser pour régner. Vous devez tous vous rappeler comment Arron a fait la même chose pour se procurer de Eric Dollard pour lui-même.
Quoi qu'il en soit, que pouvons-nous faire d'autre alors aller de l'avant avec ce que nous avons. Peut-être que si Pierre voit que nous n'abandonnons pas et ne travaillons ensemble, Pierre viendrait à comprendre que tout ça était de la désinformation volontairement fait pour nous diviser, pour que nous abandonnons et nous nous séparons.
Alors, la question maintenant est: allons-nous laisser cela se produire? ou allons-nous rester et travailler ensemble?
Veuillez poster vos réponses véridiques car je suis sûr que Pierre lit ce qui se passe.
Sincères amitiés
I would say Mr. Cotnoir may have had a little visit ? I hope he is aware that in this field of research, if a person doesn't release / disclose "Fully" a device that has true merit, that the safety of him, especially his family by Gov. sources is in jeopardy.
Mr. Cotnoir, if you are reading this it would behoove you to "Fully" come out as the "Genie", so-to-speak has been released.
Also, nobody will be able to patent this device, only perhaps dissected parts and no money will be made on this as a whole, after all look at all that are on the market now ? 58+ devices currently sitting in the basement of "Los-Alamo's labs." : ]
There is a problem that goes with these secrets in a 3d reality and "Greed" is the biggest one, along with weaponization.
.
Mr. Cotnoir ? Are you seeing lights in sky at night where you live ...there's your answer.
- All the best
"what can we do other then move forward with what we have." ?
MOVE forward... : ]
fr. Je dirais que M. Cotnoir a peut-être eu une petite visite? J'espère qu'il est conscient que dans ce domaine de recherche, si une personne ne libère pas / divulguer "entièrement" un appareil qui a du mérite, que la sécurité de lui, en particulier sa famille par les sources gouvernementales est en danger.
Monsieur Cotnoir, si vous êtes en train de lire ceci, il vous appartiendrait de "complètement" apparaître comme le "Génie", pour ainsi dire, a été publié.
En outre, personne ne sera en mesure de breveter cet appareil, seulement peut-être des pièces disséquées et aucun argent ne sera fait sur cet ensemble, après tout, regardez tout ce qui est sur le marché maintenant? Plus de 58 appareils actuellement installés dans le sous-sol des «laboratoires de Los-Alamo». :]
Il y a un problème qui va avec ces secrets dans une 3D vraiment et "Greed" est le plus grand, avec l'armement.
.
Monsieur Cotnoir? Est-ce que vous voyez des lumières dans le ciel la nuit où vous vivez ... il y a votre réponse.
- Bonne chance
"Que pouvons-nous faire d'autre alors aller de l'avant avec ce que nous avons." ?
Avance... : ]
-
Hi r2fpl,
What is the diameter of the rotor that was in that stator?
Thanks
Regards
L192
fr. Salut r2fpl,
Quel est le diamètre du rotor qui était dans ce stator?
Merci
Cordialement
Hi L192,
Stator: 173mm x 100mm
-
To everyone,
A new forum member Andy71 has been trying to post for some days but unfortunately new members need a moderators approval for their first posts and I only have moderator privileges in this topic and why I started it. Andy71 has sent me the private message below. I don't think he knows of this new topic so I sent him the link to come here.
fr. À tous,
Un nouveau membre du forum Andy71 essaye de poster depuis quelques jours mais malheureusement les nouveaux membres ont besoin d'une approbation des modérateurs pour leurs premiers posts et je n'ai que des privilèges de modérateur sur ce sujet et pourquoi je l'ai commencé. Andy71 m'a envoyé le message privé ci-dessous. Je ne pense pas qu'il connaisse ce nouveau sujet, alors je lui ai envoyé le lien pour venir ici.
Hello
I am still not logged in by the moderator.
But I have read all posts.
I also suspected something was wrong with the information provided by Pierre Cotnoir.
I've been working on similar projects for a long time.
But please, tell everyone in the forum.
We will not give up !!!
We continue to develop.
There is a way to be independent.
Best regards Andy
fr. Bonjour
Je ne suis toujours pas connecté par le modérateur.
Mais j'ai lu tous les messages.
Je soupçonnais également que quelque chose n'allait pas avec les informations fournies par Pierre Cotnoir.
Je travaille sur des projets similaires depuis longtemps.
Mais s'il vous plaît, dites à tous dans le forum.
Nous n'abandonnerons pas !!!
Nous continuons à développer.
Il y a un moyen d'être indépendant.
Cordialement Andy
-
Luc, sorry to hear about this development with Pierre. I knew there was some sort of fiasco going on regarding the situation with a patent but didn't recall the details surrounding it so I read through the links you posted to EF regarding that. It became obvious from statements by other members I know and trust that you did nothing wrong and were not trying to patent or take credit for anyone else's work. I know you to be one of the most altruistic people on these forums and know of the work you did helping others in South Africa. I am sure you would not try to take this idea to patent it as your own. It's obvious all being discussed here is in the public domain anyway. Unfortunately if Pierre keeps an important part 'secret' and someone else figures that out then they could potentially try to patent it since it is not in the public domain.
It seems so often this type of situation comes up when an inventor realizes they have something big. Unfortunately I don't think even getting a patent is a good idea unless you are very rich and can afford to defend it. The way patent law works you will lose if you don't defend it or successfully defend it and that can be very expensive when dealing with big money corporate lawyers who want to steal your idea.
I also think it's a bad idea to 'keep a secret' about something this potentially big as that just invites the probability that someone will pay you a visit and you then end up missing, scared off, having your lab ransacked or worse yet end up on a list like these:
http://overunity.com/downloads/sa/view/down/553/ (http://overunity.com/downloads/sa/view/down/553/)
http://overunity.com/downloads/sa/view/down/554/ (http://overunity.com/downloads/sa/view/down/554/)
http://overunity.com/downloads/sa/view/down/555/ (http://overunity.com/downloads/sa/view/down/555/)
Putting the info out there on the Internet everywhere possible seems to be the safest and best plan for all.
fr. Luc, désolé d'entendre parler de ce développement avec Pierre. Je savais qu'il y avait une sorte de fiasco en ce qui concerne la situation avec un brevet, mais je ne me rappelais pas les détails qui l'entouraient, alors j'ai lu les liens que vous avez envoyés à EF à ce sujet. Cela est devenu évident à partir des déclarations d'autres membres que je connais et j'ai confiance que vous n'avez rien fait de mal et que vous n'essayiez pas de faire breveter ou de revendiquer le travail de quelqu'un d'autre. Je sais que vous êtes l'une des personnes les plus altruistes sur ces forums et connaissez le travail que vous avez fait pour aider les autres en Afrique du Sud. Je suis sûr que vous n'essaieriez pas de prendre cette idée pour la breveter comme la vôtre. Il est évident que tout ce qui est discuté ici est dans le domaine public de toute façon. Malheureusement, si Pierre garde une partie importante 'secrète' et que quelqu'un d'autre s'en aperçoit, alors ils pourraient potentiellement essayer de la breveter car elle n'est pas dans le domaine public.
Il semble si souvent que ce genre de situation se présente lorsqu'un inventeur se rend compte qu'il a quelque chose de gros. Malheureusement, je ne pense pas que même obtenir un brevet est une bonne idée à moins que vous ne soyez très riche et que vous puissiez vous permettre de le défendre. La façon dont le droit des brevets fonctionne vous perdra si vous ne le défendez pas ou ne le défendez pas avec succès et cela peut être très coûteux quand vous traitez avec des avocats d'affaires qui veulent voler votre idée.
Je pense aussi que c'est une mauvaise idée de "garder un secret" sur quelque chose d'aussi grand que cela, mais qui invite à la probabilité que quelqu'un te rende visite et que tu finisses par disparaître, effrayé, avoir ton laboratoire saccagé ou pire encore finir sur une liste comme celles-ci:
http://overunity.com/downloads/sa/view/down/553/ (http://overunity.com/downloads/sa/view/down/553/)
http://overunity.com/downloads/sa/view/down/554/ (http://overunity.com/downloads/sa/view/down/554/)
http://overunity.com/downloads/sa/view/down/555/ (http://overunity.com/downloads/sa/view/down/555/)
Mettre l'information sur Internet partout où cela est possible semble être le plan le plus sûr et le meilleur pour tous.
-
" Summary from Pierre:
If you only rotates a magnetic field, you will not get much voltage (power?) because something is missing! Rotation is only one aspect of the DZ, it's really more complicated than that.
People will be able to learn how to rotate a magnetic field but it will stop there, they won't get the result I have. I keep the secret. I just wanted to show on YouTube what I and nobody else could do.
You'll have to discover the rest on your own. I can tell you it's not easy to achieve. "
Let's search for the "pistons" ! DZ, D?? Z??, What?
B. R. Arne
-
Dernier message privé de Pierre ce matin :
Je n'ai jamais dit au monde de répliquer le DZ générateur.
Je voulais juste démontrer sur YouTube ce que moi et personne d'autre avait réussi a fabriquer.
Ce sont les gens qui on voulu savoir comment le DZ générateur fonctionnait et tous ce sont emballés quand j'ai parlé des principes de base et se sont mit à visionner la vidéo image par image pour connaître mes secrets et vous avez une grosse partie de ces secrets.
Par la suite j'ai mentionné à Luc que le premier prototype n'était pas encore au point et il a voulu quand même le construire. Que voulez vous que j’y fasse.
Même si je lui ai dit que je commençait un deuxième prototype il a tenu à faire une réplique de mon premier qui ne fonctionnait pas a 100%. Libre à lui et les autres.
Tout ce que j'ai dit et mentionné pour le DZ est véridique, même le programme que j'ai mit sur YouTube.
Vous allez pouvoir faire tourner un champ magnétique. Il ne vous reste qu'à trouver la suite si cela vous chante. Je n'ai jamais forcé personne à copier le dz générateur.
De toute façon tout ce que j'ai lu sur ce forum cette semaine en disait long sur certaine personne qui voulait devancer les autres pour faire breveter mon invention. A partir de cela pensez vous sérieusement que je suis intéressé à tout dévoiler au monde pour me faire faire un gros doigt d’honneur par un autre personne qui serait partie faire une demande de brevet à ma place.
Si cela commence a être trop lourd a gérer je vais fermer mon compte sur YouTube et je vais plutôt me concentrer sur mon appareil et plus personne n'aura des nouvelles de moi .
I never told the world to replicate the generator DZ.
I just wanted to show on YouTube what I and nobody else could do.
These are the people who wanted to know how the DZ generator worked and all these look excited when I talked about the basics and started to watch the video frame by frame to know my secrets and you have a big chunk of these secrets.
Later, I mentioned to Luc that the first prototype was not yet developed and he still wanted to build it. What do you want me to do.
Even though I told him I was starting a second prototype he wanted to make a replica of my first one that did not work 100%. Free to him and the others.
All I said and mentioned for the DZ is true, even the program I put on YouTube.
You will be able to rotate a magnetic field. You just have to find the next one if you like it. I never forced anyone to copy the generator DZ.
Anyway all I read on this forum this week said a lot about someone who wanted to get ahead of others to patent my invention. From that, do you think seriously that I am interested in revealing everything to the world to make me a big finger of honor by another person who would have left to apply for a patent in my place. If it starts to be too heavy to manage I will close my account on YouTube and I will focus on my device and no one will hear from me.
-
Hi L192,
Stator: 173mm x 100mm
Most of the Chinese generator2 pole rotors are 94.5mm or 119mm.
L192
-
Dernier message privé de Pierre ce matin :
Je n'ai jamais dit au monde de répliquer le DZ générateur.
Je voulais juste démontrer sur YouTube ce que moi et personne d'autre avait réussi a fabriquer.
Ce sont les gens qui on voulu savoir comment le DZ générateur fonctionnait et tous ce sont emballés quand j'ai parlé des principes de base et se sont mit à visionner la vidéo image par image pour connaître mes secrets et vous avez une grosse partie de ces secrets.
Par la suite j'ai mentionné à Luc que le premier prototype n'était pas encore au point et il a voulu quand même le construire. Que voulez vous que j’y fasse.
Même si je lui ai dit que je commençait un deuxième prototype il a tenu à faire une réplique de mon premier qui ne fonctionnait pas a 100%. Libre à lui et les autres.
Tout ce que j'ai dit et mentionné pour le DZ est véridique, même le programme que j'ai mit sur YouTube.
Vous allez pouvoir faire tourner un champ magnétique. Il ne vous reste qu'à trouver la suite si cela vous chante. Je n'ai jamais forcé personne à copier le dz générateur.
De toute façon tout ce que j'ai lu sur ce forum cette semaine en disait long sur certaine personne qui voulait devancer les autres pour faire breveter mon invention. A partir de cela pensez vous sérieusement que je suis intéressé à tout dévoiler au monde pour me faire faire un gros doigt d’honneur par un autre personne qui serait partie faire une demande de brevet à ma place.
Si cela commence a être trop lourd a gérer je vais fermer mon compte sur YouTube et je vais plutôt me concentrer sur mon appareil et plus personne n'aura des nouvelles de moi .
"I never told the world to replicate the generator DZ.
I just wanted to show on YouTube what I and nobody else could do.
These are the people who wanted to know how the DZ generator worked and all these look excited when I talked about the basics and started to watch the video frame by frame to know my secrets and you have a big chunk of these secrets.
Later, I mentioned to Luc that the first prototype was not yet developed and he still wanted to build it. What do you want me to do.
Even though I told him I was starting a second prototype he wanted to make a replica of my first one that did not work 100%. Free to him and the others.
All I said and mentioned for the DZ is true, even the program I put on YouTube.
You will be able to rotate a magnetic field. You just have to find the next one if you like it. I never forced anyone to copy the generator DZ.
Anyway all I read on this forum this week said a lot about someone who wanted to get ahead of others to patent my invention. From that, do you think seriously that I am interested in revealing everything to the world to make me a big finger of honor by another person who would have left to apply for a patent in my place. If it starts to be too heavy to manage I will close my account on YouTube and I will focus on my device and no one will hear from me.
Hi Pierre,
Below are parts of two posts you made indirectly in the previous thread..
I have highlighted two sentences in Bold text.
You talk about working together and needing every ones help.. I thought that's what we were trying to provide by replicating your device?
Regards
L192
"Hello Luc
I received your message but I'm not always at my computer.
The reply delay is not because I don't want to answer, it's because I don't have much time in the evening since I work between 60 to 65 hrs a week.
I see your messages at work but don' have enough time to answer you and everyone at the same time.
I may have more time to answer on the weekends.
As for my phone number, I want keep it confidential as well as my email address. If I start giving my personal details out you can imagine the disturbance will never end. I hope you understand?
For the past week I wanted to make a new video but was unable since too much of my time was used to answer people.
But don't worry about it, I eventually answer and will answer new questions after I have the new video up which should help to understand the principle.
Anyways, I also have things I don't fully understand yet, so I'm going to need everyones help.
You can contact me on the overunity site. My user name is pedro1
Thank you
Pierre"
"About the sequence of the arduino, when one coil is powered on the next coil will also be powered on before the previous is turned off (overlap) otherwise you will break the magnetic field. The goal is not to turn off the magnetic stream, you only want to keep it moving. Switching example: 1 on, 2 on, 1 off, 3 on, 2 off etc.
The flyback diodes are connected to each coil but there's probably simple ways to do it?
I wanted to regulate the input power with another arduino but I was too eager to test my device so I directly connected it without input control. Maybe I could of reduced the input power but how much I do not know.
I don't know if you noticed the super capacitors can handle up to 48 volts. I only used 26volts but because of the problems I encountered. I prefer to wait to test higher voltage on the next prototype.
Don't hesitate to take the initiative if you can improve the dz generator. It's still in developing stage and there's probably many things I haven't thought of that can be improved.
If we work together we will eventually find the ideal solution."
-
... Quoi qu'il en soit, que pouvons-nous faire d'autre alors aller de l'avant avec ce que nous avons. Peut-être que si Pierre voit que nous n'abandonnons pas et ne travaillons ensemble, Pierre viendrait à comprendre que tout ça était de la désinformation volontairement fait pour nous diviser, pour que nous abandonnons et nous nous séparons.
Alors, la question maintenant est: allons-nous laisser cela se produire? ou allons-nous rester et travailler ensemble?
Veuillez poster vos réponses véridiques car je suis sûr que Pierre lit ce qui se passe.
Sincères amitiés
En lisant les deux derniers messages de Pierre, j'ai l'impression qu'ils ne sont pas de lui.
Post #104 de konehead sur l'ancien fil : "Ce dont il a besoin, c'est d'être sain et sauf, de continuer son travail et de le garder ouvert".
Son message d'aujourd'hui : "A partir de cela pensez-vous sérieusement que je suis intéressé à tout dévoiler au monde pour me faire faire un gros doigt d’honneur par une autre personne qui serait partie faire une demande de brevet à ma place."
Vous voyez, il y a quelque chose qui ne va pas.
Bref, je ne suis pas étonné de ce qui se passe, j'y pensais depuis le début. Je me disais que si son dispositif était réel, ça ne durerait pas longtemps. Effectivement, cela n'a pas duré longtemps. Néanmoins, nous pouvons travailler sur les bases que nous possédons à présent. Evidemment, il nous faut poursuivre notre travail, et le divulguer, qu'il n'en déplaise à d'autre qui liront ceci.
-
@ e2matrix and all,
It's sad how some people twist things around to adjust it to the way they see and operate in the world.
I use to also believe that sharing something in public domain makes it non patentable and why back in June 26th 2008 when I happen to combine a High Voltage Coil spark (ionization path) which allowed a capacitors low voltage Current to discharged through the spark via a Blocking Diode and saw how water violently reacted to it, I immediately publicly shared it as "WATER AS FUEL DISCOVERY FOR EVERYONE TO SHARE" http://overunity.com/5024/urgent-water-as-fuel-discovery-for-everyone-to-share/#.WrgaE9YpDM1 (http://overunity.com/5024/urgent-water-as-fuel-discovery-for-everyone-to-share/#.VbqZBEb_rIU)
thinking this could be something big that can help the world and wanted to give it away and protect it by public domain so the whole world can freely use it.
Then Arron's topic started one week later which he used the same method but his own circuit version (mine was mechanical) and why I was credited "Based on Luc's (Gotoluc) method" in his video demo : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOhNtRhJ5Rw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOhNtRhJ5Rw)
Later on I had 2 men contact me saying they made a professional plug n play version of the water spark device and said they researched and recognized me as the first to share this method in public domain (which still holds true today). I was very happy these private individuals produced and professional marketed a device anyone can easily install. I wished them all the best.
Later on they informed me that if this spark device succeeds that Public Domain would not protect it from large corporation to patent it, which if happened, would force them out of business and loose all they had already invested.
They said a paten is the best protection and promised me it won't cost me anything and I can set all the conditions. I told them the number one priority was to protect it for free public use and the documents would have to be made to reflect this as priority. Plus, they have to pay for everything and that I don't want any (zero) financial profits from their business.
They did all the legal work which took months. The way it was set up is I held 10% share of the patent document and each one of them held 45% so that none could try to do anything without consent of all. I had a lawyer look over the documents before I signed (which they paid for) and the lawyer advised me not to sign because I shouldn't give everything away and get nothing. I asked the Lawyer, can they ever do anything with this Patent without me involved. The lawyer said no, they can't. I said if you're sure of that then that is the only protection that matters to me as this is not mine but belongs to the public!... so I signed it. In short my involvement in this Patent was only for the good of the public and totally selfless.
Later on I'm contacted by one of the two owners while I was volunteering in a South Africa mission to feed, cloth and give school supplies to the poor to informing me they are in disagreement and if him and I combine our Patent shares we can dissolve the patent to protect it from being sold. I agreed and it got done after some months. Days after the patent was dissolved somehow Arron hears about the patent for the fist time and has an ego trip claiming that this is his circuit and is the only inventor.
He took the liberty (back then) to publicly declare me as a fraud, thief, you name it and still to this day keeps misinforming the public about me.
He got involved and insisted the Patent be re-applied for with only his name as inventor and that my name should of never been on the Patent since as far as he is concerned I had nothing to do with the circuit.
However, the Patent attorney did not see it quite the way Arron did, since he had done his research. After many disturbing emails with Aaron threatening me to remove my name on the new patent application, something inside told me don't give him what he wants, keep your name on the list of the now 4 inventors even if it's just 10% recognition.
Still Arron kept insisting I be removed completely so the patent attorney got fed up and quit. Still have the emails to prove that.
Soon after Arron agreed my name can stay and apparently a new patent was created.
I have no idea if it was issued since Arron tried to collect money from me to pay for it. Right, like I would send him money!... obviously I didn't send anything, so I don't know anymore the that and don't care to know. It's all in Aaron's trusted control. So best to ask him if you want more information.
To this day Arron has never stopped posting that I stole this from him and patented it, when I actually dissolved the original patent. So I have nothing to do with it. He owns it, he may of paid for it. But I guess since my name was maybe kept on the inventor list that really screws with his head somehow!
So my selfless intention for to help protect public domain and at the same time help a few research community guys who were ready to take the risk on something that may be good for the world, I'm the one that gets to be named a fraud, thief and kicked in the ass for trying to help.
As a great Guru I once knew would say "WHAT TO DO"
Kind regards
Luc
fr. C'est triste comment certaines personnes tournent les choses pour l'adapter à la façon dont ils voient et fonctionnent dans le monde.
J'avais l'habitude de croire aussi que partager quelque chose dans le domaine public le rendait non brevetable et pourquoi au 26 juin 2008 quand j'ai combiné une étincelle à haute tension (circuit d'ionisation) qui permettait le courant d'un condensateur a basse tension de traverser l'étincelle à travers une Diode Blocage et vu comment l'eau a réagi violemment à cet effet, je l'ai immédiatement publiquement partagé cet effet "L'EAU COMME DÉCOUVERTE DE CARBURANT POUR TOUS PARTAGER" http://overunity.com/5024/urgent-water-as-fuel-discovery-for-everyone (http://overunity.com/5024/urgent-water-as-fuel-discovery-for-everyone) -to-share / #. WrgaE9YpDM1
penser que cela pourrait être quelque chose de grand qui peut aider le monde et voulait le donner et le protéger par domaine public afin que le monde entier puisse l'utiliser librement.
Une semaine plus tard (à un autre forum) le sujet d'Arron a commencé. Il a utilisé la même méthode mais sa propre version de circuit (la mienne était mécanique) et pourquoi il m'a crédité "Basé sur la méthode de Luc (Gotoluc)" dans sa démo vidéo: https://www.youtube (https://www.youtube). com / watch? v = vOhNtRhJ5Rw
Plus tard, deux hommes m'ont contacté pour me dire qu'ils avaient fait une version professionnelle de l'étincelle à eau et m'ont dit qu'ils m'avaient reconnu comme étant le premier à partager cette méthode dans le domaine public (ce qui reste vrai aujourd'hui). J'ai été très heureux que ces particuliers produisent et commercialisent un appareil que tout le monde peut facilement installer. Je leur ai souhaité tout le meilleur.
Plus tard, ils m'ont informé que si ce dispositif étincelle réussissait, le domaine public ne le protégerait pas contre les grandes entreprise breveter. Et si sa se produisait, les forcerait à cesser leurs activités et perdrait tout ce qu'ils avaient déjà investi.
Ils mon dit qu'un brevet est la meilleure protection et m'ont promis que cela ne me coûterait rien et que je peux fixer toutes les conditions. Je leur ai dit que la priorité numéro un était de la protéger l'usage public et que les documents devraient être faits pour refléter cela comme une priorité. De plus, ils doivent payer pour tout et je ne veux pas de profits financiers (zéro) de leur entreprise.
Ils ont fait tout le travail juridique qui a pris des mois. De la façon dont il a été mis en place, j'ai détenu 10% du document de brevet et chacun d'entre eux détenait 45% de sorte que personne ne pouvait essayer de faire quoi que ce soit sans le consentement de tous. J'ai demandé à un avocat de vérifier les documents avant de signer (ce qu'ils ont payé) et l'avocat m'a conseillé de ne pas signer parce que je ne devrais pas tout donner et ne rien recevoir. J'ai demandé à l'avocat, peuvent-ils faire quelque chose avec ce brevet sans impliqué. L'avocat a dit non, ils ne peuvent pas. J'ai dit que si vous en étiez sûr, alors c'est la seule protection qui compte pour moi car ce n'est pas à moi mais au public! ... alors je l'ai signé. En bref, mon implication dans ce brevet était seulement pour le bien du public et totalement désintéressé de profiter.
Plus tard, j'ai été contacté par l'un des deux propriétaires alors que je faisais du bénévolat dans une mission en Afrique du Sud pour nourrir les pauvres et leur donner des fournitures scolaires pour m'informer qu'ils sont en désaccord et que si nous combinons nos pare 45% + 10%du brevets, nous pouvons dissoudre le brevet pour l'empêcher d'être vendu. J'ai accepté et cela s'est fait après quelques mois. Quelques jours après la dissolution du brevet, Arron entend parler du brevet pour la première fois et fait un d'égo trip en prétendant que c'est son circuit et qu'il est le seul inventeur.
Il a pris la liberté (à l'époque) de me déclarer publiquement comme un fraude, un voleur et encore à ce jour continue de désinformer le public à propos de moi.
Il s'est impliqué et a insisté pour que le brevet soit à nouveau demandé avec seulement son nom comme inventeur et que mon nom ne sois pas sur le brevet car en ce qui le concerne, je n'ai rien à voir avec le circuit.
Cependant, l'avocat de brevets ne l'a pas vu tout à fait comme ca, il avais fait ses recherches. Après de nombreux courriels avec Aaron me menaçant d'enlever mon nom sur la nouvelle demande de brevet, quelque chose à l'intérieur m'a dit de ne pas lui donner ce qu'il voulait, gardez votre nom sur la liste des 4 inventeurs même si c'est seulement 10% de reconnaissance.
Toujours Arron a insisté pour que je sois complètement enlevé. Afin l'avocat de brevet ait eu marre et ait quitté. J'ai les e-mails pour le prouver.
Peu de temps après, Arron a accepté que mon nom puisse rester et apparemment un nouveau brevet a été créé.
Je ne sais pas si ça a été publié et Arron a essayé de me faire payer de l'argent. Comme si je lui enverrais de l'argent! ... évidemment, je n'ai rien envoyé, alors je ne sais plus rien de tout ça et je m'en fous de savoir. Tout est dans le contrôle de confiance d'Aaron. Alors mieux vaut lui demander si vous voulez plus d'informations.
À ce jour, Arron n'a jamais cessé d'afficher que je lui ai volé cela et l'ai breveté, quand j'ai effectivement dissous le brevet original. Donc je n'ai rien à voir avec ça. Il le possède, il peut l'avoir et a payé. Mais je suppose que mon nom a peut-être été gardé sur la liste des inventeurs qui jou vraiment avec sa tête!
Donc, mon intention d'aider à protéger le domaine public et en même temps aider quelques chercheurs de la communauté qui étaient prêts à prendre le risque sur quelque chose qui pourrait être bon pour le monde, je suis celui qui obtient d'être nommé un fraude , voleur et coups de pied dans le cul pour avoir essayé d'aider.
Comme un grand gourou que j'ai connu il y a quelque temps dirait "QUE FAIRE"
Sincères amitiés
Luc
-
I spent the whole day with my two finger typing translating and so on. So I'm taking a break for tonight and locking the topic. I may re-open it tomorrow
fr. J'ai passé toute la journée avec mes deux doigts sur clavier en train de traduire et ainsi de suite. Donc, je fais une pause pour ce soir et verrouiller le sujet. Peut-être que je l'ouvrirai demain
-
Last night after locking the topic I received the below message from Pierre.
Fr. La nuit dernière, après avoir verrouillé le sujet, j'ai reçu le message ci-dessous de Pierre.
hello Luc, I want to let you know that what I wrote was not aim at you. I was addressing the whole forum. Yes, I slightly lost confidence of the discussion group. I know there are some honest people in the group but there are also some rotten apples and they are the ones I'm wary the most of. I'm sure there is one or more people ill-intentioned on the forum. Yes i wanted to give my invention to the world but the the only thing I do not want is for someone to takeover my idea to make a personal profit. How would you feel if you invent something revolutionary and another person takes credit for it in you place. I would not be very happy. I don't give a dam about money this can bring, I'm not rich but I'm very happy, so money doesn't necessarily give happiness and I really don't do this for money. All I wanted to start with was to demonstrate my invention that took me months to build and I managed to get it to run. The test that you saw in my first video that some thinks it's a fake was actually my first real test of the dz generator. I was very happy with the test results and decided to share it online. Then everything got crazy. I didn't want everyone to try to replicate what I achieved, even you wanted to replicate despite my mentioning that my prototype was only a draft and did not work at its best. I had a lot of improvement to bring to the project even with my second prototype. I'm not even sure of all the needed changes yet, so why all the eagerness to make a replication which in my opinion is not yet operating to full capacity? When I first saw it working I was wondering what to do with it, I just want to give my invention to the whole world but how do I prevent a person from taking over of my idea to profit from it? at this moment a patent sounds like the best option, even if I don't have the means to spend so much money for a piece of paper. Until I have the money for a patent the rest of my secrets will stay with me, unless you prove otherwise that if it's made public nobody can apply for a patent in my place? In the time of Tesla everything was so different, today it's so complicated. So for now I've removed all my youtube videos. You've mention that you're fingers are tired of translating, for me it never stopped ever since I put my video on youtube. So I'll take a break of a few months to free my mind and carefully think this all over. I want to focus on my second prototype instead of spending hours reading and responding to the good and not so good comments. Looking at what you've built so far as replication it's really a beautiful job and nothing is preventing you to continue, you're on a good path. The only concern I have are the mosfet's you use, I'm not sure if they will withstand the the input amperage? just a single coil takes a lot of amperage, check before how much one coil draws compared to the 2 amps the mosfet's can handle. That's it for tonight. My week starts very early in the morning and I'm going to rest a little bit. Pierre Cotnoir
Fr. bonjour luc, je tiens a vous mentionner que je ne vous ai pas viser vous pour ce que j'ai écrit, je visait l'ensemble du forum, oui j'ai perdue légèrement la confiance du groupe de discussion. je sait qu'il y a des gens honnête dans le groupe mais il y a aussi des pommes pourrie. ce sont de eu que je me méfie le plus. je suis sure qu'il y a une ou des personnes mal intentionné sur le forum. oui je voulait donner mon invention au monde mais la seul chose que je veut pas c'est que quelqu'un s'empare de mon idée pour en faire son profit personnel. comment vous vous sentiriez si vous inventer quelque chose de révolutionnaire et qu'un autre prend le mérite a votre place. et bien moi je ne serait vraiment pas heureux, je me fou de l'argent que cela peut rapporté, je ne suis pas riche mais je suis très heureux, ainsi l'argent ne donne pas le bonheur nécessairement et je ne fait vraiment pas cela pour l'argent. tout ce que voulait au début c'était de montrer l'invention que j'avait travailler depuis des mois et que j'ai réussi a faire fonctionner, le test que vous avez vue dans ma première vidéo que certaine personne pense a du fake était en réalité est mon premier vrai test du dz générateur. j'était très heureux de mon test et j'ai décider de le mettre en ligne et la tout a débouler pour moi. je ne voulait pas que tout le monde essaye de répliquer ce que j'ai fait ,même vous vous avez voulue répliqué ce que j'avait fait malgré que je vous avait mentionner que mon prototype n'était qu'une ébauche et ne fonctionnait pas a son maximum encore j'avait beaucoup d'amélioration a apporter a ce projet même avec mon deuxième prototype je ne suis pas sure de tout réglé encore alors pourquoi l'empressement de faire une réplique qui selon moi n'est pas encore a sa pleine capacité? bref des le début je me demandait quoi faire avec cela je voulait seulement donner mon invention au monde entier mais comment empêcher qu'une personne de s'empare de mon idée a sont propre profit ? la est la question un brevet me semble pour le moment la meilleur option même si je n'ai pas vraiment les moyen de dépenser autant d'argent pour un bout de papier tant que je n'aurai pas l'argent nécessaire pour un brevet le reste de mes secret resteront avec moi, a moins que vous me prouviez du contraire que si ses rendue public personne ne peut faire une demande de brevet a ma place, dans le temps de tesla tout était tellement différent, aujourd'hui c'est tellement rendue compliquer, de la j'ai tout retirer mes vidéo sur youtube. si vous avez mentionner que vous avez les doigts fatiguer de traduire et bien moi cela dure depuis que j'ai mis ma vidéo sur youtube. alors je vais prendre une pause de quelque mois pour me vidé la tête et de réfléchir a tout cela. je veut me concentrer sur mon deuxième prototype au lieu de passer des heures a lire et a répondre au bon et moins bon commentaire, pour de ce qui est de ce que vous avez commencer, c'est vraiment une beau travail rien ne vous empêche de continuer vous êtes sure la bonne voit. la seul réticence que j'ai se sont les mosfet que vous avez utiliser, je ne suis pas sure si il vont résister a l'ampérage que vous injecterez? je crois que une seul bobine prend assez d'ampérage, vérifier avant combien tire une bobine versus le 2 amp que peuvent fournir le choix de vos mosfet. la dessus bonne nuit ma semaine commence très top le matin et je vais aller me reposer un peut. pierre cotnoir
-
I'm opening the topic for the rest of the day (New York time) I ask that you please restrict your posts to only important or useful information.
Fr. J'ouvre le sujet pour le reste de la journée (heure de New York) Je vous demande de restreindre vos messages uniquement à des informations importantes ou utiles.
-
For those using the L298N:
As we have changed to Pierre's ladder switch scheme, using each half of the L298N H bridge, as a half bridge will increase current capacity to 3.5A
If we need more current then two power transistors, one NPN and one PNP, can have their bases connected to the output of the half bridge (via a suitable resistor to set the base current) and that will extend the drive current range to whatever we like, depending on the transistors rating.
It still will be a cheap solution.
Note: I modified this post changing MOSFET's to bipolar transistors.
MOSFET's would have a rail limitation in this configuration.
Regards
L192
Fr. Pour ceux qui utilisent le L298N:
Comme nous avons changé le schéma de l'interrupteur d'échelle de Pierre, en utilisant chaque moitié du pont L298N H, comme un demi-pont va augmenter la capacité actuelle à 3,5 A
Si nous avons besoin de plus de courant alors deux MOSFET de puissance, un canal N et un canal P peuvent avoir leurs portes connectées à la sortie du demi-pont (via une résistance de 10 ohms sur chaque porte) et cela étendra la gamme actuelle à ce que nous voulons. en fonction de la note du MOSFET.
Ce sera toujours une solution bon marché.
Cordialement
-
I'm opening the topic for the rest of the day (New York time) I ask that you please restrict your posts to only important or useful information.
Fr. J'ouvre le sujet pour le reste de la journée (heure de New York) Je vous demande de restreindre vos messages uniquement à des informations importantes ou utiles.
Hi Luc
A message for Pierre.
In Canada it costs 300$ to make an application, you do not need to pay any more for around 1 year, that is if you do the patent yourself and not in cure agent fees. Once filled you have a proven prior art, you really don't have to do any more, no other person can patent it, only the prior art holder, even if you let it die, it is registered.
This does not stop anyone else from making it, or selling it, that is what open source is at the end of the day. If you want to stop people from making it and selling it, you will have to obtain a patent, the cost is huge. Then there are the companies who will use very expensive law firms to break that patent and patent for themselves, very expensive to fight.
All these paths, been there, done that, and I'm not joking. Las month I informed the Canadian patents office of the prior art which joi scientific is trying to patent, along with documented evidence and dates and a Canadian application by myself. All this just took me time and really I do not need to do anymore, I hope, or the patents office will have a problem, they know there is a prior art which precedes the dates, it should at least be cited.
Prior art is very powerful for stopping someone from patenting your work, but not to stop anyone from using it or selling it, that's for the rich of this world I'm afraid. Publishing is an alternative, that's what I do now (research gate).
Just some information, take it or leave it, no problem.
Regards
Mike 8)
Fr.
Bonjour Luc, Un message pour Pierre.
Au Canada, il en coûte $300. pour faire une demande, vous n'avez pas besoin de payer plus pour environ 1 an, c'est-à-dire si vous faites vous-même le brevet et pas les frais d'agent de guérison. Une fois rempli vous avez un art antérieur prouvé, vous n'avez vraiment plus rien à faire, personne d'autre ne peut le breveter, seul le détenteur de l'art antérieur, même si vous le laissez mourir, c'est enregistré.
Cela n'empêche personne d'en faire ou de le vendre, c'est ce que l'open source est en fin de compte. Si vous voulez empêcher les gens de le faire et de le vendre, vous devrez obtenir un brevet, le coût est énorme. Ensuite, il ya les entreprises qui vont utiliser des cabinets d'avocats très coûteux pour briser ce brevet et breveter pour eux-mêmes, très coûteux à se battre.
Tous ces chemins ont été faits, et je ne plaisante pas. Au cours du mois, j'ai informé le Bureau des brevets du Canada de l'état de la technique que Joi Scientific essayait de breveter, ainsi que des preuves et des dates documentées et une demande canadienne par moi-même. Tout cela m'a juste pris du temps et je n'ai vraiment plus besoin de le faire, j'espère, ou le bureau des brevets aura un problème, ils savent qu'il y a un art antérieur qui précède les dates, il devrait au moins être cité.
L'art antérieur est très puissant pour empêcher quelqu'un de breveter votre travail, mais pas pour empêcher quiconque de l'utiliser ou de le vendre, c'est pour les riches de ce monde que j'ai peur. La publication est une alternative, c'est ce que je fais maintenant (porte de la recherche).
Juste quelques informations, prenez-le ou laissez-le, pas de problème.
Cordialement
-
With regards to other things shifting/rotating, that we don't see...
I you look in the back stator region, (see pmgs simulation result without rotor in place), apart from the pole flux there is also the counter flux due to the rotor load.
The counter flux will be opposed for each pair of adjacent poles, shown in red, assuming both adjacent poles are present during the same period.
Depending on timing, the counter flux could actually aid the adjacent poles flux, if this presented a lower reluctance path.
Maybe pmgr can model the counter flux, so we can see exactly what happens here?
Regards
L192
Fr. En ce qui concerne d'autres choses décalant / tournant, que nous ne voyons pas ...
Je regarde dans la région du stator arrière, (voir le résultat de la simulation de pmgr sans rotor en place), en dehors du flux de pôle, il y a aussi le contre-flux dû à la charge du rotor.
Le contre-flux sera opposé pour chaque paire de pôles adjacents, représentée en rouge, en supposant que les deux pôles adjacents sont présents pendant la même période.
En fonction du temps, le flux de comptage pourrait réellement aider le flux de pôles adjacents, si cela présentait un chemin de réluctance inférieur.
Pmgr peut peut-être modéliser le contre-flux, afin que nous puissions voir exactement ce qui se passe ici?
Cordialement
-
Last night after locking the topic I received the below message from Pierre.
Fr. La nuit dernière, après avoir verrouillé le sujet, j'ai reçu le message ci-dessous de Pierre.
hello Luc, I want to let you know that what I wrote was not aim at you. I was addressing the whole forum. Yes, I slightly lost confidence of the discussion group. I know there are some honest people in the group but there are also some rotten apples and they are the ones I'm wary the most of. I'm sure there is one or more people ill-intentioned on the forum. Yes i wanted to give my invention to the world but the the only thing I do not want is for someone to takeover my idea to make a personal profit. How would you feel if you invent something revolutionary and another person takes credit for it in you place. I would not be very happy. I don't give a dam about money this can bring, I'm not rich but I'm very happy, so money doesn't necessarily give happiness and I really don't do this for money. All I wanted to start with was to demonstrate my invention that took me months to build and I managed to get it to run. The test that you saw in my first video that some thinks it's a fake was actually my first real test of the dz generator. I was very happy with the test results and decided to share it online. Then everything got crazy. I didn't want everyone to try to replicate what I achieved, even you wanted to replicate despite my mentioning that my prototype was only a draft and did not work at its best. I had a lot of improvement to bring to the project even with my second prototype. I'm not even sure of all the needed changes yet, so why all the eagerness to make a replication which in my opinion is not yet operating to full capacity? When I first saw it working I was wondering what to do with it, I just want to give my invention to the whole world but how do I prevent a person from taking over of my idea to profit from it? at this moment a patent sounds like the best option, even if I don't have the means to spend so much money for a piece of paper. Until I have the money for a patent the rest of my secrets will stay with me, unless you prove otherwise that if it's made public nobody can apply for a patent in my place? In the time of Tesla everything was so different, today it's so complicated. So for now I've removed all my youtube videos. You've mention that you're fingers are tired of translating, for me it never stopped ever since I put my video on youtube. So I'll take a break of a few months to free my mind and carefully think this all over. I want to focus on my second prototype instead of spending hours reading and responding to the good and not so good comments. Looking at what you've built so far as replication it's really a beautiful job and nothing is preventing you to continue, you're on a good path. The only concern I have are the mosfet's you use, I'm not sure if they will withstand the the input amperage? just a single coil takes a lot of amperage, check before how much one coil draws compared to the 2 amps the mosfet's can handle. That's it for tonight. My week starts very early in the morning and I'm going to rest a little bit. Pierre Cotnoir
Fr. bonjour luc, je tiens a vous mentionner que je ne vous ai pas viser vous pour ce que j'ai écrit, je visait l'ensemble du forum, oui j'ai perdue légèrement la confiance du groupe de discussion. je sait qu'il y a des gens honnête dans le groupe mais il y a aussi des pommes pourrie. ce sont de eu que je me méfie le plus. je suis sure qu'il y a une ou des personnes mal intentionné sur le forum. oui je voulait donner mon invention au monde mais la seul chose que je veut pas c'est que quelqu'un s'empare de mon idée pour en faire son profit personnel. comment vous vous sentiriez si vous inventer quelque chose de révolutionnaire et qu'un autre prend le mérite a votre place. et bien moi je ne serait vraiment pas heureux, je me fou de l'argent que cela peut rapporté, je ne suis pas riche mais je suis très heureux, ainsi l'argent ne donne pas le bonheur nécessairement et je ne fait vraiment pas cela pour l'argent. tout ce que voulait au début c'était de montrer l'invention que j'avait travailler depuis des mois et que j'ai réussi a faire fonctionner, le test que vous avez vue dans ma première vidéo que certaine personne pense a du fake était en réalité est mon premier vrai test du dz générateur. j'était très heureux de mon test et j'ai décider de le mettre en ligne et la tout a débouler pour moi. je ne voulait pas que tout le monde essaye de répliquer ce que j'ai fait ,même vous vous avez voulue répliqué ce que j'avait fait malgré que je vous avait mentionner que mon prototype n'était qu'une ébauche et ne fonctionnait pas a son maximum encore j'avait beaucoup d'amélioration a apporter a ce projet même avec mon deuxième prototype je ne suis pas sure de tout réglé encore alors pourquoi l'empressement de faire une réplique qui selon moi n'est pas encore a sa pleine capacité? bref des le début je me demandait quoi faire avec cela je voulait seulement donner mon invention au monde entier mais comment empêcher qu'une personne de s'empare de mon idée a sont propre profit ? la est la question un brevet me semble pour le moment la meilleur option même si je n'ai pas vraiment les moyen de dépenser autant d'argent pour un bout de papier tant que je n'aurai pas l'argent nécessaire pour un brevet le reste de mes secret resteront avec moi, a moins que vous me prouviez du contraire que si ses rendue public personne ne peut faire une demande de brevet a ma place, dans le temps de tesla tout était tellement différent, aujourd'hui c'est tellement rendue compliquer, de la j'ai tout retirer mes vidéo sur youtube. si vous avez mentionner que vous avez les doigts fatiguer de traduire et bien moi cela dure depuis que j'ai mis ma vidéo sur youtube. alors je vais prendre une pause de quelque mois pour me vidé la tête et de réfléchir a tout cela. je veut me concentrer sur mon deuxième prototype au lieu de passer des heures a lire et a répondre au bon et moins bon commentaire, pour de ce qui est de ce que vous avez commencer, c'est vraiment une beau travail rien ne vous empêche de continuer vous êtes sure la bonne voit. la seul réticence que j'ai se sont les mosfet que vous avez utiliser, je ne suis pas sure si il vont résister a l'ampérage que vous injecterez? je crois que une seul bobine prend assez d'ampérage, vérifier avant combien tire une bobine versus le 2 amp que peuvent fournir le choix de vos mosfet. la dessus bonne nuit ma semaine commence très top le matin et je vais aller me reposer un peut. pierre cotnoir
"The only concern I have are the mosfet's you use, I'm not sure if they will withstand the the input amperage? just a single coil takes a lot of amperage, check before how much one coil draws compared to the 2 amps the mosfet's can handle."
I agree with Pierre's statement, as he and only he is aware of his device....
Perhaps "Logic-Fets" would be a solution as they can @5v handle some hefty current, it's just choosing the most efficient one and circuit build.
C'mon guys give Pierre a little assistance here : ]
-
Hello
This with Pierre is a pity.
But I can understand him.
As I have already written I use the following circuit.
Here again the circuit diagram for 36 coils.
Best regards Andy
Fr. Bonjour
Ceci avec Pierre est dommage.
Mais je peux le comprendre.
Comme je l'ai déjà écrit, j'utilise le circuit suivant.
Ici encore le schéma de circuit pour 36 bobines.
Cordialement Andy
-
Here is a half bridge driver for N channel MOSFET's up to 60VDC rail.
It has shoot through prevention under voltage lockout.
If you leave both inputs low both upper and lower MOSFET will be off.
PDIP package only so unless making a PCB you would have to solder on a DIL header.
$5
L192
Fr. Voici un driver demi-pont pour le MOSFET à canal N jusqu'à 60VDC.
Il a tiré à travers la prévention sous le verrouillage de tension.
Si vous laissez les deux entrées faibles, les MOSFET supérieur et inférieur seront désactivés.
Paquet PDIP seulement donc à moins de faire un PCB vous auriez à souder sur un en-tête DIL.
$5.
-
SiLabs:
Si8230 Half bridge driver operation similar to the Linear 11602 but with higher voltage rating .
Later technology.
SOIC 16 package wide or narrow.
$2.85
Fr. SiLabs:
Si8230 Fonctionnement du driver demi-pont similaire au Linear 11602 mais avec une tension nominale plus élevée. Technologie postérieure
SOIC 16 paquet large ou étroit. $2.85
-
http://www.electronics-lab.com/project/high-current-discrete-half-bridge-based-ir2104-ir2101/
IR2101 based for those that want a PCB overlay already designed.
60V 30A
L192
-
Thanks L192 for all these additional options.
But can you help me out with my present build with the questions I PM you hours ago?
Thanks for your help
Luc
-
Hi Gotoluc,
Pretty late here so here is a quick and dirty markup.
5V regulator powers logic side of L298N
You can feed in 35V but the regulator would get very hot so I would use +12V.
The diodes for the transistors are in place on the board.
I have shown connections for Pierres ladder switch arrangement, so the switches are connected in parallel for a half bridge with a 3.5A rating instead of 2A.
The enable lines switch off both transistors. When enabled the In1 In2 lines are tied together high or low TTL on this input will switch on either the upper or lower transistor pairs.
Regards
L192
-
Hi Gotoluc,
Pretty late here so here is a quick and dirty markup.
5V regulator powers logic side of L298N
You can feed in 35V but the regulator would get very hot so I would use +12V.
The diodes for the transistors are in place on the board.
I have shown connections for Pierres ladder switch arrangement, so the switches are connected in parallel for a half bridge with a 3.5A rating instead of 2A.
The enable lines switch off both transistors. When enabled the In1 In2 lines are tied together high or low TTL on this input will switch on either the upper or lower transistor pairs.
Regards
L192
Thanks L192 for your help. No need to make the circuit any cleaner unless you wish to do so,
Is there a way to directly connect an external 5v power source for the boards logic (bypass voltage regulator) so I can use a higher input voltage then 12v?
Is it just a matter of pulling out the "5V Enable" jumper seen in below picture?
I was planing on going up to the 20 volt rage as maybe a good amount of saturation could be needed.
Also, how many outputs from the Arduino 3560 will be needed to control 30 of L298N?
Thanks
Luc
-
Hi everyone,
I've been busy with my build but today I'm opening the topic as I have some questions.
I want to know if I leave the pin jumpers on each (A Enable & B Enable) of the L298N or do I remove them?
Also, has their been a post on how the four control wires of each L298N are grouped and then to which pin numbers the groups are connected on the 2560?
Thanks for your help
Luc
Fr. Salut à tous,
J'ai été occupé avec ma construction mais aujourd'hui j'ouvre le sujet car j'ai quelques questions.
Je veux savoir si je laisse les jumpers de broche sur chacun (A Enable & B Enable) du L298N ou est-ce que je les enlève?
Aussi, a-t-il été un message sur la façon dont les quatre fils de contrôle de chaque L298N sont groupés et ensuite sur quels numéros de broche les groupes sont connectés sur le 2560?
Merci de votre aide
Luc
-
Hi everyone,
I've been busy with my build but today I'm opening the topic as I have some questions.
I want to know if I leave the pin jumpers on each enable of the L298N or do I remove them?
Also, has their been a post on how the four control wires of each L298N are grouped and then to which pin numbers the groups are connected on the 2560?
Thanks for your help
Luc
-
Thanks listener191 for the diagram.
So it's confirmed that the A Enable and B Enable Jumpers are remover.
I also want to use a higher voltage then 12vdc so I'm also going to remove the 5V voltage regulator (5v Enable) Jumper and power all the 30 L298N boards with an external power supply connected to all boards to the 5v connector.
Now all that is left to know is how the four control wires to each L298N x 30 are grouped and then to which pin numbers the groups are connected on the 2560 to work with the program TK has modified for my 30 slot stator?
This question can be answered by yourself if you wish, TK or slider2732
Thanks
Luc
Fr. Merci listener191 pour le diagramme.
Il est donc confirmé que les jumpers A Enable et B Enable sont supprimés.
Je veux également utiliser une tension plus élevée que 12Vcc, donc je vais également retirer le (5v Enable) jumper du régulateur de tension 5V et alimenter toutes les 30 cartes L298N avec une alimentation externe connectée a touts les cartes au connecteur 5v.
Maintenant tout ce qui reste à savoir est comment les quatre fils de contrôle à chaque L298N x 30 sont groupés et ensuite à quels numéros de broche les groupes sont connectés sur le 2560 pour travailler avec le programme que TK a modifié pour mon stator à 30 slots?
Cette question peut être répondue par vous-même si vous le souhaitez, TK ou slider2732
Merci
Luc
-
.....
-
My version, 36 slots
-
Hi Gotoluc,
Each L298N has two full H bridges. We parallel the H bridge to make a half bridge.You only need 15 boards and you have 30 half bridges.
Regards
L192
-
Hi guys,
When comparing Pierre's shared program with 1->2 coils activation against real operation and his explanation in videos there is inconsistency about how many coils need to be activated at once and in what order. You can see my post in open thread about what is seen in recordings - http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/msg519057/#msg519057
Also the most important part is not in coils switching as Pierre mentioned. My bet is - he managed to make BEMF/interwinding induction recovery back to bank of supercapacitors of most energy spent and is not telling that. Also the Carlos Benitez patent No.17811 have strong relationship in what is causing extra energy there in my opinion.
Cheers!
-
Hi Gotoluc,
Each L298N has two full H bridges. We parallel the H bridge to make a half bridge.You only need 18 boards and you have 30 half bridges.
Regards
L192
What... I don't understand anymore!!!... I posted this video on page 3 of this topic showing 30 boards: https://youtu.be/3-HHaPDOWAM (https://youtu.be/3-HHaPDOWAM) and no one said anything. Now you're saying I need 18?
Can someone PLEASE make a Full diagram like I have asked for in the video.
I can build stuff but I need everyones help with the Aduino programming to work with the electronic circuit connections
I've just wasted 2 days soldering 30 boards.
I don't understand how 18 boards can control 30 coils?
Luc
Fr. Quoi ... Je ne comprends plus !!! ... J'ai posté cette vidéo à la page 3 de ce sujet montrant 30 L298N: https://youtu.be/3-HHaPDOWAM et personne n'a rien dit. Maintenant vous dites que j'ai besoin de 18 ans?
Quelqu'un peut-il S'IL VOUS PLAÎT faire un diagramme complet comme je l'ai demandé dans la vidéo.
Je peux construire des choses mais j'ai besoin que tout le monde aide avec la programmation Aduino pour travailler avec les connexions de circuits électroniques
Je viens de gaspiller 2 jours à souder 30 planches.
Je ne comprends pas comment 18 planches peuvent contrôler 30 bobines?
Luc
-
Hi Gotoluc,
The schematic I sent shows how they are connected.
It true they don't have opto isolation.
I was looking at the specification of the opto isolated board version. However the diodes are either side of any one coil and clamped by the high capacitance of the rail capacitors, so there should be no voltage rise over rail.
I don't know what local transients there may be on the board, that will have to be checked.
I am only planning to run these boards at low voltage, then use the BTS7960 boards to run at 20-35V.
The enable jumpers have to come off otherwise the outputs are always active.
Regards
L192
-
Hi Gotoluc,
Perhaps this makes it clearer.
Regards
L192
-
Hi Gotoluc,
Perhaps this makes it clearer.
Regards
L192
If you check Pierre's explanation video screenshot in https://i.imgur.com/NkNCryA.png (https://i.imgur.com/NkNCryA.png) - the solution would be full bridge on each coil including BEMF recovery circuit.
30 coils would mean 30 full bridge circuits.
-
liestener,luc
attention les sorties out1 et out2 sont en court-circuit sur le schéma Reply #120.
beware the out1 and out2 outputs are shorted on the Reply # 120 schema.
-
Hi Gotoluc,
Perhaps this makes it clearer.
Regards
L192
Yes, that makes it clear now but changes everything!... I'm not sure if that's how TK envisioned his program to work and maybe if we had 30 it could handle more overall current?
Why did you not say something earlier when I made the video on page 3 or then when TK posted his 30 coil program?
Regards
Luc
Fr. Oui, cela le rend clair maintenant mais change touts! Je ne sais pas si c'est comme ça que TK a imaginé que son programme fonctionne et peut-être que si nous en avions 30, il pourrait gérer plus de courant global?
Pourquoi n'avez-vous pas dit quelque chose plus tôt quand j'ai fait la vidéo à la page 3 et quand TK a publié son programme de 30 bobine?
Cordialement
Luc
-
If you check Pierre's explanation video screenshot in https://i.imgur.com/NkNCryA.png (https://i.imgur.com/NkNCryA.png) - the solution would be full bridge on each coil including BEMF recovery circuit.
30 coils would mean 30 full bridge circuits.
Hi T-1000,
Originally that's what I planned for in the case of the 36 slot stator i.e 36 H bridges.
This was on the assumption that each coil was switched separately by it own H bridge however, what Pierre is showing in that diagram, is 36 half bridges each one created by two single pole relays and all 36 coils in series which is quiet a different arrangement.
So each high side relay that's on, is paired with low side relay thats on, 6 coils further around the series.
To achieve that scheme electronically you have to use a half bridge configuration.
Also what emerged was the current required by the six coil series, intimated to be 10A, at least that's the rating of the relays. So really now the L298N's for me at least are only a connection proving tool and I plan to use a much more robust half bridge with 45A 45V rating and built in opto isolation, over current protection etc.
Regards
L192
-
Yes, that help a little and changes everything but I'm not sure if that's how TK envisioned his program to work and maybe if we had 30 it could handle more overall current?
Why did you not say something earlier when I made the video on page 3 and then when TK posted his program?
Regards
Luc
Fr. Oui, cela aide un peu et change tout mais je ne sais pas si c'est comme ça que TK a imaginé que son programme fonctionne et peut-être que si nous en avions 30, il pourrait gérer plus de courant global?
Pourquoi n'avez-vous pas dit quelque chose plus tôt quand j'ai fait la vidéo à la page 3 et quand TK a publié son programme?
Cordialement
Luc
Hi Gotoluc,
Quite simply I am spending time building the stator, so I have not spent time on the software, or anything else.
If I stop and do all you are requesting, i.e. make a schematic that shows the exact connection scheme, write the code etc, then I wont get my own build done.
Regards
L192
-
This is my wiring job that I have done to 30 L298N: https://youtu.be/QwIwdyHXMz0 (https://youtu.be/QwIwdyHXMz0)
Fr. C'est mon travail de câblage que j'ai fait à 30 L298N: https://youtu.be/QwIwdyHXMz0
-
Why are there less than 36 connections coming from the stator? => 28!? maybe 24?
should be 72 !
-
Hi Gotoluc,
Quite simply I am spending time building the stator, so I have not spent time on the software, or anything else.
If I stop and do all you are requesting, i.e. make a schematic that shows the exact connection scheme, write the code etc, then I wont get my own build done.
Regards
L192
Dear L192
I'm not saying you should do all those things but your idea sounds good and I just wish you would of wrote a message.
I appreciate your help and participation but your suggestion (which sounds good) changes everything. Just wish I knew about it earlier so we could all consider the pros and cons as a group.
Kind regards
Luc
Fr. Cher L192
Je ne dis pas que vous devriez faire toutes ces choses mais votre idée semble bonne et j'aimerais juste que vous écriviez un message.
J'apprécie votre aide et votre participation, mais votre suggestion (qui sonne bien) change tout. Je souhaite juste que je le savais plus tôt afin que nous puissions tous considérer les avantages et les inconvénients en tant que groupe.
Sincères amitiés
Luc
-
Why are there less than 36 connections coming from the stator? => 28!? maybe 24?
should be 72 !
Hi r2fpl,
He probably has the coil connected in series at the stator and then just pulls 36 wires down to the relays.
Regards
L192
-
Dear L192
I'm not saying you should do all those things but your idea sounds good and I just wish you would of wrote a message to suggest it to TK or anyone else that understand more.
I appreciate your help and participation but your suggestion (which sounds good) changes everything. Just wish I knew about it earlier so we could all consider the pros and cons.
Kind regards
Luc
Fr. Cher L192
Je ne dis pas que vous devriez faire toutes ces choses mais votre idée semble bonne et j'aimerais juste que vous écriviez un message pour le suggérer à TK ou à quelqu'un d'autre qui comprendrait plus.
J'apprécie votre aide et votre participation, mais votre suggestion (qui sonne bien) change tout. Je souhaite juste que je savais à ce sujet plus tôt afin que nous puissions tous considérer les avantages et les inconvénients.
Sincères amitiés
Luc
Hi Gotoluc,
I normally write my own software, so the only reason I looked at the TK software is that you said that is what you plan to use with the L298N boards.
Sorry but I don't analyze everything that is posted.
Forgive me for asking and please don't take this the wrong way but how do you manage to function in this environment without having all the necessary skills?
Please remember I know nothing about the individuals on this forum.. is this how it is for many members?
Regards
L192
-
Hi r2fpl,
He probably has the coil connected in series at the stator and then just pulls 36 wires down to the relays.
Regards
L192
Hi listener191,
No, See ... only 4 plugs, Full cables in 3 plugs. 4 plugs is 4 cables. Total=28 !
not 36 or not 72.
How connect this ? It is impossible. How it is to the program Arduino ?
-
liestener,luc
attention les sorties out1 et out2 sont en court-circuit sur le schéma Reply #120.
beware the out1 and out2 outputs are shorted on the Reply # 120 schema.
Hi ARTIMOSAT,
Yes this is intentional, both sides of the H bridge are driven together to produce a half bridge with nearly double the current capacity.
Regards
L192
-
Hi Gotoluc,
I normally write my own software, so the only reason I looked at the TK software is that you said that is what you plan to use with the L298N boards.
Sorry but I don't analyze everything that is posted.
Forgive me for asking and please don't take this the wrong way but how do you manage to function in this environment without having all the necessary skills?
Please remember I know nothing about the individuals on this forum.. is this how it is for many members?
Regards
L192
@L192
Looking at your total post count I now see you probably haven't been member for very long and understandably don't know who's who.
The research work I usually do is not replications. It's usually my own ideas based on electro and permanent magnets experiments which I share.
From my well known history and readiness to truly build and share video test results, if I need any electronics help usually well versed electronic engineer like TK and other members of this forum will help.
Sorry if I made you feel bad, it's not my intention. Just disappointed something so simple was not thought of or understood earlier.
Thanks for making it clear.
Slider2732 is now looking over your suggestion to see if it's the direction we will take. Anyone else is also free to do so and share your pros and cons.
Regards
Luc
Fr. @ L192
En regardant votre nombre total de messages, je vois maintenant que vous n'avez probablement pas été membre depuis très longtemps et, naturellement, tu ne sais pas qui est qui.
Le travail de recherche que je fais habituellement n'est pas une répétition. C'est habituellement mes propres idées basées sur des expériences d'électro et d'aimants permanents que je partage.
De mon histoire bien connue et prêt à vraiment construire et partager les résultats des tests vidéo, si j'ai besoin d'aide électronique généralement un ingénieur électronique bien versé comme TK et d'autres membres de ce forum aidera.
Désolé si je vous ai fait mal, ce n'est pas mon intention. Juste déçu quelque chose de si simple n'a pas été pensé ou compris plus tôt.
Merci de le préciser.
Slider2732 regarde maintenant votre suggestion pour voir si c'est le chemin que nous prendrons. Tout le monde est également libre de le faire et de partager vos avantages et inconvénients.
Cordialement
Luc
-
My version, 36 slots
Very good work r2fpl
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Fr. Très bon travail r2fpl
Merci d'avoir partagé
Luc
-
In the datasheet for the chip version of the L298N we see 600mA per channel and 1.2A total. That's where I was in error when talking to you Luc, thinking the module version you have could be similarly limited. However, Sparkfun say 4A for the heatsinked version:
https://www.sparkfun.com/products/9479
If all 30 are now soldered, do it that route...if it doesn't run, change to L192's method ? :)
It gives an option and, if anything untoward was to happen to any of the modules in testing, you have L192's clever method to replace up to 12 defective L298N's !
Here's a quick demo of a simple rotating fields method for solid state.
It's merely outputting Pierre's type of code structure to 3 inputs of a chip version of the L298N. Coil 1 on, Coil 2 on, Coil 1 off etc.
The LED's indicate the position in the firing order. The motor is a 12 pole floppy drive 3 phase, where none of its circuit is used, the 3 coil sections are controlled directly by the Arduino and L298N. The L298N Enables are connected to Vcc.
What I can say, is that Pierre's way of running coils does work, the fields evidently rotate fine because the motor is seen running smoothly.
The short vid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZ9bm0EN8cc
Here's the simple code:
// 3 phase motor driver
// Variable speed
// Slider 2732, March 2018
int pot = 0;
void setup()
{
pinMode(2, OUTPUT);
pinMode(3, OUTPUT);
pinMode(4, OUTPUT);
pinMode(A0, INPUT);
}
void loop()
{
pot = analogRead(A0);
pot = map(pot,0,1023, 2,200);
digitalWrite (2, HIGH);
delay(pot);
digitalWrite (4, LOW);
delay(pot);
digitalWrite (3, HIGH);
delay(pot);
digitalWrite (2, LOW);
delay(pot);
digitalWrite (4, HIGH);
delay(pot);
digitalWrite (3, LOW);
delay(pot);
}
-
Hi listener191,
No, See ... only 4 plugs, Full cables in 3 plugs. 4 plugs is 4 cables. Total=28 !
not 36 or not 72.
How connect this ? It is impossible. How it is to the program Arduino ?
5 connectors (difficult to see)
-
@L192
Looking at your total post count I now see you probably haven't been member for very long and understandably don't know who's who.
The research work I usually do is not replications. It's usually my own ideas based on electro and permanent magnets experiments which I share.
From my well known history and readiness to truly build and share video test results, if I need any electronics help usually well versed electronic engineer like TK and other members of this forum will help.
Sorry if I made you feel bad, it's not my intention. Just disappointed something so simple was not thought of or understood earlier.
Thanks for making it clear.
Slider2732 is now looking over your suggestion to see if it's the direction we will take. Anyone else is also free to do so and share your pros and cons.
Regards
Luc
Fr. @ L192
En regardant votre nombre total de messages, je vois maintenant que vous n'avez probablement pas été membre depuis très longtemps et, naturellement, tu ne sais pas qui est qui.
Le travail de recherche que je fais habituellement n'est pas une répétition. C'est habituellement mes propres idées basées sur des expériences d'électro et d'aimants permanents que je partage.
De mon histoire bien connue et prêt à vraiment construire et partager les résultats des tests vidéo, si j'ai besoin d'aide électronique généralement un ingénieur électronique bien versé comme TK et d'autres membres de ce forum aidera.
Désolé si je vous ai fait mal, ce n'est pas mon intention. Juste déçu quelque chose de si simple n'a pas été pensé ou compris plus tôt.
Merci de le préciser.
Slider2732 regarde maintenant votre suggestion pour voir si c'est le chemin que nous prendrons. Tout le monde est également libre de le faire et de partager vos avantages et inconvénients.
Cordialement
Luc
Hi Gotoluc,
I have been a member for 10 years, I just very rarely look at the forum (or any other forum)
I have no inclination to participate in the politics that end up permeating every thread eventually, so it is best to not linger too long.
Some projects I have worked on have a duration of several years, so that arrangement works for me.
This one is different as it has similarities to one I worked on 10 years ago based on AC and a traveling wave in a three phase rotary transformer.
Regards
L192
-
5 connectors (difficult to see)
Hi Cheors,
Perhaps he is running a parallel scheme for the 6 poles, that would reduce the count.
Regards
L192
-
If all 30 are now soldered, do it that route...if it doesn't run, change to L192's method ? :)
Thanks for your reply Slider2732 but I'm going to need a little more than that.
If I was to connect all 30 L298N I would need for someone who knows the program and better knowledge in electronics to tell me which boards can be grouped together so the 120 wires can connect in the Arduino which only has some 50 or so connections. See the the problem?
Now if L192 suggestion of using 18 L298N is capable of handling the same amount of current as 30 L298N and I only need to deal with 72 wires to the Arduino instead of 120 then I would rather go that route.
I need help one way or the other and 18 sounds a lot easier to deal with then 30.
So are you or anyone else ready to help me with this part to see what this device will do?
Regards
Luc
Fr. Merci pour votre réponse Slider2732 mais je vais avoir besoin d'un peu plus que ça.
Si je devais connecter les 30 L298N, il faudrait que quelqu'un qui connaisse le programme et de meilleures connaissances en électronique me dise quelles cartes peuvent être regroupées pour que les 120 fils puissent se connecter à l'Arduino qui n'a qu'une cinquantaine de connexions. Voir le problème?
Maintenant, si la suggestion L192 d'utiliser 18 L298N est capable de gérer la même quantité de courant que 30 L298N et j'ai seulement besoin de traiter 72 fils à l'Arduino au lieu de 120 alors je préfère aller dans cette voie.
J'ai besoin d'aide dans un sens ou dans l'autre et 18 sons beaucoup plus faciles à traiter que 30.
Alors êtes-vous ou quelqu'un d'autre prêt à m'aider avec cette partie pour voir ce que cet appareil va faire?
Cordialement
Luc
-
Thanks for your reply Slider2732 but I'm going to need a little more than that.
If I was to connect all 30 L298N I would need for someone who knows the program and better knowledge in electronics to tell me which boards can be grouped together so the 120 wires can connect in the Arduino which only has some 50 or so connections. See the the problem?
Now if L192 suggestion of using 18 L298N is capable of handling the same amount of current as 30 L298N and I only need to deal with 72 wires to the Arduino instead of 120 then I would rather go that route.
I need help one way or the other and 18 sounds a lot easier to deal with then 30.
So are you or anyone else ready to help me with this part to see what this device will do?
Regards
Luc
Fr. Merci pour votre réponse Slider2732 mais je vais avoir besoin d'un peu plus que ça.
Si je devais connecter les 30 L298N, il faudrait que quelqu'un qui connaisse le programme et de meilleures connaissances en électronique me dise quelles cartes peuvent être regroupées pour que les 120 fils puissent se connecter à l'Arduino qui n'a qu'une cinquantaine de connexions. Voir le problème?
Maintenant, si la suggestion L192 d'utiliser 18 L298N est capable de gérer la même quantité de courant que 30 L298N et j'ai seulement besoin de traiter 72 fils à l'Arduino au lieu de 120 alors je préfère aller dans cette voie.
J'ai besoin d'aide dans un sens ou dans l'autre et 18 sons beaucoup plus faciles à traiter que 30.
Alors êtes-vous ou quelqu'un d'autre prêt à m'aider avec cette partie pour voir ce que cet appareil va faire?
Cordialement
Luc
Hi Gotoluc,
30 L298N H bridges individually connected to 30 coils would be 2A per coil, 60A in total, whereas with the series scheme there are 3 current paths running through three half bridges, each handling 3.5A or 10.5A in total... big difference.
Regards
L192
-
Luc - I did think there was a circuit to follow with the 30 modules, but if not and if they can cope with the needed amperage via L192's design, it makes sense to do that.
We're lucky to have such input as his in my opinion. Pierre used relays, so it's a case of what can work effectively.
The changes to the code are something I can do, or help with, as i'm sure others will :)
Now, yes, it becomes a case of what gets soldered to where.
Is there a flowchart or diagram of circuit path ? for example how the diode recovery gets back to the supercaps ?
There may be areas that can be soldered up while waiting for a full circuit diagram or the code changes.
-
Hi Slider2739,
I received a personal message from pmgr and he is wiling to help map out all the connections for me according to the 2560 programs timings.
As for the coil recovery diodes, I already asked about that on page 8 and L192 has replied and said the L298N have recovery diodes built into the board
http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg518983/#msg518983
I guess somehow the coil recovery will go back through the power rails and evened out by the super capacitors.
Regards
Luc
Fr. Salut Slider2739,
J'ai reçu un message personnel de la part de pmgr et il est prêt à aider à établir toutes les connexions pour moi selon les horaires des programmes du 2560.
En ce qui concerne les diodes de récupération de bobine, j'ai déjà demandé à ce sujet à la page 8 et L192 a répondu et dit que le L298N ont des diodes de récupération intégrées dans la carte
http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg518983/#msg518983
Je suppose que la récupération de la bobine reviendra en quelque sorte à travers les rails d'alimentation et compensée par les supercondensateurs.
Cordialement
Luc
-
Hi Luc and everyone
Just my two cents and disregard if you "don't think so"(no problem) but it scares me a bit with those modules with their "built in" recovery diodes....as I am thinking where do they go to?
Is there an external "collector" capacitor that collects the backemf/recoil/flyback energy via those steering diodes and this collector capaciyor is then pulsed out to load (for example)s after 4 pulses filling them, the...load in this case would be the supercaps
To fill up super-caps "straight" from backemf/recoil/flyback steering diodes usually does not work very well, since the caps being so large of UF will act like a resistive load to the backemf/recoil energy steered out through the steering diodes....and so this immediately reflects back to lurch up the primary input to much larger draw and it just becomes a big loss to system...I am sure any of you working with flyback/backemf energy know this - and what needs to be done is proper size UF cap needs to be filled, and this cap filled all by itself, with no resistive load over it too.....then this cap is periodically discharged to a load (so cap does not fill up and stay filled up otherwise being filled up it will stop collecting the backemf/recoil energy!)
And important this collector cap must be disconnected from the steering diodes and/or switching whenever it does discharge, or the discharge reflects back to the primary, and it goes up in draw terrible ....(anyone who has worked with backemf/flyback energy also knows this)
This is called a two-stage cap discharge output...pretty common stuff really....
Anyways I cannot believe those built in diodes in those modules will do anything at all but to suppress the backemf/flyback energy and snuff it out so it will not disturb the electronics in the modules and this would be the normal thing to do - ususally the designer will steer the energy straight back into the inductor, snuffing out the :"destgructive transients" that way - and I will suppose that is all those modules will do too, with their built-in diodes...
So I think how Pierre has external steering diodes mounted to his relays to recover the backemf/recoil energy into the supercaps will be actually recovering that backemf/recoil energy and helping the super caps stay stocked up in joules, keeping the system looped and self-sustaining....
(at least helping it to)
While I think those modules will only suppresss and snuff out the backemf/recoil energy, adding nothing to the supercaps...
The supercap UF value might not be such a factor, since Pierre pre-charges those caps, and the caps being already high in voltage will make them more receptive to recieveing and capturing the backemf/recoil energy - that is all I can think of as to how it can actually work OK
One more thing - having modern "ultra fast" or even better "hyper fast" diodes as the backemf/recoil recovery diodes could make the system even better....at least I hiope those are shottkys but there are even better diodes out nowadays....look up the hyper fast ones....
So that is my two cents sorry!
Please continue everyone how you are all doing great!!!!
I like this moderated board it was quite ridiculous the arguments and accusations and eventual sabotage of this project by the usual dickweeds ....
-
Hi Luc,
Edit: just realized I did this originally for 36 slot rotor. Edited below now and fixed for 30 slot stator.
Edit 2: updated for enable pins.
I don't have time today to make a drawing but a description should work as well.
Each coil has two leads, input lead A and output lead B, so e.g. Coil 1 has leads C_01A and C_01B, coil 2 has leads C_02A and C_02B, etc.... Coil 30 has leads C_30A and C_30B. The leading C_ stands for Coil. We will use H_ for the H-bridge and A_ for the Arduino.
The Arduino has 54 digital I/Os. We are going to use only 30 of them (for 30 coils): A_01 through A_30.
Each of the half bridge has 6 inputs: Inputs 1 through 4 and Enable A and Enable B. Remove the Enable A and B jumpers (so they are NOT connected to Vcc). Input 1,2 should be connected to Vcc, input 3,4 to GND. ENA and ENB should be connected together as we are going to activate both the high (Vcc) FET and the low (GND) FET at the same time to activate a set of 5 coils. You already have all coils connected in series on the stator, so you can leave that in place.
So let's call the EN inputs that are connected together H_01I for bridge 1, H_02I for bridge 2, etc. through H_30I. The I stands for input.
The H-bridge has 4 outputs. Output 1 and 2 are connected together and Output 3 and 4 are connected together (for double amps). Let's now assign these two resulting outputs as H_01A (for output 1-2) and H_01B (output 3-4).
Then the connections you will need to make are:
A_01 output to input H_01I, and outputs H_01A to C_01A and H_01B to C_05B (so five coils in series)
A_02 output to input H_02I, and outputs H_02A to C_02A and H_02B to C_06B
etc.
A_29 output to input H_29I, and outputs H_29A to C_29A and H_29B to C_03B
A_30 output to input H_30I, and outputs H_30A to C_30A and H_30B to C_04B
That's it. Just label all the wires accordingly so you can easily find back wires later on.
I note a few things. Please also see the datasheet of the L298N:
https://www.sparkfun.com/datasheets/Robotics/L298_H_Bridge.pdf (https://www.sparkfun.com/datasheets/Robotics/L298_H_Bridge.pdf)
Each output of the L298N can carry 2Amps of current max (maybe 2.5-3amps at 1/12 duty cycle but let's use 2amps for now). Since we hooked two outputs together, each of the outputs H_01A and H01B can supply or sink 4Amps of current.
Each of your coils has about 0.5ohms resistance. We are driving 5 coils in series, so that is about 2.5ohms total per coil.
However, we are activating 6 poles with 6 FETs (3 on the high (Vcc) side and 3 on the low (GND) side, see the image in reply #9).
So e.g. we would activate A_01, A_11 and A_21 on the Arduino which will activate H-bridge H_01I, H_11I and H_21I and coils C01A-C05B, C_11A-C_15B and C_21A-C_25B with forward current and coils C_06A-C_10B, C_16A-C20B and C_26A-C_30B with reverse current.
This makes the 6 poles. One each subsequent Arduino step, everything shifts by one:
We would activate A_02, A_12 and A_22 on the Arduino which will activate H-bridge H_02I, H_12I and H_22I and coils C02A-C06B, C_12A-C_16B and C_22A-C_26B with forward current and coils C_07A-C_11B, C_17A-C_21B and C_27A-C_01B with reverse current[/size].
etc.
I note that because of this configuration (Which is the same as Pierre is using), the current that each FET supplies is split into two coilsets (5 series coils per set, let's call it a 5-coilset). So e.g. the FET at coil 1 (H-bridge output H_01A) provides current to two coils sets (5-coilset C_01A-C_05B and 5-coilset C_26A-C_30B). Since the resistance of each 5-coilset is 2.5 ohms, the current will be split equally, so 2Amps max per 5-coilset.
At each point in time there are 6 poles on (each pole has 2 5-coilsets), so total current draw will be 6x2amps=12amps max.
The max voltage over one 5-coilset is 2.5ohms x 2amps = 5 volts. So you should not be driving your coils with anything higher than 5 volts, otherwise you will burn out your FETs.
So this confirms Pierre's concern about the H-bridges not being able to provide enough current. But I think this is good for an initial try to see if we can make a rotating magnetic field.
Let me know if you have any questions or if things are not clear.
PmgR
====
Help end the persecution of Falun Gong * www.faluninfo.net (http://www.faluninfo.net) * www.stoporganharvesting.org (http://www.stoporganharvesting.org)
-
Hi all,
please note the number of wires coming from Pierre's induced coil.
The attached image is an enlarged detail from his 1st video at ca. 6:30
Hello Pierre,
please consider how Linus Torvalds (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki) made an operating system for computers and open sourced it.
Today he has thousands of collaborators who provide a free operating system - an alternative to the products of the military industrial complex.
-
Hi Luc,
I don't have time today to make a drawing but a description should work as well.
Each coil has two leads, input lead A and output lead B, so e.g. Coil 1 has leads C_01A and C_01B, coil 2 has leads C_02A and C_02B, etc.... Coil 36 has leads C_36A and C_36B. The leading C_ stands for Coil. We will use H_ for the H-bridge and A_ for the Arduino.
The Arduino has 54 digital I/Os. We are going to use only 36 of them (for 36 coils): A_01 through A_36.
Each of the half bridge has 6 inputs: Inputs 1 through 4 and Enable A and Enable B. You can leave the Enable A and B jumpers in place (so they are connected to Vcc and HIGH). Input 1,2,3,4 should all be connected together as we are going to activate both the high (Vcc) FET and the low (GND) FET at the same time to activate a set of 6 coils. You already have all coils connected in series on the stator, so you can leave that in place.
So let's call the four inputs that are connected together H_01I for bridge 1, H_02I for bridge 2, etc. through H_36I. The I stands for input.
The H-bridge has 4 outputs. Output 1 and 2 are connected together and Output 3 and 4 are connected together (for double amps). Let's now assign these two resulting outputs as H_01A (for output 1-2) and H_01B (output 3-4).
Then the connections you will need to make are:
A_01 output to input H_01I, and outputs H_01A to C_01A and H_01B to C_06B (so six coils in series)
A_02 output to input H_02I, and outputs H_02A to C_02A and H_02B to C_07B
etc.
A_35 output to input H_35I, and outputs H_35A to C_35A and H_36B to C_04B
A_36 output to input H_36I, and outputs H_36A to C_36A and H_36B to C_05B
That's it. Just label all the wires accordingly so you can easily find back wires later on.
I note a few things. Please also see the datasheet of the L298N:
https://www.sparkfun.com/datasheets/Robotics/L298_H_Bridge.pdf (https://www.sparkfun.com/datasheets/Robotics/L298_H_Bridge.pdf)
Each output of the L298N can carry 2Amps of current max (maybe 2.5-3amps at 1/12 duty cycle but let's use 2amps for now). Since we hooked two outputs together, each of the outputs H_01A and H01B can supply or sink 4Amps of current.
Each of your coils has about 0.5ohms resistance. We are driving 6 coils in series, so that is about 3ohms total per coil.
However, we are activating 6 poles with 6 FETs (3 on the high (Vcc) side and 3 on the low (GND) side, see the image in reply #9).
So e.g. we would activate A_01, A_13 and A_25 on the Arduino which will activate H-bridge H_01I, H_13I and H_25I and coils C01A-C06B, C_13A-C_18B and C_25A-C_30B with forward current and coils C_07A-C12B, C_19A-C24B and C_31A-C36B with reverse current.
This makes the 6 poles. One each subsequent Arduino step, everything shifts by one:
We would activate A_02, A_14 and A_26 on the Arduino which will activate H-bridge H_02I, H_14I and H_26I and coils C02A-C07B, C_14A-C_19B and C_26A-C_31B with forward current and coils C_08A-C13B, C_20A-C25B and C_32A-C01B with reverse current[/size].
etc.
I note that because of this configuration (Which is the same as Pierre is using), the current that each FET supplies is split into two coilsets (6 series coils per set, let's call it a 6-coilset). So e.g. the FET at coil 1 (H-bridge output H_01A) provides current to two coils sets (6-coilset C_01A-C_06B and 6-coilset C_31A-C_36B). Since the resistance of each 6-coilset is 3 ohms, the current will be split equally, so 2Amps max per 6-coilset.
At each point in time there are 6 poles on (each pole has 2 6-coilsets), so total current draw will be 6x2amps=12amps max.
The max voltage over one 6-coilset is 3ohms x 2amps = 6 volts. So you should not be driving your coils with anything higher than 6 volts, otherwise you will burn out your FETs.
So this confirms Pierre's concern about the H-bridges not being able to provide enough current. But I think this is good for an initial try to see if we can make a rotating magnetic field.
Let me know if you have any questions or if things are not clear.
PmgR
====
Help end the persecution of Falun Gong * www.faluninfo.net (http://www.faluninfo.net) * www.stoporganharvesting.org (http://www.stoporganharvesting.org)
Hi PmgR,
You have to use the EnA & EnB inputs as when you take these low both upper and lower transistors are then turned off, otherwise the In1/In2 In2/In3 just determine which transistor is turned on.
The half bridges not in use have to be completely switched off.
Regards
L192
-
Hi Luc and everyone
Just my two cents and disregard if you "don't think so"(no problem) but it scares me a bit with those modules with their "built in" recovery diodes....as I am thinking where do they go to?
Is there an external "collector" capacitor that collects the backemf/recoil/flyback energy via those steering diodes and this collector capaciyor is then pulsed out to load (for example)s after 4 pulses filling them, the...load in this case would be the supercaps
To fill up super-caps "straight" from backemf/recoil/flyback steering diodes usually does not work very well, since the caps being so large of UF will act like a resistive load to the backemf/recoil energy steered out through the steering diodes....and so this immediately reflects back to lurch up the primary input to much larger draw and it just becomes a big loss to system...I am sure any of you working with flyback/backemf energy know this - and what needs to be done is proper size UF cap needs to be filled, and this cap filled all by itself, with no resistive load over it too.....then this cap is periodically discharged to a load (so cap does not fill up and stay filled up otherwise being filled up it will stop collecting the backemf/recoil energy!)
And important this collector cap must be disconnected from the steering diodes and/or switching whenever it does discharge, or the discharge reflects back to the primary, and it goes up in draw terrible ....(anyone who has worked with backemf/flyback energy also knows this)
This is called a two-stage cap discharge output...pretty common stuff really....
Anyways I cannot believe those built in diodes in those modules will do anything at all but to suppress the backemf/flyback energy and snuff it out so it will not disturb the electronics in the modules and this would be the normal thing to do - ususally the designer will steer the energy straight back into the inductor, snuffing out the :"destgructive transients" that way - and I will suppose that is all those modules will do too, with their built-in diodes...
So I think how Pierre has external steering diodes mounted to his relays to recover the backemf/recoil energy into the supercaps will be actually recovering that backemf/recoil energy and helping the super caps stay stocked up in joules, keeping the system looped and self-sustaining....
(at least helping it to)
While I think those modules will only suppresss and snuff out the backemf/recoil energy, adding nothing to the supercaps...
The supercap UF value might not be such a factor, since Pierre pre-charges those caps, and the caps being already high in voltage will make them more receptive to recieveing and capturing the backemf/recoil energy - that is all I can think of as to how it can actually work OK
One more thing - having modern "ultra fast" or even better "hyper fast" diodes as the backemf/recoil recovery diodes could make the system even better....at least I hiope those are shottkys but there are even better diodes out nowadays....look up the hyper fast ones....
So that is my two cents sorry!
Please continue everyone how you are all doing great!!!!
I like this moderated board it was quite ridiculous the arguments and accusations and eventual sabotage of this project by the usual dickweeds ....
Hi Konehead,
There is nothing wrong with a half bridge arrangement and diodes as shown, except you are correct the super caps will present much impedance to charge which will likely overheat the diodes. If a half bridge with MOSFET's were used with a rating of say 20A or greater, the body diodes would have the same rating and this would not be an issue. I think the L298N's can only be run at very low current in this arrangement.
Regards
L192
-
Hi all,
please note the number of wires coming from Pierre's induced coil.
The attached image is an enlarged detail from his 1st video at ca. 6:30
Hello Pierre,
please consider how Linus Torvalds (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki) made an operating system for computers and open sourced it.
Today he has thousands of collaborators who provide a free operating system - an alternative to the products of the military industrial complex.
Hi Oscar,
Yes,he is using two parallel windings to provide two 115V outputs.
Regards
L192
-
Hi PmgR,
You have to use the EnA & EnB inputs as when you take these low both upper and lower transistors are then turned off, otherwise the In1/In2 In2/In3 just determine which transistor is turned on.
The half bridges not in use have to be completely switched off.
Regards
L192
Yes, you are right. Luc, remove the jumpers to Vcc in and instead connect ENA to ENB to arduino. Connect in1/in2 to Vcc and in3/in4 to GND.
I have updated the original post.
PmgR
-
Hi all,
please note the number of wires coming from Pierre's induced coil.
The attached image is an enlarged detail from his 1st video at ca. 6:30
Due square wave-like with spikes going on induction (because the field rotates in 6 steps resolution) the collecting coils must have more interwinding capacity in order to consume spikes. In low resolution of magnetic field movement simulation the flat collection coils made from foil might be even better due spike rise/falll times against wire length and inductance.
-
Has consideration to the direction of injected signal from the recovery diodes been given? Could this be driving a H/V spike on top of the rail? TDR reflections play havoc in certain situations but may well be "USED" in this one creating extra voltage on the main rails.
thay
-
If a half bridge with MOSFET's were used with a rating of say 20A or greater, the body diodes would have the same rating and this would not be an issue.
In this case in which we use mosfets or IGBTs do you think that an extra diode is needed? (To prevent an opposite flow of current through the mosfet/IGBT body diode).
ps. I have the suspicion that thyristors are best for this work.
-
To achieve that scheme electronically you have to use a half bridge configuration.
I plan to use a much more robust half bridge with 45A 45V rating and built in opto isolation, over current protection etc.
Can you provide a type of such an isolated bridge?
-
This may be obvious and I may have missed it in the technical discussions.
But if we view the supercaps of Pierre's as the condensers in the Benitez Patent, doesn't that make sense of why there are 72 relays and not just 36 ?
Every time there is a collection from a coil sequence, the correct supercap is grounded.
All supercaps can be initially charged and then at the switch on of the device their common ground to the charging source is removed, replaced by the switching action in and out of those relays.
Control timings need not be in any Arduino code and, we don't see it there in Pierre's published code, instead tied to the relevant ordering of the coil relays.
Each coil winding is a transformer of the Benitez Patent ?
-
Input 1,2 should be connected to Vcc, input 3,4 to GND.
Are Input 1,2 and 3,4 connected to Vcc and GHD of the Arduino or Vcc and GND of the input power rails?
Each of your coils has about 0.5ohms resistance. We are driving 5 coils in series, so that is about 2.5ohms total per coil.
Sorry but the way I understood Pierre's circuit is, even though all the coils are connected in series they are individually driven, so I don't understand why you wrote "We are driving 5 coils in series"
It would be important we be on the same page before moving forward.
However, we are activating 6 poles with 6 FETs (3 on the high (Vcc) side and 3 on the low (GND) side
Yes, I agree and understood it this way
Thanks for your help and kind regards
Luc
-
why there are 72 relays and not just 36 ?
The way I understand it is, there's 2 relays per coil because, one for each direction the current is to circulate in.
Regards
Luc
-
The way I understand it is, there's 2 relays per coil because, one for each direction the current is to circulate in.
Regards
Luc
Please see numbers in frame captures from video:
https://i.imgur.com/pNVrVIV.jpg (https://i.imgur.com/pNVrVIV.jpg)
https://i.imgur.com/XPcfU3S.jpg (https://i.imgur.com/XPcfU3S.jpg)
https://i.imgur.com/BEve2jS.png (https://i.imgur.com/BEve2jS.png)
https://i.imgur.com/SyfQ4oy.png
Cheers!
-
Are Input 1,2 and 3,4 connected to Vcc and GHD of the Arduino or Vcc and GND of the input power rails?
Sorry but the way I understood Pierre's circuit is, even though all the coils are connected in series they are individually driven, so I don't understand why you wrote "We are driving 5 coils in series"
It would be important we be on the same page before moving forward.
Yes, I agree and understood it this way
Thanks for your help and kind regards
Luc
Hi Gotoluc,
In the case of the 36 slot stator there are 6 coils driven in series. Pierre shows this on his diagram. From the switch high side feed the current goes through 6 coils in series clockwise and 6 coils anticlockwise. At the end of the 6th coil the low side switch is turned on completing the current flow. This generates an adjacent North and South pole. This is repeated at two more times to createtwo more sets of poles. The three high side switches and 3 low side switches are then all rotated to the next switch positions before the previous set of switches are turned off.
Regards
L192
-
J'espère que ce ne sera pas trop confus. Il s'agit d'une tentative de visualisation des champs magnétiques, laquelle semble mettre en évidence que les bobines, dans 30 rainures / 36, ont leurs lignes de champ en opposition.
On est toujours avec le stator de Pierre avec ses 36 rainures (fentes), et 36 bobines au pas de 6 rainures. Chaque bobine est composée de 6 bobines en série (une couleur pour chacune).
J'ai indiqué une légende sur la gauche de l'image :
- Dans 30 rainures du stator, les 2 bobines qui s'y trouvent ont leurs champs en opposition (répulsion) Nord/Nord ou Sud/Sud ;
- Dans 6 rainures du stator, les 2 bobines on leur lignes de champ en attraction.
On peut estimer que les mêmes répulsions se produisent dans le chignon (où les fils se croisent aux deux bouts du stator).
Au lieu de couvrir 6 rainures, si chaque bobine en couvrait 7, dans l'ensemble du stator les lignes de champ seraient en opposition.
-
J'espère que ce ne sera pas trop confus. Il s'agit d'une tentative de visualisation des champs magnétiques, laquelle semble mettre en évidence que les bobines, dans 30 rainures / 36, ont leurs lignes de champ en opposition.
On est toujours avec le stator de Pierre avec ses 36 rainures (fentes), et 36 bobines au pas de 6 rainures. Chaque bobine est composée de 6 bobines en série (une couleur pour chacune).
J'ai indiqué une légende sur la gauche de l'image :
- Dans 30 rainures du stator, les 2 bobines qui s'y trouvent ont leurs champs en opposition (répulsion) Nord/Nord ou Sud/Sud ;
- Dans 6 rainures du stator, les 2 bobines on leur lignes de champ en attraction.
On peut estimer que les mêmes répulsions se produisent dans le chignon (où les fils se croisent aux deux bouts du stator).
Au lieu de couvrir 6 rainures, si chaque bobine en couvrait 7, dans l'ensemble du stator les lignes de champ seraient en opposition.
Hi MichelM,
Yes exactly.
Regards
L192
-
Are Input 1,2 and 3,4 connected to Vcc and GHD of the Arduino or Vcc and GND of the input power rails?
Sorry but the way I understood Pierre's circuit is, even though all the coils are connected in series they are individually driven, so I don't understand why you wrote "We are driving 5 coils in series"
It would be important we be on the same page before moving forward.
Yes, I agree and understood it this way
Thanks for your help and kind regards
Luc
Input 1,2 should be connected to Vss (not Vs) of the H-bridge. This is the logic supply voltage, so 5V, not your input voltage (unless it is 5V as well). Please see attached image. Input 3,4 to GND. GND in general should all be connected together, so GND of H-bridge and GND of Arduino should be connected as well. And then input 3,4 to GND (you can do it on the H-bridge as well).
I note that this bridge has actually transistors and not FETs. The voltage drop across the collector-emitter is around 1-2V when driving 2Amps of current through each of them (4A total per 2 outputs). So your rails voltage can be higher than 5V, e.g. it could be 7-9 volts. I suggest you start at 5V then go to 9V max. Then measure the voltages at a coil compared to GND. Current through the coil will be voltage drop over the coil divided by the 0.5ohm resistance.
Regarding the coils, they are driving six at a a time. Just driving a single one will not generate a large magnetic field. You drive six (in your case 5) in series and the field strengths add up.
PmgR
-
Hi Gotoluc,
In the case of the 36 slot stator there are 6 coils driven in series. Pierre shows this on his diagram. From the switch high side feed the current goes through 6 coils in series clockwise and 6 coils anticlockwise. At the end of the 6th coil the low side switch is turned on completing the current flow. This generates an adjacent North and South pole. This is repeated at two more times to createtwo more sets of poles. The three high side switches and 3 low side switches are then all rotated to the next switch positions before the previous set of switches are turned off.
Regards
L192
That video of his complete circuit was him sharing a possible solution to eliminate the WWW wave he was seeing on his scope.
Pierre's instructions and diagram prior to making that video.
Eng. About the sequence of the arduino, you will have to turn on one coil and then the other and then turn off the first coil otherwise you will break the magnetic field. The goal is not to turn off the magnetic flux but only to keep it moving ex: 1 on, 2 on, 1 off, 3 on, 2 off etc.
Fr. pour de ce qui est de la séquence de l'arduino quand vous ferez la séquence vous devrez allumer une bobine et puis l'autre et par la suite éteindre la première sinon vous allez coupé le champ magnétique le but étant de ne pas éteindre le flux seulement le déplacer ex:1 on, 2 on, 1 off ,3 on, 2 off etc.
I don't know but I read that and see the diagram he provided with those instructions as coils are individually powered and not 5 or 6 powered in series in a row.
However, there are 6 poles, so at all times there are 6 coils powered plus another 6 for the overlap time.
Regards
Luc
-
So I am looking back over the sequence of progression on how the coils are supposed to be configured. I originally thought only one coil was powered at a time which appears what Luc's previous picture shows as well.
Then Pierre posted his video where he makes one coil out of six coils (by putting them in series) so then I thought this is how he has his current machine wired.
But maybe this is not the case. Maybe his last video was just a way to improve his current machine.
Maybe someone who can read over his French replies once more can shed some more light on this.
PmgR
-
Hi everyone! This is my first post here. I'm following this thread for a while and I want to give you some advice. That L298 is suitable for RC's and small stepper motors used in 3D printers or small CNC machines. In this DZ particular case you have to deal with coils that have low resistance and high inductance. Use specially designed mosfets with logic level drive and very low on-resistance like IRLR2905 or IGBT's like IXDH35N60B from IXYS Corporation or equivalent. But I advice everyone for the first build to use relays. As a personal project I have in my mind to design a simple and low cost sequencer based on a PIC microcontroller. Using one Arduino for this simple job is like killing a mosquito with a sledgehammer. I will return when I finish the code. Cheers, K.[/size]
-
Luc, one more question I have about the last picture you posted is how Pierre controls the direction of the current. The Arduino appears to only control the transistors that control the relays, but what determines if the top relay turns on or the bottom relay? I would assume one transistor controls both at the same time.
E.g. in your picture, let's say the left two relays with the forward flowing arrows are turned on with transistor 1 (so coil 1 on), then if for that particular coil he wants to switch current direction, what transistor(s) would he need to turn on? If he turns on the second transistor, it would give the same forward flowing current in the second coil, not reverse current. He would need to turn on the GND connection of coil 36 (controlled by transistor 36).
If he turns on the first transistor (so he gets the GND connection for second coil for negative flow), he would also need to turn on the third coil. Then he will get reverse current in second coil, but the third coil will also be on in forward direction. And he would have transistor 1 and 3 on at the same time. His Arduino code doesn't show any evidence of that kind of transistor switching.
PmgR
-
I'm not sure if these were mentioned before but in cruising eBay I notice these 8 channel 8 relay module boards for Arduino for only $4.96 (from Hong Kong) or same one from a U.S. seller for $7.95 which appear to be identical to the 8 relay boards in Pierre's video as seen at 6:16 into his second video which showed it completely self running. You can easily find them on eBay by these item numbers: eBay item number:172396554144 for the $4.96 one from H.K. and eBay item number:231682185473 for the $7.95 one from the U.S. I'm quite sure they are identical to the one's in Pierre's video for anyone wanting to do a relay type replication. Nine of the boards would be needed for your 72 relays which only comes to about $45 total with shipping - not bad for all that many relays with screw connections and rated 10 amp at 250 VAC and Arduino ready.
-
Building H-Bridge, I suggests used 2 sets:
AOD609: N/P-MOSFET; http://aosmd.com/pdfs/datasheet/AOD609.pdf
or
FDD8424H: N/P-MOSFET; http://www.mouser.com/ds/2/149/FDD8424H-92711.pdf
-
Hi everyone! This is my first post here. I'm following this thread for a while and I want to give you some advice. That L298 is suitable for RC's and small stepper motors used in 3D printers or small CNC machines. In this DZ particular case you have to deal with coils that have low resistance and high inductance. Use specially designed mosfets with logic level drive and very low on-resistance like IRLR2905 or IGBT's like IXDH35N60B from IXYS Corporation or equivalent. But I advice everyone for the first build to use relays. As a personal project I have in my mind to design a simple and low cost sequencer based on a PIC microcontroller. Using one Arduino for this simple job is like killing a mosquito with a sledgehammer. I will return when I finish the code. Cheers, K.[/size]
It seems Arduino's have gotten so cheap ( $10 to around $18 for a Mega 2560 R3) that they are as cheap or even less than many PIC controllers and can do a lot more with them if you decide to use it for something else. But if you are more familiar with PIC controllers and can get the same results thats all good too.
-
That video of his complete circuit was him sharing a possible solution to eliminate the WWW wave he was seeing on his scope.
Pierre's instructions and diagram prior to making that video.
Eng. About the sequence of the arduino, you will have to turn on one coil and then the other and then turn off the first coil otherwise you will break the magnetic field. The goal is not to turn off the magnetic flux but only to keep it moving ex: 1 on, 2 on, 1 off, 3 on, 2 off etc.
Fr. pour de ce qui est de la séquence de l'arduino quand vous ferez la séquence vous devrez allumer une bobine et puis l'autre et par la suite éteindre la première sinon vous allez coupé le champ magnétique le but étant de ne pas éteindre le flux seulement le déplacer ex:1 on, 2 on, 1 off ,3 on, 2 off etc.
I don't know but I read that and see the diagram he provided with those instructions as coils are individually powered and not 5 or 6 powered in series in a row.
However, there are 6 poles, so at all times there are 6 coils powered plus another 6 for the overlap time.
Regards
Luc
Hi Gotoluc,
I believe that diagram Pierre made was just to demonstrate the switching principle, the larger diagram in the video showing all the coils, was made to show that 6 coils were energize in series.
Regards
L192
-
Luc, one more question I have about the last picture you posted is how Pierre controls the direction of the current. The Arduino appears to only control the transistors that control the relays, but what determines if the top relay turns on or the bottom relay? I would assume one transistor controls both at the same time.
E.g. in your picture, let's say the left two relays with the forward flowing arrows are turned on with transistor 1 (so coil 1 on), then if for that particular coil he wants to switch current direction, what transistor(s) would he need to turn on? If he turns on the second transistor, it would give the same forward flowing current in the second coil, not reverse current. He would need to turn on the GND connection of coil 36 (controlled by transistor 36).
If he turns on the first transistor (so he gets the GND connection for second coil for negative flow), he would also need to turn on the third coil. Then he will get reverse current in second coil, but the third coil will also be on in forward direction. And he would have transistor 1 and 3 on at the same time. His Arduino code doesn't show any evidence of that kind of transistor switching.
PmgR
Hi Pmgr,
Yes you are correct, each high side relay coil is also linked to a respective low side relay coil, (6 coils further around the loop), so one line switches both hence only 36 control lines are need with his scheme.
I think this is what he started with and what he showed us however, as there appear to be less than 36 wires going to the stator, I wonder if he has paralleled the 3 north pole together and paralleled the 3 south poles together? That would reduce the wires to 12. The number of wires appears to be 28 but there are at least two wires going to the same contact on one of the connectors.
It would take some thought to realize what the effect of that would be.
Regards
L192
-
Pour faire tourner le champ magnétique régulièrement il faut activer 2 bobines adjacentes L1, puis L1 et L2, puis L2, L2 et L3,....
Or les bobines sont alimentés + - pour la première et - + pour la seconde.
Comme on veut le même champ pour le renforcer, il me semble que l'on doit bobiner L1 dans le sens horaire et L2 dans le sens anti-horaire.
Ainsi les bobines impaires seraient CW , les paires CCW.
A -t-on déjà parlé de çà ? Evident ou pas ? J'ai manqué quelque chose ? le secret de Pierre ?
To rotate the magnetic field regularly it is necessary to activate 2 adjacent coils L1, then L1 and L2, then L2, L2 and L3, ....
But the coils are powered + - for the first and - + for the second.
As we want the same field to strengthen it, it seems to me that we must wind L1 clockwise and L2 in the anti-clockwise direction.
Thus the odd coils would be CW, the even coils CCW .
Have we already talked about that? Obvious or not? I missed something? the secret of Peter?
-
They can be all CW or CCW does not matter. For convenience, there could be CW and CCW less connection distance. In the configuration, all CW can change the ends of every CW then there will be reverse polarity.
example:
all CW or CCW = A1 .... B1, A2 ... B2, ..... the connection will be: A1 + B2 and B1 + A2
for once CW and CCW = A1 .... B1, A2 ... B2, ..... the connection will be: A1 + A2 and B1 + B2
Of course, it depends on the subsequent connections between the coil orders.
-
In regards to sequence, each group have 6 coils N and 6 coils S for three phase rotation. Only 4 coils used at once before flipping over to other set.
So the the three phase sequence for moving magnetic field would be in coil positions:
1) V+2 V-5 and V-31 V+35
2) V+2,V+3 V-5,V-6 and V-31,V-32 V+35,V+36
3) V+3 V-6 and V-32 V+36
Then continuing to flip around ring over next shifted sets of coils.
-
Hi Pmgr,
Yes you are correct, each high side relay coil is also linked to a respective low side relay coil, (6 coils further around the loop), so one line switches both hence only 36 control lines are need with his scheme.
I think this is what he started with and what he showed us however, as there appear to be less than 36 wires going to the stator, I wonder if he has paralleled the 3 north pole together and paralleled the 3 south poles together? That would reduce the wires to 12. The number of wires appears to be 28 but there are at least two wires going to the same contact on one of the connectors.
It would take some thought to realize what the effect of that would be.
Regards
L192
Someone else stated that there are actually 5 green connectors in the video (hard to see), not four. So that would make 4x8 + 4 = 36 connections to the stator. Also, his boards show labels going up to 36.
PmgR
-
5 conns
But still Pierres repetition frequency is 5 Hz !
-
I found problem L298n.
When connect 2 channel (ex. coil1 and coil2) Voltage is different beetwen them.
I change L298n to another new. I changed coil 1-2, 2-1. Still channel 1 is more voltage to 2 channel less voltage !
1 = 0.56 ohm
2 = 0.56 ohm
When driver no load, voltage is equal.
Solution:
join 2 channel together and make one L298n for 1 coil
calibrate voltage used PWM. this method takes 2 pin arduino more. Total 6 pins on 2 channel.
https://youtu.be/_jbd0DPaQg0
I think this driver is very poor for our applications.
temp 80C about 5 minutes work.
-
I redraw H bridge for Arduino.
Maybe replaced this mosfets to multi mosfet ? I write few post later.
-
L298n - test 2 channel witch 1 coil
There is still a difference on the channels although it is the same coil.
https://youtu.be/hvrPy_lQfDI
-
L298n - and another problem.
Overheating 85C ! destability output. We needs better cooling for this driver.
https://youtu.be/TgLBk3GdHSA
-
Yes, you are right. Luc, remove the jumpers to Vcc in and instead connect ENA to ENB to arduino. Connect in1/in2 to Vcc and in3/in4 to GND.
I have updated the original post.
PmgR
Hi PmgR
I didn't understand how you can get AC the way you suggest to connect it but I tried one to see: https://youtu.be/afLj8s-jscg (https://youtu.be/afLj8s-jscg)
Luc
-
L'interrupteur 1 haut est fermé (S1H).
L'interrupteur S7L est fermé.
Le courant circule de L1 à L6. D'ACCORD.
Quelqu'un pourrait dire quelle est la prochaine étape quand le programme Arduino envoie un second digitalWrite pour fermer d'autres commutateurs ?
Switch 1 high is closed( S1H).
Switch S7L is closed.
Current flows through L1 to L6. OK.
Somedbody could tell what is the next step when the Arduino program send a second digitalWrite to close some more switches ?
-
Hi Everyone
Pierre just put his videos back up again on youtube parts 1 through 4
He has comments section open too but did not see him answer any questions there (yet)
Seems like he wants to stay being open sourced....
Ask him questions there!
Personally I think 6 individual N-S stator-poles at 60 degrees are energized and then sequentially pulsed in rotation, and continued around flipping polariies every single "pole-segment" - so if 36 poles, this is every revolution 36 polarity changes and because so many polarity changes, this is where the big power is produced....also this is done with that overlapping sequence as Pierre outlined in his circuit drawing...
Now why is it so overunity is the very interesting and unique winding pattern, which puts backemf and lenz law forces to work reinforcing the power produced, not cancelling it...
I will guess really not much "flyback" energy is produced from the diodes and the reason for the all the recovery diodes is just to protect the electronics more than anything...(could be wrong and this is lots and lots of energy recovered into cap banks - interesting experiment for Pierre would be to put this into 2nd cap bank see if it still loops just as long in time (forever)
Anyways this all my opininons nothing else, working looping models on bench would make it fact...
Big Question:
Were those "magic numbers" Pierre released a few weeks ago correct or was he mistaken??
Seems like now 1-7 etc etc is correct now looking at drawings and lots of analysis , not 1-6 as he put out...maybe this is for slots instead poles I don't know...
-
Big Question:
Were those "magic numbers" Pierre released a few weeks ago correct or was he mistaken??
Seems like now 1-7 etc etc is correct now looking at drawings and lots of analysis , not 1-6 as he put out...maybe this is for slots instead poles I don't know...
Pierre did not make a mistake
-
5 Hz
-
Does anyone know what is that orange sheet at the internal of the stator? I thought it was paint but now looks more like a sheet of something.
-
L'interrupteur 1 haut est fermé (S1H).
L'interrupteur S7L est fermé.
Le courant circule de L1 à L6. D'ACCORD.
Quelqu'un pourrait dire quelle est la prochaine étape quand le programme Arduino envoie un second digitalWrite pour fermer d'autres commutateurs ?
Switch 1 high is closed( S1H).
Switch S7L is closed.
Current flows through L1 to L6. OK.
Somedbody could tell what is the next step when the Arduino program send a second digitalWrite to close some more switches ?
si j'ai bien compris ,l'étape suivante sera :
S2H fermé et S8L fermé, (note à ce moment L1 et L7 sont en court circuit pendant le temps de la transition) .puis alors S1H et S6L seront ouvert ,le champ est donc décalé d'un pas ;puis ca continue
selon le même principe
EN:if I understand correctly, the next step will be: S2H closed and S8L closed, (note at this time L1 and L7 are in short circuit during the transition time) .Then S1H and S6L will be open, the field is shifted by one step, then it continues according to the same principle
-
Attached is a scope shot showing voltage and current across 6 coils in series (25mH) total. 30 slot stator 36 turn 22AWG coils.
Using the half bridge parallel arrangement i.e. OUT 1& 2 tied together In1 & In2 tied together.
Nearly 4A peak at 31VDC applied. Of course if you slow down the pulse rate the pulses become square and more current is drawn.
The L298N's I have don't have any heatsink compound between the device and heatsink.
Placing some compound between improved the heat dissipation but after several minutes at this current raised the temperature to 80deg C and climbing, so either more heatsink area or forced cooling required.
To get these current pulses to square up at say a 1ms period more rail voltage is required.
I have 1 BTN7960 board coming, I will test this but the board is limited to 28V however, the RDS on for the MOSFET's used in the device is reasonable and will reduce volt drop across the half bridge, therefore increasing current through the coils.
Regards
L192
-
This shot is monitoring the current into the board, from the DC supply, same period as before approx.
The negative going portion of current is that returned to the supply.
Regards
L192
-
Stator and rotor used for testing.
L192
-
si j'ai bien compris ,l'étape suivante sera :
S2H fermé et S8L fermé, (note à ce moment L1 et L7 sont en court circuit pendant le temps de la transition) .puis alors L1H et L6L seront ouvert ,le champ est donc décalé d'un pas ;puis ca continue
selon le même principe
EN:
if I understand correctly, the next step will be: S2H closed and S8L closed, (note at this time L1 and L7 are in short circuit during the transition time) .Then L1H and L6L will be open, the field is shifted by one step, then it continues according to the same principle
L7L et non L6L. Ok dans ce cas les bobines sont courtcircuitées pendant un délai complet du programme (plusieurs millisecondes).
C'est peut-être une des clés:
- l'inductance totale est changée de L1 à L6 pour L2 à L6
- on obtient peut-être un gros BEMF quand les courcircuits sont relâchés. Konehead pourrait nous en dire plus là dessus.
L7L not L6L. Ok that means that coils are shorted during one delay time (several milliseconds). May be it's the key :
- the total inductance is reduced from L1 to L6 to L2 to L6
- We get a big BEMF when releasing these shorts. Konehead could tell us more about that.
-
My code attached. No refinements or attempts to reduce lines.
Not tested yet.
I have another version for a 36 slot stator, as I have a 10KW motor coming my way.
Regards
L192
// L192 March 2018
// 30 slot stator
const int Enable_1_11_21_5_15_25 = 37;
const int Enable_2_12_22_6_16_26 = 38;
const int Enable_3_13_23_7_17_27 = 39;
const int Enable_4_14_24_8_18_28 = 40;
const int Enable_5_15_25_9_19_29 =41;
const int Enable_6_16_26_10_20_30 =42;
const int Enable_7_17_27_11_21_1 =43;
const int Enable_8_18_28_12_22_2 =44;
const int Enable_9_19_29_13_23_3 =45;
const int Enable_10_20_30_14_24_4 =46;
void setup() {
// initialize digital pin 1-30 as an output.
pinMode(1, OUTPUT);
pinMode(2, OUTPUT);
pinMode(3, OUTPUT);
pinMode(4, OUTPUT);
pinMode(5, OUTPUT);
pinMode(6, OUTPUT);
pinMode(7,OUTPUT);
pinMode(8, OUTPUT);
pinMode(9, OUTPUT);
pinMode(10, OUTPUT);
pinMode(11, OUTPUT);
pinMode(12, OUTPUT);
pinMode(13, OUTPUT);
pinMode(14,OUTPUT);
pinMode(15, OUTPUT);
pinMode(16, OUTPUT);
pinMode(17, OUTPUT);
pinMode(18, OUTPUT);
pinMode(19, OUTPUT);
pinMode(20, OUTPUT);
pinMode(21, OUTPUT);
pinMode(22, OUTPUT);
pinMode(23,OUTPUT);
pinMode(24, OUTPUT);
pinMode(25, OUTPUT);
pinMode(26, OUTPUT);
pinMode(27, OUTPUT);
pinMode(28, OUTPUT);
pinMode(29, OUTPUT);
pinMode(30,OUTPUT);
//initialize pins 37-46 as an output
pinMode (Enable_1_11_21_5_15_25,OUTPUT);
pinMode (Enable_2_12_22_6_16_26,OUTPUT);
pinMode (Enable_3_13_23_7_17_27,OUTPUT);
pinMode (Enable_4_14_24_8_18_28,OUTPUT);
pinMode (Enable_5_15_25_9_19_29,OUTPUT);
pinMode (Enable_6_16_26_10_20_30,OUTPUT);
pinMode (Enable_7_17_27_11_21_1,OUTPUT);
pinMode (Enable_8_18_28_12_22_2,OUTPUT);
pinMode (Enable_9_19_29_13_23_3,OUTPUT);
pinMode (Enable_10_20_30_14_24_4,OUTPUT);
}
int x = 0;
void loop(){
//int y= analogRead(0); // read pot use this if you want or set x manually
// x= map(y,0,1000 ,1,100);
x=1000;
// sequencing 30 coils 5 slot pitch previous coil stays on until next coil is on
digitalWrite(1,HIGH), digitalWrite(11,HIGH), digitalWrite(21,HIGH); //top switches
digitalWrite(5,LOW), digitalWrite(15,LOW), digitalWrite(25,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite (Enable_1_11_21_5_15_25,HIGH); //enable all switches in group setting output
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(2,HIGH), digitalWrite(12,HIGH), digitalWrite(22,HIGH); // top switches ON before 1 OFF
digitalWrite(6,LOW), digitalWrite(16,LOW), digitalWrite(26,LOW); // bottom switches ON before 1 OFF
digitalWrite(Enable_2_12_22_6_16_26,HIGH); //enable all switches in group setting output
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(Enable_1_11_21_5_15_25,LOW); //disable all switches in group 1 OFF
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(3,HIGH), digitalWrite(13,HIGH), digitalWrite(22,HIGH); // top swtches ON before 2 OFF
digitalWrite(7,LOW), digitalWrite(17,LOW), digitalWrite(27,LOW); // bottom switches ON before 2 OFF
digitalWrite(Enable_3_13_23_7_17_27,HIGH); //enable all switches in group setting output
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(Enable_2_12_22_6_16_26,LOW); //disable all switches in group 2 OFF
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(4,HIGH), digitalWrite(14,HIGH), digitalWrite(24,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(8,LOW), digitalWrite(18,LOW), digitalWrite(28,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite(Enable_4_14_24_8_18_28,HIGH); //enable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(Enable_3_13_23_7_17_27,LOW); //disable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(5,HIGH), digitalWrite(15,HIGH), digitalWrite(25,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(9,LOW), digitalWrite(19,LOW), digitalWrite(29,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite(Enable_5_15_25_9_19_29,HIGH); //enable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(Enable_4_14_24_8_18_28,LOW); //disable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(6,HIGH), digitalWrite(16,HIGH), digitalWrite(26,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(10,LOW), digitalWrite(20,LOW), digitalWrite(30,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite(Enable_6_16_26_10_20_30,HIGH); //enable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(Enable_5_15_25_9_19_29,LOW); //disable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(7,HIGH), digitalWrite(17,HIGH), digitalWrite(27,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(11,LOW), digitalWrite(21,LOW), digitalWrite(1,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite(Enable_7_17_27_11_21_1,HIGH); //enable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(Enable_6_16_26_10_20_30,LOW); //disable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(8,HIGH), digitalWrite(18,HIGH), digitalWrite(28,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(12,LOW), digitalWrite(22,LOW), digitalWrite(2,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite(Enable_8_18_28_12_22_2,HIGH); //enable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(Enable_7_17_27_11_21_1,LOW); //disable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(9,HIGH), digitalWrite(19,HIGH), digitalWrite(29,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(13,LOW), digitalWrite(23,LOW), digitalWrite(3,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite(Enable_9_19_29_13_23_3,HIGH); //enable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(Enable_8_18_28_12_22_2,LOW); //disable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(10,HIGH), digitalWrite(20,HIGH), digitalWrite(30,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(14,LOW), digitalWrite(24,LOW), digitalWrite(4,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite(Enable_10_20_30_14_24_4,HIGH); //enable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(Enable_9_19_29_13_23_3,LOW); //disable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(Enable_10_20_30_14_24_4,LOW); //enable all switches in group
delay(x);
-
Cheors,
j'ai édité et corriger mon poste
S1H et S6L au lieu de L1H et L6L ,
-
This shot shows the flux (blue) waveform between Stator and rotor.
Current in yellow.
L192
-
Stator and rotor used for testing.
L192
That looks like an excellent wiring job L192.
Can you post a front few picture (like below) with rotor in place.
Thanks for sharing your great work
Luc
-
My code attached. No refinements or attempts to reduce lines.
Not tested yet.
I have another version for a 36 slot stator, as I have a 10KW motor coming my way.
Regards
L192
// L192 March 2018
// 30 slot stator
const int Enable_1_11_21_5_15_25 = 37;
const int Enable_2_12_22_6_16_26 = 38;
const int Enable_3_13_23_7_17_27 = 39;
const int Enable_4_14_24_8_18_28 = 40;
const int Enable_5_15_25_9_19_29 =41;
const int Enable_6_16_26_10_20_30 =42;
const int Enable_7_17_27_11_21_1 =43;
const int Enable_8_18_28_12_22_2 =44;
const int Enable_9_19_29_13_23_3 =45;
const int Enable_10_20_30_14_24_4 =46;
void setup() {
// initialize digital pin 1-30 as an output.
pinMode(1, OUTPUT);
pinMode(2, OUTPUT);
pinMode(3, OUTPUT);
pinMode(4, OUTPUT);
pinMode(5, OUTPUT);
pinMode(6, OUTPUT);
pinMode(7,OUTPUT);
pinMode(8, OUTPUT);
pinMode(9, OUTPUT);
pinMode(10, OUTPUT);
pinMode(11, OUTPUT);
pinMode(12, OUTPUT);
pinMode(13, OUTPUT);
pinMode(14,OUTPUT);
pinMode(15, OUTPUT);
pinMode(16, OUTPUT);
pinMode(17, OUTPUT);
pinMode(18, OUTPUT);
pinMode(19, OUTPUT);
pinMode(20, OUTPUT);
pinMode(21, OUTPUT);
pinMode(22, OUTPUT);
pinMode(23,OUTPUT);
pinMode(24, OUTPUT);
pinMode(25, OUTPUT);
pinMode(26, OUTPUT);
pinMode(27, OUTPUT);
pinMode(28, OUTPUT);
pinMode(29, OUTPUT);
pinMode(30,OUTPUT);
//initialize pins 37-46 as an output
pinMode (Enable_1_11_21_5_15_25,OUTPUT);
pinMode (Enable_2_12_22_6_16_26,OUTPUT);
pinMode (Enable_3_13_23_7_17_27,OUTPUT);
pinMode (Enable_4_14_24_8_18_28,OUTPUT);
pinMode (Enable_5_15_25_9_19_29,OUTPUT);
pinMode (Enable_6_16_26_10_20_30,OUTPUT);
pinMode (Enable_7_17_27_11_21_1,OUTPUT);
pinMode (Enable_8_18_28_12_22_2,OUTPUT);
pinMode (Enable_9_19_29_13_23_3,OUTPUT);
pinMode (Enable_10_20_30_14_24_4,OUTPUT);
}
int x = 0;
void loop(){
//int y= analogRead(0); // read pot use this if you want or set x manually
// x= map(y,0,1000 ,1,100);
x=1000;
// sequencing 30 coils 5 slot pitch previous coil stays on until next coil is on
digitalWrite(1,HIGH), digitalWrite(11,HIGH), digitalWrite(21,HIGH); //top switches
digitalWrite(5,LOW), digitalWrite(15,LOW), digitalWrite(25,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite (Enable_1_11_21_5_15_25,HIGH); //enable all switches in group setting output
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(2,HIGH), digitalWrite(12,HIGH), digitalWrite(22,HIGH); // top switches ON before 1 OFF
digitalWrite(6,LOW), digitalWrite(16,LOW), digitalWrite(26,LOW); // bottom switches ON before 1 OFF
digitalWrite(Enable_2_12_22_6_16_26,HIGH); //enable all switches in group setting output
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(Enable_1_11_21_5_15_25,LOW); //disable all switches in group 1 OFF
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(3,HIGH), digitalWrite(13,HIGH), digitalWrite(22,HIGH); // top swtches ON before 2 OFF
digitalWrite(7,LOW), digitalWrite(17,LOW), digitalWrite(27,LOW); // bottom switches ON before 2 OFF
digitalWrite(Enable_3_13_23_7_17_27,HIGH); //enable all switches in group setting output
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(Enable_2_12_22_6_16_26,LOW); //disable all switches in group 2 OFF
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(4,HIGH), digitalWrite(14,HIGH), digitalWrite(24,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(8,LOW), digitalWrite(18,LOW), digitalWrite(28,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite(Enable_4_14_24_8_18_28,HIGH); //enable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(Enable_3_13_23_7_17_27,LOW); //disable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(5,HIGH), digitalWrite(15,HIGH), digitalWrite(25,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(9,LOW), digitalWrite(19,LOW), digitalWrite(29,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite(Enable_5_15_25_9_19_29,HIGH); //enable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(Enable_4_14_24_8_18_28,LOW); //disable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(6,HIGH), digitalWrite(16,HIGH), digitalWrite(26,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(10,LOW), digitalWrite(20,LOW), digitalWrite(30,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite(Enable_6_16_26_10_20_30,HIGH); //enable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(Enable_5_15_25_9_19_29,LOW); //disable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(7,HIGH), digitalWrite(17,HIGH), digitalWrite(27,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(11,LOW), digitalWrite(21,LOW), digitalWrite(1,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite(Enable_7_17_27_11_21_1,HIGH); //enable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(Enable_6_16_26_10_20_30,LOW); //disable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(8,HIGH), digitalWrite(18,HIGH), digitalWrite(28,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(12,LOW), digitalWrite(22,LOW), digitalWrite(2,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite(Enable_8_18_28_12_22_2,HIGH); //enable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(Enable_7_17_27_11_21_1,LOW); //disable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(9,HIGH), digitalWrite(19,HIGH), digitalWrite(29,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(13,LOW), digitalWrite(23,LOW), digitalWrite(3,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite(Enable_9_19_29_13_23_3,HIGH); //enable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(Enable_8_18_28_12_22_2,LOW); //disable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(10,HIGH), digitalWrite(20,HIGH), digitalWrite(30,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(14,LOW), digitalWrite(24,LOW), digitalWrite(4,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite(Enable_10_20_30_14_24_4,HIGH); //enable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(Enable_9_19_29_13_23_3,LOW); //disable all switches in group
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(Enable_10_20_30_14_24_4,LOW); //enable all switches in group
delay(x);
Ah... OK.... But...
1. Your code doesn't compile, because of a minor error: you left off the closing curly bracket in loop(). Once this is fixed the code compiles and runs... But...
2. There is a timing irregularity. This was also there in the original sketch Pierre proposed and I don't recall ever getting a straight answer about whether this was intentional on his part (the "Secret") or a mistake (the "bug"). At any rate it interferes with the smooth flow of the fields around the stator. To be specific, there are two "delay" intervals between "Enable_1x, HIGH" and "Enable_1x, LOW" and also between "Enable_10x, HIGH" and "Enable_10x, LOW", whereas there are three "delay" intervals between all the other "Enable_" HIGH and LOW statements. If this is intentional, fine, but it would be nice to know why.
3. It is far better IMHO (for debugging and actual running, since the desired loop speed is so low) to include setting the "delay" interval value each time it is used, via the potentiometer, rather than setting it once per loop. So I'd recommend replacing each "delay(x)" statement with "delay(map(analogRead(A0), 0, 1023, 0, 100))" so that the speed can be set without having to wait for the loop to finish. This adds some tiny microseconds to the execution time but compared to the "60 Hz" output speed this is insignificant.
4. In my testing it looks like this code has several more "overlaps" than previous versions. That is, instead of just two LEDs lit at any time, this has groups of 5 or 6 chasing around. My test board doesn't have all 30 LED positions populated though; I am only looking at the first "thirdrant" of the complete circle (Pins 1 - 12) , so I'm not seeing the full picture in my hardware test.
-
To shed some more light on the coil winding pattern from Pierre, I went back to my old post:
For Pierre's case, I think we need to get clarification from him how exactly he has wound the stator. What I assumed in my latest simulations is that a coil runs over 7 slots and the next coil is in the neighboring slot (see my number sequence above).
01-07 08-14 15-21 22-28 29-35 36-06
07-13 14-20 21-27 28-34 35-05 06-12
13-19 20-26 27-33 34-04 05-11 12-18
19-25 26-32 33-03 04-10 11-17 18-24
25-31 32-02 03-09 10-16 17-23 24-30
31-01 02-08 09-05 16-22 23-29 30-36
36 coils total, so he could be using this winding configuration. The magnetic field pattern is attached (7SlotCoilSpan).
Yet he could also have done it like this: spanning 7 slots and have the neighboring coils in the same slot, then he would get the following sequence:
01-07 07-13 13-19 19-25 25-31 31-01
02-08 08-14 14-20 20-26 26-32 32-02
03-09 09-15 15-21 21-27 27-33 33-03
04-10 10-16 16-22 22-28 28-34 34-04
05-11 11-17 17-23 23-29 29-35 35-05
06-12 12-18 18-24 24-30 30-36 36-06
This actually yields the same coil configuration as the previous configuration (yet in different order, but that doesn't matter).
So again, 36 total coils, so he could be using this configuration.
So let's look now at a coil span of 6 slots instead of 7:
01-06 07-12 13-18 19-24 25-30 31-36
02-07 08-13 14-19 20-25 26-31 32-01
03-08 09-14 15-20 21-26 27-32 33-02
04-09 10-15 16-21 22-27 28-33 34-03
05-10 11-16 17-22 23-28 29-34 35-04
06-11 12-17 18-23 24-29 30-35 36-05
Again 2 coils per slot and 36 coils total, so he could be using this as well. I note that his one has his magic number sequence 01-06 ; 02-07; 03-08, etc. see post #170. For the magnetic field, see the attached image (6SlotCoilSpan).
Let's see if he could have done it like this: spanning 6 slots and have the neighboring coils in the same slot, then he would get the following sequence:
01-06 06-11 11-16 16-21 21-26 26-31 31-36
36-04 04-09 09-14 14-19 19-24 24-29 29-34
34-03 03-08 08-13 13-18 18-23 23-28 28-33
33-02 02-07 07-12 12-17 17-22 22-27 27-32
32-01
However this only gives 29 coils, so he can't have used this.
Someone should ask him what he is using.
PmgR
====
* Truthfulness * Compassion * Forbearance * www.falundafa.org (http://www.falundafa.org)
-
I've "massaged" listener191's code a little bit to get rid of the timing glitch (assuming it is unintentional), fix an error in comments, add the realtime speed control, etc.
I haven't been able to figure out how to compress the 10 coil-actuation statement sets into a single loop yet, but I'm sure it can be done.
Please, Stefan or moderators... can you enable the "code" BBTag?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
/**********************************
L192 March 2018
30 slot stator
massaged by TK:
-- timing irregularity fixed
-- for loop added
-- Enable[] group array added
-- Speed adjust real-time added
**********************************/
const int Enable[] = { 37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46 }; // Enable pins for coil groups 1-10
/*
Enable[1] group controls coils _1_11_21_5_15_25
Enable[2] group controls coils _2_12_22_6_16_26
Enable[3] group controls coils _3_13_23_7_17_27
Enable[4] group controls coils _4_14_24_8_18_28
Enable[5] group controls coils _5_15_25_9_19_29
Enable[6] group controls coils _6_16_26_10_20_30
Enable[7] group controls coils _7_17_27_11_21_1
Enable[8] group controls coils _8_18_28_12_22_2
Enable[9] group controls coils _9_19_29_13_23_3
Enable[10] group controls coils _10_20_30_14_24_4
*/
int pincounter = 1;
int index = 1;
int maxDelay = 100; // set maximum delay interval in milliseconds here
void setup() {
// initialize digital pin 1-30 as an output.
for (pincounter = 1; pincounter < 31; pincounter ++) {
pinMode(pincounter, OUTPUT);
}
pinMode(A0, INPUT);
}
void loop() {
// sequencing 30 coils 5 slot pitch previous coil stays on until next coil is on
digitalWrite(1,HIGH), digitalWrite(11,HIGH), digitalWrite(21,HIGH); //top switches
digitalWrite(5,LOW), digitalWrite(15,LOW), digitalWrite(25,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite (Enable[1], HIGH); // enable all switches in group 1
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(Enable[10],LOW); // disable all switches in group 10
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay));
digitalWrite(2,HIGH), digitalWrite(12,HIGH), digitalWrite(22,HIGH); // top switches ON before 1 OFF
digitalWrite(6,LOW), digitalWrite(16,LOW), digitalWrite(26,LOW); // bottom switches ON before 1 OFF
digitalWrite (Enable[2], HIGH); // enable all switches in group 2
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(Enable[1], LOW); // disable all switches in group 1
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(3,HIGH), digitalWrite(13,HIGH), digitalWrite(22,HIGH); // top switches ON before 2 OFF
digitalWrite(7,LOW), digitalWrite(17,LOW), digitalWrite(27,LOW); // bottom switches ON before 2 OFF
digitalWrite (Enable[3], HIGH); // enable all switches in group 3
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(Enable[2],LOW); // disable all switches in group 2
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(4,HIGH), digitalWrite(14,HIGH), digitalWrite(24,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(8,LOW), digitalWrite(18,LOW), digitalWrite(28,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite (Enable[4], HIGH); // enable all switches in group 4
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(Enable[3],LOW); // disable all switches in group 3
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(5,HIGH), digitalWrite(15,HIGH), digitalWrite(25,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(9,LOW), digitalWrite(19,LOW), digitalWrite(29,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite (Enable[5], HIGH); // enable all switches in group 5
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(Enable[4],LOW); // disable all switches in group 4
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(6,HIGH), digitalWrite(16,HIGH), digitalWrite(26,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(10,LOW), digitalWrite(20,LOW), digitalWrite(30,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite (Enable[6],HIGH); // enable all switches in group 6
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(Enable[5],LOW); // disable all switches in group 5
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(7,HIGH), digitalWrite(17,HIGH), digitalWrite(27,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(11,LOW), digitalWrite(21,LOW), digitalWrite(1,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite (Enable[7],HIGH); // enable all switches in group 7
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(Enable[6],LOW); // disable all switches in group 6
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(8,HIGH), digitalWrite(18,HIGH), digitalWrite(28,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(12,LOW), digitalWrite(22,LOW), digitalWrite(2,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite (Enable[8],HIGH); // enable all switches in group 8
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(Enable[7],LOW); // disable all switches in group 7
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(9,HIGH), digitalWrite(19,HIGH), digitalWrite(29,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(13,LOW), digitalWrite(23,LOW), digitalWrite(3,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite (Enable[9],HIGH); // enable all switches in group 9
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(Enable[8],LOW); // disable all switches in group 8
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(10,HIGH), digitalWrite(20,HIGH), digitalWrite(30,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(14,LOW), digitalWrite(24,LOW), digitalWrite(4,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite (Enable[10],HIGH); // enable all switches in group 10
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(Enable[9],LOW); // disable all switches in group 9
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
}
-
To shed some more light on the coil winding pattern from Pierre, I went back to my old post:
For Pierre's case, I think we need to get clarification from him how exactly he has wound the stator. What I assumed in my latest simulations is that a coil runs over 7 slots and the next coil is in the neighboring slot (see my number sequence above).
01-07 08-14 15-21 22-28 29-35 36-06
07-13 14-20 21-27 28-34 35-05 06-12
13-19 20-26 27-33 34-04 05-11 12-18
19-25 26-32 33-03 04-10 11-17 18-24
25-31 32-02 03-09 10-16 17-23 24-30
31-01 02-08 09-05 16-22 23-29 30-36
36 coils total, so he could be using this winding configuration. The magnetic field pattern is attached (7SlotCoilSpan).
Yet he could also have done it like this: spanning 7 slots and have the neighboring coils in the same slot, then he would get the following sequence:
01-07 07-13 13-19 19-25 25-31 31-01
02-08 08-14 14-20 20-26 26-32 32-02
03-09 09-15 15-21 21-27 27-33 33-03
04-10 10-16 16-22 22-28 28-34 34-04
05-11 11-17 17-23 23-29 29-35 35-05
06-12 12-18 18-24 24-30 30-36 36-06
This actually yields the same coil configuration as the previous configuration (yet in different order, but that doesn't matter).
So again, 36 total coils, so he could be using this configuration.
So let's look now at a coil span of 6 slots instead of 7:
01-06 07-12 13-18 19-24 25-30 31-36
02-07 08-13 14-19 20-25 26-31 32-01
03-08 09-14 15-20 21-26 27-32 33-02
04-09 10-15 16-21 22-27 28-33 34-03
05-10 11-16 17-22 23-28 29-34 35-04
06-11 12-17 18-23 24-29 30-35 36-05
Again 2 coils per slot and 36 coils total, so he could be using this as well. I note that his one has his magic number sequence 01-06 ; 02-07; 03-08, etc. see post #170. For the magnetic field, see the attached image (6SlotCoilSpan).
Let's see if he could have done it like this: spanning 6 slots and have the neighboring coils in the same slot, then he would get the following sequence:
01-06 06-11 11-16 16-21 21-26 26-31 31-36
36-04 04-09 09-14 14-19 19-24 24-29 29-34
34-03 03-08 08-13 13-18 18-23 23-28 28-33
33-02 02-07 07-12 12-17 17-22 22-27 27-32
32-01
However this only gives 29 coils, so he can't have used this.
Someone should ask him what he is using.
PmgR
====
* Truthfulness * Compassion * Forbearance * www.falundafa.org (http://www.falundafa.org)
Hi PmgR,
This was posted a few posts back.
Shows Pierre's coil pitch was 6 slots, so I favour..
01-06 07-12 13-18 19-24 25-30 31-36
02-07 08-13 14-19 20-25 26-31 32-01
03-08 09-14 15-20 21-26 27-32 33-02
04-09 10-15 16-21 22-27 28-33 34-03
05-10 11-16 17-22 23-28 29-34 35-04
06-11 12-17 18-23 24-29 30-35 36-05
Regards
L192
(http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/dlattach/attach/167187/image//)
-
Pierre connection:
simple connection 2 coils together.
-
Regarding the L298N temperature rise.
In the test I conducted, I was using the high side transistor pair of OUT1&2 and the low side transistor pair of OUT3&4, so both half bridges of the L298N were in conduction.
If you move the low switch to another board, then you change the thermal duty cycle of the device, as both half bridges will not be in conduction.
Although the device die is rated to 130 deg C, I would not want to run the heat sinked device over 75deg C, as thermal shutdown occurs some where between 80-85 deg C.
I set up a test with a 1 in 6 pulse duty cycle, with the high side and low side switches on different boards. 4A peak was achieved with a 38 deg C temp on the heatsink continuous running..so this is the way to go.
Another point ..the high side switch appears to be dropping about 8V at 4A and the low side switch about 4V. MOSFET's would not have this problem .
Regards
L192
-
That looks like an excellent wiring job L192.
Can you post a front few picture (like below) with rotor in place.
Thanks for sharing your great work
Luc
Hi Gotoluc,
Here is an end shot of the stator and rotor.
Note my coils are a little longer than I planned but they were wound for a 6 slot pitch in a slightly bigger stator.
I didnt want to wind up another set or spend time changing these so they would be tighter.
The rotor covers 9 poles, so induction will be over a wider range of arc.
You can see that more than 36T x 2 could have been packed in these slots, perhaps 46T.
Regards
L192
-
TK, i think there is a minor mistake in your sketch.
Arrays are zero indexed, that is the first element of the array is at index 0 (zero)
Taken that in to account i changed your code a little.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
/**********************************
L192 March 2018
30 slot stator
manicured by CM
massaged by TK:
-- timing irregularity fixed
-- for loop added
-- Enable[] group array added
-- Speed adjust real-time added
**********************************/
const int Enable[] = { 37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46 }; // Enable pins for coil groups 1-10
/*
Enable[0] group controls coils _1_11_21_5_15_25
Enable[1] group controls coils _2_12_22_6_16_26
Enable[2] group controls coils _3_13_23_7_17_27
Enable[3] group controls coils _4_14_24_8_18_28
Enable[4] group controls coils _5_15_25_9_19_29
Enable[5] group controls coils _6_16_26_10_20_30
Enable[6] group controls coils _7_17_27_11_21_1
Enable[7] group controls coils _8_18_28_12_22_2
Enable[8] group controls coils _9_19_29_13_23_3
Enable[9] group controls coils _10_20_30_14_24_4
*/
int pincounter = 1;
int index = 1;
int maxDelay = 100; // set maximum delay interval in milliseconds here
void setup() {
// initialize digital pin 1-30 as an output.
for (pincounter = 1; pincounter < 31; pincounter ++) {
pinMode(pincounter, OUTPUT);
}
pinMode(A0, INPUT);
}
void loop() {
// sequencing 30 coils 5 slot pitch previous coil stays on until next coil is on
digitalWrite(1,HIGH), digitalWrite(11,HIGH), digitalWrite(21,HIGH); //top switches
digitalWrite(5,LOW), digitalWrite(15,LOW), digitalWrite(25,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite (Enable[0], HIGH); // enable all switches in group 1
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(Enable[9],LOW); // disable all switches in group 10
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay));
digitalWrite(2,HIGH), digitalWrite(12,HIGH), digitalWrite(22,HIGH); // top switches ON before 1 OFF
digitalWrite(6,LOW), digitalWrite(16,LOW), digitalWrite(26,LOW); // bottom switches ON before 1 OFF
digitalWrite (Enable[1], HIGH); // enable all switches in group 2
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(Enable[0], LOW); // disable all switches in group 1
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(3,HIGH), digitalWrite(13,HIGH), digitalWrite(22,HIGH); // top switches ON before 2 OFF
digitalWrite(7,LOW), digitalWrite(17,LOW), digitalWrite(27,LOW); // bottom switches ON before 2 OFF
digitalWrite (Enable[2], HIGH); // enable all switches in group 3
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(Enable[1],LOW); // disable all switches in group 2
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(4,HIGH), digitalWrite(14,HIGH), digitalWrite(24,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(8,LOW), digitalWrite(18,LOW), digitalWrite(28,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite (Enable[3], HIGH); // enable all switches in group 4
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(Enable[2],LOW); // disable all switches in group 3
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(5,HIGH), digitalWrite(15,HIGH), digitalWrite(25,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(9,LOW), digitalWrite(19,LOW), digitalWrite(29,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite (Enable[4], HIGH); // enable all switches in group 5
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(Enable[3],LOW); // disable all switches in group 4
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(6,HIGH), digitalWrite(16,HIGH), digitalWrite(26,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(10,LOW), digitalWrite(20,LOW), digitalWrite(30,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite (Enable[5],HIGH); // enable all switches in group 6
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(Enable[4],LOW); // disable all switches in group 5
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(7,HIGH), digitalWrite(17,HIGH), digitalWrite(27,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(11,LOW), digitalWrite(21,LOW), digitalWrite(1,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite (Enable[6],HIGH); // enable all switches in group 7
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(Enable[5],LOW); // disable all switches in group 6
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(8,HIGH), digitalWrite(18,HIGH), digitalWrite(28,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(12,LOW), digitalWrite(22,LOW), digitalWrite(2,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite (Enable[7],HIGH); // enable all switches in group 8
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(Enable[6],LOW); // disable all switches in group 7
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(9,HIGH), digitalWrite(19,HIGH), digitalWrite(29,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(13,LOW), digitalWrite(23,LOW), digitalWrite(3,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite (Enable[8],HIGH); // enable all switches in group 9
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(Enable[7],LOW); // disable all switches in group 8
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(10,HIGH), digitalWrite(20,HIGH), digitalWrite(30,HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite(14,LOW), digitalWrite(24,LOW), digitalWrite(4,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite (Enable[9],HIGH); // enable all switches in group 10
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(Enable[8],LOW); // disable all switches in group 9
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
}
-
Right you are, thanks, so I've incorporated your correction into the current "looped" version here. I managed to compress the ten group switch sequences into one loop, I think. The performance looks the same on my test hardware as the unlooped version above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
/**********************************
*
* L192 March 2018
* 30 slot stator
*
* massaged by TK:
* -- timing irregularity fixed
* -- for loop added
* -- Enable[] group array added
* -- Speed adjust real-time added
* -- groups looped
*
* --corrected by CM for array index
*
*
**********************************/
const int Enable[] = { 37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46 }; // Enable pins for coil groups 1-10
/*
Enable[0] group controls coils _1_11_21_5_15_25
Enable[1] group controls coils _2_12_22_6_16_26
Enable[2] group controls coils _3_13_23_7_17_27
Enable[3] group controls coils _4_14_24_8_18_28
Enable[4] group controls coils _5_15_25_9_19_29
Enable[5] group controls coils _6_16_26_10_20_30
Enable[6] group controls coils _7_17_27_11_21_1
Enable[7] group controls coils _8_18_28_12_22_2
Enable[8] group controls coils _9_19_29_13_23_3
Enable[9] group controls coils _10_20_30_14_24_4
*/
int pincounter = 1;
int index = 1;
int maxDelay = 500; // set maximum delay interval in milliseconds here
void setup() {
// initialize digital pin 1-30 as an output
for (pincounter = 1; pincounter < 31; pincounter ++) {
pinMode(pincounter, OUTPUT);
}
pinMode(A0, INPUT);
// initialize digital pins in Enable[] as output
for (index = 0; index <10; index ++){
pinMode(Enable[index],OUTPUT);
}
}
void loop() {
for (index=1; index<11; index ++){
digitalWrite(index,HIGH), digitalWrite(index+10,HIGH), digitalWrite(index+20,HIGH); //top switches
digitalWrite(index+4,LOW), digitalWrite(index+14,LOW), digitalWrite((index+24)%30,LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite (Enable[index-1], HIGH); // enable all switches in group 0
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite(Enable[(index+8)%10],LOW); // disable all switches in group 9
delay(map(analogRead(A0),0,1023,0,maxDelay));
}
}
-
That's a nice solution.
Although it compiles, i'm not sure about the following
You might want to look at the second last line of your code, the format differs from the first time you used it, it looks like typo's, but as it seems to work... i might be missing something.
digitalWrite (Enable[index-1], HIGH); // enable all switches in group 0
digitalWrite(Enable[(index+8)%10],LOW); // disable all switches in group 9
And a little typo here i think?:
digitalWrite(index+4,LOW), digitalWrite(index+14,LOW), digitalWrite((index+24)%30,LOW); // bottom switches
Or am i missing the function of the % ? I'm not thát familiar with Arduino coding. Still learning myself.
Maybe it is the forum that changes it while copy-pasting?
But my guess would be for the loop:
void loop()
{
for (index = 1; index < 11; index ++)
{
digitalWrite (index, HIGH), digitalWrite(index + 10, HIGH), digitalWrite(index + 20, HIGH); // top switches
digitalWrite (index + 4, LOW), digitalWrite(index + 14, LOW), digitalWrite(index + 24, LOW); // bottom switches
digitalWrite (Enable[index - 1], HIGH); // enable all switches in group 0
delay(map(analogRead(A0), 0, 1023, 0, maxDelay)); // read speedpot and wait
digitalWrite (Enable[index + 8], LOW); // disable all switches in group 9
delay(map(analogRead(A0), 0, 1023, 0, maxDelay));
}
}
-
Hi Gotoluc,
Here is an end shot of the stator and rotor.
Great skills great job L192!
What is your wire gauge?
Jeg
ps. TK/Cherryman nice work guys, thanks fore these programming lessons. ;)
-
Possible relays Pierre
-
Great skills great job L192!
What is your wire gauge?
Jeg
ps. TK/Cherryman nice work guys, thanks fore these programming lessons. ;)
Hi Jeg,
I just checked and it 0.53mm which is 23AWG rated at about 5A continuous at a nominal temperature. The wire is is rated to 160 deg C, so it could be run beyond 5A.
I had plenty of this gauge and also 0.8mm which is closer to 20AWG.
The slot CSA would accommodate 0.8mm however it would be tight getting the wire pass the pole ends.
Regards
L192
-
Hi Jeg,
I just checked and it 0.53mm which is 23AWG rated at about 5A continuous at a nominal temperature. The wire is is rated to 160 deg C, so it could be run beyond 5A.
I had plenty of this gauge and also 0.8mm which is closer to 20AWG.
The slot CSA would accommodate 0.8mm however it would be tight getting the wire pass the pole ends.
Regards
L192
Thanks a lot for the info. I am to order some wire as i have plenty of 0.4mm which seems to be very thin for this job.
In the meanwhile, after some searching, and after balancing between cost and power characteristics, i ended up with transistors bd911/912 (http://www.st.com/resource/en/datasheet/bd911.pdf) for low and high side switches, and tip120 for driving them through my arduino. Total cost not over 60euros. If i was sure that mosfets can do the job, i would go with them even if i need nearly 120Euros for the boards.
-
This shot gives an idea of what you get out on the rotor for 3A pk input on six aligned coils. There was a 25 Watt load on the rotor coils (230V winding on original generator).
4.5A obtained by bring the rail above 35V for a short period double the peak output voltage from 120V to 240V.
Of course the opposite 6 coils (opposite polarity) were not present so I would expect less induction. If they were present this would bring the output up to around 480V peak, assuming just over 3A through each set of coils.
Regards
L192
-
Hi Gotoluc,
Here is an end shot of the stator and rotor.
Thanks L192 for posting the picture
Note my coils are a little longer than I planned but they were wound for a 6 slot pitch in a slightly bigger stator.
I didnt want to wind up another set or spend time changing these so they would be tighter.
So from what I see and understand your coils are presently positioned in a 5 slot span but could be reused in longer 36 slot stator and positioned in a 6 slot span?
The rotor covers 9 poles, so induction will be over a wider range of arc.
If your stator has 6 poles and your pitch is 5 slots then I would think if your rotor core covers more then 4 of the T surfaces. then at all time you have 2 poles on each ends of your rotor core.
I think it would result in a very weak flux swing (change) in the rotor core and not induce much flux in the rotor coils? Notice Pierre's rotor core (first pic) has only about 5 T surfaces coverage.
You can see that more than 36T x 2 could have been packed in these slots, perhaps 46T.
Regards
L192
Yes, I agree and I could of done the same to my stator which made me wonder why Pierre mentioned he had a hard time to fit the same wire gauge and turns I used in his much larger stator. Something is not right!... Have a look at the second picture of Pierre's stator. At 4 o'clock you can see the last winding (6 slot pitch) and behind it a bunch of wires away on the outer stator?... then at 5 o'clock a lager mass of wires which slowly reduces at 9 o'clock then starts to build back up again to 1 o'clock. Did you notice a large black wire at 12 o'clock? I don't think we are building anything close to what Pierre demonstrated.
Regards
Luc
-
Hi Luc
here is your quote:
"I don't think we are building anything close to what Pierre demonstrated"
(!!!!!!!)
-
I have 1 BTN7960 board coming
Looks robust enough. I am curious to read your review on this.
Why are you using separate arduino output pins for driving the below switches while they can be driven by sharing the same input with their mate switch at the above row?
-
Hi Luc
here is your quote:
"I don't think we are building anything close to what Pierre demonstrated"
(!!!!!!!)
Yes Doug, that's my quote for today!
Do you want me to call you?
Regards
Luc
-
Thanks L192 for posting the picture
So from what I see and understand your coils are presently positioned in a 5 slot span but could be reused in longer 36 slot stator and positioned in a 6 slot span?
If your stator has 6 poles and your pitch is 5 slots then I would think if your rotor core covers more then 4 of the T surfaces. then at all time you have 2 poles on each ends of your rotor core.
I think it would result in a very weak flux swing (change) in the rotor core and not induce much flux in the rotor coils? Notice Pierre's rotor core (first pic) has only about 5 T surfaces coverage.
Yes, I agree and I could of done the same to my stator which made me wonder why Pierre mentioned he had a hard time to fit the same wire gauge and turns I used in his much larger stator. Something is not right!... Have a look at the second picture of Pierre's stator. At 4 o'clock you can see the last winding (6 slot pitch) and behind it a bunch of wires away on the outer stator?... then at 5 o'clock a lager mass of wires which slowly reduces at 9 o'clock then starts to build back up again to 1 o'clock. Did you notice a large black wire at 12 o'clock? I don't think we are building anything close to what Pierre demonstrated.
Regards
Luc
Hi Gotoluc,
36 slot stators have much less slot CSA than 30 slot stators, so I think he would have had a harder time. Also he may have been using thick nomex slot liners.
Mine are made with 0.13mm nomex which is a little thin for the job.
Regards
L192
-
Looks robust enough. I am curious to read your review on this.
Why are you using separate arduino output pins for driving the below switches while they can be driven by sharing the same input with their mate switch at the above row?
Hi Jeg,
Yes I could do that, I just decided to keep full independent control for experimentation purposes.
Regards
L192
-
Hi Everyone
Pierre just put his videos back up again on youtube parts 1 through 4
He has comments section open too but did not see him answer any questions there (yet)
Seems like he wants to stay being open sourced....
Ask him questions there!
Personally I think 6 individual N-S stator-poles at 60 degrees are energized and then sequentially pulsed in rotation, and continued around flipping polariies every single "pole-segment" - so if 36 poles, this is every revolution 36 polarity changes and because so many polarity changes, this is where the big power is produced....also this is done with that overlapping sequence as Pierre outlined in his circuit drawing...
Now why is it so overunity is the very interesting and unique winding pattern, which puts backemf and lenz law forces to work reinforcing the power produced, not cancelling it...
I will guess really not much "flyback" energy is produced from the diodes and the reason for the all the recovery diodes is just to protect the electronics more than anything...(could be wrong and this is lots and lots of energy recovered into cap banks - interesting experiment for Pierre would be to put this into 2nd cap bank see if it still loops just as long in time (forever)
Anyways this all my opininons nothing else, working looping models on bench would make it fact...
Big Question:
Were those "magic numbers" Pierre released a few weeks ago correct or was he mistaken??
Seems like now 1-7 etc etc is correct now looking at drawings and lots of analysis , not 1-6 as he put out...maybe this is for slots instead poles I don't know...
Hi Konehead,
See attached.
As area A (red) moves into registration with rotor, coil inductance increases rotor induction happens current flows in load and a counter flux is set up in the rotor and stator. The counterflux sees the high reluctance path offered by the stator path to the rotor however the counter flux sees a lower reluctance path (green) offered by the adjacent pole where the energizing flux is in the same direction.
At this point this adjacent area is not in registration with the rotor, so induction is low and little counter flux is generated to oppose area A counter flux. It would have to be modeled to confirm this.
Regards
L192
-
Hi Jeg,
I just checked and it 0.53mm which is 23AWG rated at about 5A continuous at a nominal temperature. The wire is is rated to 160 deg C, so it could be run beyond 5A.
I had plenty of this gauge and also 0.8mm which is closer to 20AWG.
The slot CSA would accommodate 0.8mm however it would be tight getting the wire pass the pole ends.
Regards
L192
L192, what is the resistance and inductance of one of your coils by itself (no rotor present).
PmgR
-
L192, what is the resistance and inductance of one of your coils by itself (no rotor present).
PmgR
Hi PmgR,
Mine are all connected in series in the loom, heat shrunk and tie wrapped, so it will be tomorrow before I can find an open place to break the loop.
I may have a spare coil which I can measure the resistance.
Regards
L192
-
L192, you can measure from one half of the stator to the other half of the stator. I believe you have 30slots, so you would be measuring two parallel strings of 15 inductors in series, so what you would measure would be 7.5*L and 7.5*R where R and L are for a single coil. So no need to disconnect anything. Just make sure the rotor is not in the stator.
PmgR
-
I think, that this generator work in fallowing way:
-
Pierre said that only six coils are on at a time, then the next six turn on just as the previous are turning off.
Doesn't that mean there could only be 3 coils at say 0 degrees, then 3 at 180 degrees?
3 at 0 degrees north, 3 at 180 degrees south?
Also the sleeve inside the motor housing, whats that for ,and what is it aluminium?
Thanks artv
also watch the first video where he inserts the magnets to show rotation, slow it down you see a very jerking motion
it seems to match up with the bulges of coils winds at 10 ,2, 4 and 8
-
L192, you can measure from one half of the stator to the other half of the stator. I believe you have 30slots, so you would be measuring two parallel strings of 15 inductors in series, so what you would measure would be 7.5*L and 7.5*R where R and L are for a single coil. So no need to disconnect anything. Just make sure the rotor is not in the stator.
PmgR
Hi PmgR,
Each coil is 1.42 ohms and 1.176mH without rotor present in stator.
Regards
L192
-
Pierre said that only six coils are on at a time, then the next six turn on just as the previous are turning off.
Doesn't that mean there could only be 3 coils at say 0 degrees, then 3 at 180 degrees?
3 at 0 degrees north, 3 at 180 degrees south?
Also the sleeve inside the motor housing, whats that for ,and what is it aluminium?
Thanks artv
Hi Shylo,
Pierre's diagram shows 6 coils energized in series for each pole, so that's 6 x 6 = 36 coils energized all the time.
Its the poles that rotate by changing the high side and low side switch pairs, in a one coil per step sequence, combined with a 1 coil overlap to ensure the magnetic field is never switched off.
Regards
L192
-
Pierre's diagram shows 6 coils energized in series for each pole, so that's 6 x 6 = 36 coils energized all the time.
Hi listener191,
I think 12 coils all the time for 36 coils stator.
section from 1 coil sets (6 coils)...
section from 2 coil sets (6 coils)...
1on
2on
3off
..
later
1off
2on
3on
=12 coils all the time.
-
Hi listener191,
I think 12 coils all the time for 36 coils stator.
section from 1 coil sets (6 coils)...
section from 2 coil sets (6 coils)...
1on
2on
3off
..
later
1off
2on
3on
=12 coils all the time.
Hi r2fpl,
Look at the attached.
This is the point where Pierre is describing the pole transition problem.
It shows 6 transitions and you can only get this if all 36 coils are on.
Regards
L192
-
Hi r2fpl,
Look at the attached.
This is the point where Pierre is describing the pole transition problem.
It shows 6 transitions and you can only get this if all 36 coils are on.
Regards
L192
listener191,
You want to say that it is always 36 coils power on and only their polarization changes in 6 ?
-
Hi listener191,
I think 12 coils all the time for 36 coils stator.
section from 1 coil sets (6 coils)...
section from 2 coil sets (6 coils)...
1on
2on
3off
..
later
1off
2on
3on
=12 coils all the time.
Hello r2fpl,
yes, always 36, just the magnetic fields rotation, according to the game of commutations. Look again : https://goo.gl/zAW2Ge (https://goo.gl/zAW2Ge)
FR
oui, toujours 36, juste la rotation des champs magnétiques avec le jeu des commutations. Regardez à nouveau : https://goo.gl/zAW2Ge (https://goo.gl/zAW2Ge)
-
When the coil shortening takes place, high spike's many kVolt in BOTH plus and minus direction occurs!
FR/ Lorsque le raccourcissement de la bobine a lieu, de nombreux kVolt de la pointe haute dans les deux sens plus et moins se produit!
-
Look again : https://goo.gl/zAW2Ge (https://goo.gl/zAW2Ge)
Video problem.
See animation (gif) by oscar:
http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/msg519284/#msg519284
-
Red = Down Orange = Up The non connected diodes in opposite direction! FR/ Les diodes non connectées dans la direction opposée!
If I decrease the coupling Factor in the coil array more or less a Transformer the higher the spikes goes!
FR/ Si je diminue le facteur de couplage dans le réseau de bobines plus ou moins un transformateur, plus les pointes sont hautes!
-
The consequence of the above discovered situation in my previous post.
Depending of the coil connection situation// connection to Plus, or connection to Minus. The H-Bridge has to be protected with some VOLTAGE limiters both ways!
FR/ La conséquence de la situation découverte ci-dessus dans mon post précédent.
Selon la situation de connexion de la bobine // connexion à Plus, ou connexion à Minus. Le H-Bridge doit être protégé avec des limiteurs de VOLTAGE dans les deux sens!
Why were Pierre's diodes only connected to the plus rail? FR/ Pourquoi les diodes de Pierre étaient-elles uniquement connectées au rail plus?
-
Hi gotoluc, in regard to your 'all is one' thread.
Thank you for sharing, that seed of information is very helpful for many.
I love you without condition.
peace love light
-
Hi gotoluc, in regard to your 'all is one' thread.
Thank you for sharing, that seed of information is very helpful for many.
I love you without condition.
peace love light
Thanks SkyWatcher123
My reply: http://overunity.com/17663/all-is-one-and-not-how-you-perceive-it-tout-est-un-et-non-comment-tu-le-perois/msg519316/#new (http://overunity.com/17663/all-is-one-and-not-how-you-perceive-it-tout-est-un-et-non-comment-tu-le-perois/msg519316/#new)
If anyone would like to contribute or ask positive questions, post here as SkyWatcher123 did.
Posts here will then be deleted in 24 hours. I'm sure all understand why the topic needs to stay in visual mode only.
Fr. Si quelqu'un souhaite contribuer ou poser des questions positives, postez ici comme SkyWatcher123 l'a fait.
Les messages ici seront ensuite supprimés dans les 24 heures. Je suis sûr que tous comprennent pourquoi le sujet doit rester en mode visuel seulement.
-
I analyze first set relays works:
transistor count from bottom right, relay label number
1 - 1,14
13 - 25,38
16 - 39,52
18 - 41,54
for first sets: (blue leds: 1,2,11,13,23,24) ->(labels relays 1,14,16,18,25,27,38,42,49,51,62,71)
When get 1-1,14 ok
13- 25,38 ok
... ok
When get first set 1,2,11,13,23,24 where is logical ? How counts correctly ?
-
Why were Pierre's diodes only connected to the plus rail?
How I draw, it colects Back EMF. And minus also gose to minus of supercaps.
In Half Bridge, of Full bridge topology BACK EMF always go to input source. On All Electric bikes motors and all DC BLDC motors also back EMF gose to input source thourth mosfet internal diodes. So no be Hight VOLTAGE spikes!
-
How I draw, it colects Back EMF. And minus also gose to minus of supercaps.
In Half Bridge, of Full bridge topology BACK EMF always go to input source. On All Electric bikes motors and all DC BLDC motors also back EMF gose to input source thourth mosfet internal diodes. So no be Hight VOLTAGE spikes!
If the transistor has a diode inside.
-
Why were ALL (if I'm right?) Pierre's diodes only connected to the plus rail if it occurs negative spikes also?
MenofFather: Pierre used Relays not H-bridges or Fets.
I'm not using H-bridges, but the building guys here. So take care of the spikes!
Pourquoi toutes les diodes de Pierre (si j'ai raison!?) Sont connectées au rail plus si des pointes négatives se produisent également?
MenofFather: Pierre a utilisé des relais non H-ponts ou Fets.
Je n'utilise pas de ponts en H, mais les gars du bâtiment ici. Dus pas op de pointes!
-
I analyze first set relays works:
transistor count from bottom right, relay label number
1 - 1,14
13 - 25,38
16 - 39,52
18 - 41,54
for first sets: (blue leds: 1,2,11,13,23,24) ->(labels relays 1,14,16,18,25,27,38,42,49,51,62,71)
When get 1-1,14 ok
13- 25,38 ok
... ok
When get first set 1,2,11,13,23,24 where is logical ? How counts correctly ?
Take a look at the attached image. It outlines the various relays that are on at the same time.
Transistor 1 (T1) controls relays 1-14
T2 controls 3 and 16
T3 controls 5 and 18
...
T13 controls 25 and 38
....
T16 controls 31 and 44
...
T18 controls 35 and 48
...
T20 controls 39 and 52
...
T25 controls 49 and 62,
etc.
PmgR
-
3 days ago I sent a message to Pierre asking him to confirm if his coils are powered in series. I've just received a reply from him which I translated and below is his original French message.
Fr. Il y a 3 jours j'ai envoyé un message à Pierre lui demandant de confirmer si ses bobines sont alimentées en série. Je viens de recevoir une réponse de lui que j'ai traduite et ci-dessous est son message original en français.
in my assembly there is 6 coils in series except that there is one that I feed for a fraction of a second so not to lose the magnetic field, so it leaves me with 5 coils operating in reality, example: 1 and 2 are powered by the positive and then 1 goes off to allow the magnetic flux to move etc. So in your case (Pierre is referring to my 30 slot) there should be 4 coils operating using the program I gave you which is good. The only thing I may of modified is the value x and y and played a bit with the speed. Everybody is making too much of a deal with the frequency. I already mentioned that the frequency meter may not of been correct. We can see all the uneven switching noise on the oscilloscope which affected the frequency meter. I adjust the potentiometer but most likely the frequency meter did not read the right frequency. Instead of having a discussion on frequency, people should be working on rotating the magnetic field. Then they can start playing with frequency and increase it to the desired speed.
Fr. dans mon montage il y a 6 bobine en série sauf qu'il y a une que j'alimente pendant une fraction de seconde pour ne pas perdre le champ magnétique donc il me reste 5 bobine en fonction en réalité ex:1 et 2 sont alimenté par le positif et puis 1 s'éteint pour déplacé le flux magnétique ainsi de suite dans votre cas il devrait rester 4 bobine en fonction en passant le programme que je vous ai donner est bon la seul chose que j'ai peut être modifier est la valeur x et y j'ai jouer un peut avec la vitesse et puis le monde s'en font vraiment trop pour la fréquence ,j'ai déjà mentionner que le fréquence de mon meter n'a peut-être pas la bonne valeur avec ce que j'ai vue a l'ociloscope a cause des parasite la fréquence était anarchique j'ai ajuster le potentiometre mais il se peut que le fréquence meter n'a pas lue la bonne fréquence avant de parler de fréquence il devrait se concentrer par faire tourné le champ magnétique après ils pourront s'amuser avec la fréquence il suffit juste d'augmenter a la vitesse désirer
-
Also received this message Today at 02:57:56 AM (Forum time)
Fr. également reçu ce message
I just saw the plan on the last page and it's pretty close to reality to keep the magnetic field moving
Fr. je vient de voir le plan a la dernière page et cela est assez proche de la réalité pour faire bouger le champ magnétique
-
gotoluc:
Can you ask Pierre if all the coils have the same amount of wire or are they the same.
-
Take a look at the attached image. It outlines the various relays that are on at the same time.
Transistor 1 (T1) controls relays 1-14
T2 controls 3 and 16
T3 controls 5 and 18
...
T13 controls 25 and 38
....
T16 controls 31 and 44
...
T18 controls 35 and 48
...
T20 controls 39 and 52
...
T25 controls 49 and 62,
etc.
PmgR
Yes,
led relay
1 1 14
2 3 16
3 5 18
4 7 20
5 9 22
6 11 24
7 13 26
8 15 28
9 17 30
10 19 32
11 21 34
12 23 36
13 25 38 (led TOP/upper)
14 27 40 (led TOP/bottom)
15 29 42
16 31 44
17 33 46
18 35 48
19 37 50
20 39 52
21 41 54
22 43 56
23 45 58
24 47 60
25 49 62
26 51 64
27 53 66
28 55 68
29 57 70
30 59 72
-
If the transistor has a diode inside.
All strong transistors-mosfets have diode inside!
-
Why were ALL (if I'm right?) Pierre's diodes only connected to the plus rail if it occurs negative spikes also?
MenofFather: Pierre used Relays not H-bridges or Fets.
Because he and use diodes! Because relays not have integrated diodes, i think.
-
3 days ago I sent a message to Pierre asking him to confirm if his coils are powered in series. I've just received a reply from him which I translated and below is his original French message.
Fr. Il y a 3 jours j'ai envoyé un message à Pierre lui demandant de confirmer si ses bobines sont alimentées en série. Je viens de recevoir une réponse de lui que j'ai traduite et ci-dessous est son message original en français.
in my assembly there is 6 coils in series except that there is one that I feed for a fraction of a second so not to lose the magnetic field, so it leaves me with 5 coils operating in reality, example: 1 and 2 are powered by the positive and then 1 goes off to allow the magnetic flux to move etc. So in your case (Pierre is referring to my 30 slot) there should be 4 coils operating using the program I gave you which is good. The only thing I may of modified is the value x and y and played a bit with the speed. Everybody is making too much of a deal with the frequency. I already mentioned that the frequency meter may not of been correct. We can see all the uneven switching noise on the oscilloscope which affected the frequency meter. I adjust the potentiometer but most likely the frequency meter did not read the right frequency. Instead of having a discussion on frequency, people should be working on rotating the magnetic field. Then they can start playing with frequency and increase it to the desired speed.
Fr. dans mon montage il y a 6 bobine en série sauf qu'il y a une que j'alimente pendant une fraction de seconde pour ne pas perdre le champ magnétique donc il me reste 5 bobine en fonction en réalité ex:1 et 2 sont alimenté par le positif et puis 1 s'éteint pour déplacé le flux magnétique ainsi de suite dans votre cas il devrait rester 4 bobine en fonction en passant le programme que je vous ai donner est bon la seul chose que j'ai peut être modifier est la valeur x et y j'ai jouer un peut avec la vitesse et puis le monde s'en font vraiment trop pour la fréquence ,j'ai déjà mentionner que le fréquence de mon meter n'a peut-être pas la bonne valeur avec ce que j'ai vue a l'ociloscope a cause des parasite la fréquence était anarchique j'ai ajuster le potentiometre mais il se peut que le fréquence meter n'a pas lue la bonne fréquence avant de parler de fréquence il devrait se concentrer par faire tourné le champ magnétique après ils pourront s'amuser avec la fréquence il suffit juste d'augmenter a la vitesse désirer
Has there been another Arduino program received from Pierre? Because the one I saw and analyzed does not appear to do this.
-
Has there been another Arduino program received from Pierre? Because the one I saw and analyzed does not appear to do this.
Hi TinselKoala,
These lines in Pierre's original code, as an example for the first and second coils support an overlap.
digitalWrite(1,HIGH), digitalWrite(13,HIGH), digitalWrite(25,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(2,HIGH), digitalWrite(14,HIGH), digitalWrite(26,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(1,LOW), digitalWrite(13,LOW), digitalWrite(25,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
Regards
L192
-
Extensive running of L298N half bridges (parallel transistors) at 4A into one set of 6 coils, resulted in a device failure.
The running temperature was only 40 deg C for the high side switch.
4A into two sets of 5 coils via one source and one sink half bridge, for my 30 slot stator, would likely be a minimum for me, so I think the L298N will prove not fit for purpose.
I want to evaluate the BTN7960 board carefully, as the relatively low rail voltage limit of 28V may be limiting if the clock rate is raised to say a 1ms period, as higher voltage will be required to get the current rise within the period.
Regards
L192
-
Why were Pierre's diodes only connected to the plus rail? FR/ Pourquoi les diodes de Pierre étaient-elles uniquement connectées au rail plus?
Because he made a mistake when drawing. That simple. One diode looks to the positive rail and the other to the negative. Like all clamps.
What i don't quite understand is why there are about 100 steps between two peaks (whole period). Look at the drawing. There should be just 12 switching events until the full period to be completed. Any idea?
-
Hi TinselKoala,
These lines in Pierre's original code, as an example for the first and second coils support an overlap.
digitalWrite(1,HIGH), digitalWrite(13,HIGH), digitalWrite(25,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(2,HIGH), digitalWrite(14,HIGH), digitalWrite(26,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(1,LOW), digitalWrite(13,LOW), digitalWrite(25,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
Regards
L192
Yes, I realize that. After all, I have the sketch running on a Mega right in front of me.
What I am questioning is the number of coils that are being turned on according to the quote from Perre. Does this posted sketch turn on 4 coils at a time?
Another issue that has never been cleared up, as far as I can tell, is the timing irregularity present in that first sketch posted from Pierre. Is this intentional, or should there be an even, smooth flow with equal timings all around the ring? If it is intentional, what is the reason and does the demonstrated OU effect depend on it? If it is not intentional... then wtf????
-
What I am questioning is the number of coils that are being turned on according to the quote from Perre. Does this posted sketch turn on 4 coils at a time?
No. Those numbers are not representing coils but switches. At anytime, all 36 coils are active. Look the drawing of PMR at the previous page.
-
No. Those numbers are not representing coils but switches. At anytime, all 36 coils are active. Look the drawing of PMR at the previous page.
But what about what Pierre himself said?
in my assembly there is 6 coils in series except that there is one that I feed for a fraction of a second so not to lose the magnetic field, so it leaves me with 5 coils operating in reality, example: 1 and 2 are powered by the positive and then 1 goes off to allow the magnetic flux to move etc. So in your case (Pierre is referring to [Luc's] 30 slot) there should be 4 coils operating using the program I gave you which is good.
-
But what about what Pierre himself said?
Looks like he says the same. Six coils in series across each of the poles, but at the moment of changing to the next switch we have momentarily a different number of coils. You should study his diagram with the 360 deg. cycle showing exactly how current moves and what switches open and close for this to be achieved. PMR's drawing also is very well made.
-
Yes, I realize that. After all, I have the sketch running on a Mega right in front of me.
What I am questioning is the number of coils that are being turned on according to the quote from Perre. Does this posted sketch turn on 4 coils at a time?
Another issue that has never been cleared up, as far as I can tell, is the timing irregularity present in that first sketch posted from Pierre. Is this intentional, or should there be an even, smooth flow with equal timings all around the ring? If it is intentional, what is the reason and does the demonstrated OU effect depend on it? If it is not intentional... then wtf? ???
Hi TinselKoala,
It turns on 3 group of 6 coils. Looking at one group say 1 to 6, then before turning of coil 1 it turns on coil 2 to 7 , then after a delay it turns off coil 1.
Regards
L192
-
Red=1
Blue=13
Green=25
Current through the upper red switch flows to ground through two below switches (Red and Green). The same action happens with the other two upper switches. So current flows all time through all of the 36 coils. At least this is how i get it.
-
Just a Falstad simulation for half bridges simulating the coil 1 coil 2 period.
Green trace in second file is voltage across 1st MOSFET
There is some high frequency oscillation happening, which diminishes if I snub the source-drain.
Only clocking at 15Hz, but no large voltage peaks.
Current is across the 2nd inductor, which increases when the 2nd switch is turned on.
Regards
L192
-
listener191: falstad has a lot of mistakes! ex. When changes to much anything does not work properly. Help: select all, copy, reload page F5 and paste.
-
Now this is the picture when you remove all of the lower diodes, similar to the Pierre relay case.
Now there is a 206V pk spike when a coil turns off, which also would be the case if it were switch 2 staying on and switch 1 turning off. If you turn off all coils that's a 388V pk spike.
So the problem with Pierre's waveform looking so spikey, is lack of diodes in parallel with the low side relay contacts. Basic he has not provided any solid current path for the coils to discharge.
L192
-
hi Jeg
In message 249 you were asking about all the steps in voltage you see on scope between periods -
what I think all this is, is a "shorted" coil effect from his winding pattern and method, especially when the two opposing coils pass through the same slot in opposite=flow directions....this creating a bucking field, which slams the magnetic fields against each other, stopping the flow abruptly, and creating the bucking condition which also creates a shorted-condition more or less in both coils at once and this causes those hyper-spikes in voltage.....
these spikes in voltage also go "both ways" they are not like backemf/flyback spikes so much....rather ringing oscillations are created when coil is shorted; in Pierres case it is not so much a simple short of a coil by connecting coil leads together for instant with switch at the sinewave peak.......instead Pierre has more complicated (somewhat) = at least not so understandable method to create hyper-ringing spikes to his generating coils via his interweaving winding method and also passing coils through same stator slot in opposite directions
"perhaps" this has lots to do with the way it loops, and fills up the caps so well without lenz law or CEMF cancelling forces which normall occur in generators or transformers when loaded...
Normally you will see a gain in voltage into caps X20 when switch-shorting at sinewave peaks, a generator coil, X50 if all things perfect..
.
So this my konehead- theory it might have some merit might not but those spikes sure resemble peak-shorted spikes...
-
Hi all,imho, in Pierre first video between minutes 5:09 and 6:19 i see that the core of the stator is very lightweight, out of normal, Piere can manipulate it of very easy way, the orange plastic that support winding insulators because aparently there are ausence of iron that can support it, and texture of the estator core make me think that this is a resin made core and not a iron or steel core. Maybe i could be wrong, but i hope i'm not.
Regards.
GM
-
Hi Gmolina,
No sorry you are incorrect..see attached
You can clearly see the stator is laminated steel.
The orange tube is just to pack the airgap to stop the rotor vibrating, which I can confirm it does, unless the air gap is firmly packed.
Regards
L192
-
Seems my reported demise of a L298N after extended running at 4A was premature.
The device had actually entered thermal shutdown and it took some time to recover.
I tested the board the next day and all was well.
This demonstrates they are pretty robust.
Regards
L192
-
The current flowing through the relay is about 8A or more. The effect may not be below a certain value. It's better to use more robust layouts.
-
The current flowing through the relay is about 8A or more. The effect may not be below a certain value. It's better to use more robust layouts.
Hi R2fpl,
Yes I totally agree.
I am waiting on one of the BTN7960B boards for evaluation.
It will have a 28V rail limit, so I want to see how much current I can get to pass through two sets of coils before deciding.
Also I think it wont sustain 10A on the heatsink supplied, with out thermal shutdown, so that's another area of experimentation,
to see how the boards could be bolted on either a large heatsink plate or a thick aluminum angle rail.
Regards
L192
-
It will have a 28V rail limit, so I want to see how much current I can get to pass through two sets of coils before deciding.
Also I think it wont sustain 10A on the heatsink supplied, with out thermal shutdown, so that's another area of experimentation,
It depends how far you would like to go on heating coil wires.
In Pierre's setup the input was 110V 1.5A which translates to 165W in total and supercaps was on 20V charge. Which translates to 8.25A consumption in total across all coils minus BEMF recovery.
And for a sake of test how much you can get from artificially created rotating magnetic field it does not need to consume so much power.
Cheers!
-
It depends how far you would like to go on heating coil wires.
In Pierre's setup the input was 110V 1.5A which translates to 165W in total and supercaps was on 20V charge. Which translates to 8.25A consumption in total across all coils minus BEMF recovery.
And for a sake of test how much you can get from artificially created rotating magnetic field it does not need to consume so much power.
Cheers!
Hi T-1000
There are three current paths, so each high side and low side switch would be conducting 2.75A based on the assumption that all of the power is coming from the supply, which is well within a paralleled L298N's rating.
Pierre alluded to a much larger current per switch pair (not stated though), so perhaps the recovery is much higher than we can see at this time and hence the coil current is higher.
If he could give us a ball park coil current, that would be helpful in a number of ways.
Regards
L192
-
Builders You need a gross value of 900 Watt to make your magnetic field, if you don't find a method to recover power to the electromagets!
And Pierres OU ???
Regards Arne
-
Builders You need a gross value of 900 Watt to make your magnetic field, if you don't find a method to recover power to the electromagets!
And Pierres OU ???
Regards Arne
Hi Seead,
At such a low clock frequency DC resistance dominates so...
6 of my coils in series are about 6.41ohms, so two of these series chains are fed in parallel, so 3.205ohms .. 21V/3.205ohms = 6.55A x 3 paths = 19.65A, closer to 412W.
Regards
L192
-
To prevent melting the insulation or the wires stay below 2000A/in2 = 3.1A/mm2. Source of this information:
http://what-when-how.com/electric-motors/current-density-electric-motors/ (http://what-when-how.com/electric-motors/current-density-electric-motors/)
Here are more on designing stator windings:
http://what-when-how.com/electric-motors/design-equations-electric-motors/ (http://what-when-how.com/electric-motors/design-equations-electric-motors/)
There has to be enough inductance in the coils to limit the current at the frequency used. If using resistance to limit the current place external resistors rated for dissipating the required amount of power. This of course is a total waste of power. External inductors can also limit the current. Inductors don't dissipate the power as the energy is given back at demagnetization. Better design the windings for the job without dissipating power as heat.
Regards
Ole
-
IRF3205 / IRF4905
Max values
55V, 200W, continuous Id=52A/80A, Pulsed I=260A/390, Rds(on) 8mOhm/20mOm
An interesting mosfet matching and cheap. With a capable heatsink it will run fine
http://www.irf.com/product-info/datasheets/data/irf3205.pdf
https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/irf4905.pdf?fileId=5546d462533600a4015355e32165197c
As for clamping diodes i was thinking about UF5408. 1000V/3A. Any other idea here?
-
Hi Seead,
At such a low clock frequency DC resistance dominates so..
L192
Hi L192
Your coil: About 1.2mH (free) assuming 2.5 mH (tight to secondary core)
1.2mH => XL 60Hz ==> about 0.5 Ohm
2.5mH => XL 60Hz ==> about 1 Ohm
Roughly; DC flows half the time of the outgoing frequency (60Hz; 8.3ms) then DC in the opposite direction next half, if looking at one single coil.
Pic : one single coil Z (Roughly)
Regards Arne
-
IRF3205 / IRF4905
Max values
55V, 200W, continuous Id=52A/80A, Pulsed I=260A/390, Rds(on) 8mOhm/20mOm
An interesting mosfet matching and cheap. With a capable heatsink it will run fine
http://www.irf.com/product-info/datasheets/data/irf3205.pdf (http://www.irf.com/product-info/datasheets/data/irf3205.pdf)
https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/irf4905.pdf?fileId=5546d462533600a4015355e32165197c (https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/irf4905.pdf?fileId=5546d462533600a4015355e32165197c)
As for clamping diodes i was thinking about UF5408. 1000V/3A. Any other idea here?
Hi Jeg,
Whats wrong with using the body diodes, or are you concerned about heat?
Regards
L192
-
Hi L192
Your coil: About 1.2mH (free) assuming 2.5 mH (tight to secondary core)
1.2mH => XL 60Hz ==> about 0.5 Ohm
2.5mH => XL 60Hz ==> about 1 Ohm
Roughly; DC flows half the time of the outgoing frequency (60Hz; 8.3ms) then DC in the opposite direction next half, if looking at one single coil.
Pic : one single coil Z (Roughly)
Regards Arne
Hi Seaad
Except if I clock at 60Hz then current reduces. Clocking at 20 to 25Hz produces the largest output.
Also even if I take your impedance example for a single coil, I have 6 in series (under test), =8.4 ohms.
I have been operating at 35V so 35/8.4= 4.1A.
4.1A is achievable at 20Hz clock rate, not 60Hz.
Regards
L192
-
Hi Seaad
A) Clocking at 20 to 25Hz produces the largets output.
Also even if I take your impedance example for a single coil, I have 6 in series (under test), =8.4 ohms.
I have been operating at 35V so 35/8.4= 4.1A.
B) 4.1A is achievable at 20Hz clock rate, not 60Hz.
L192
A) Pierres freq. 13-15 Hz 8)
B) You have a multiplicative effect with the (total 6 coils) m-Henry value due to overlapping coils and some weird half and full transformer function depending of the proximity to to the output core. Due to that the Z goes up steeper than just adding coils. A higher total Henry value favorably even at 20 Hz.
Which inductance value do you get to a 6 coil overlapped "section"? Away or close to the output core.
Regards Arne
-
A) Pierres freq. 13-15 Hz 8)
B) You have a multiplicative effect with the (total 6 coils) m-Henry value due to overlapping coils and some weird half and full transformer function depending of the proximity to to the output core. Due to that the Z goes up steeper than just adding coils. A higher total Henry value favorably even at 20 Hz.
Which inductance value do you get to a 6 coil overlapped "section"? Away or close to the output core.
Regards Arne
Hi Seaad,
With the rotor open circuit and rotated through 360 degs, the minimum inductance of 6 coils in series is 9.7mH and the maximum inductance is 98mH.
There is nothing particularly strange about the windings, apart from the linear distribution that produces a triangular wave.
The individual coils flux add, with the peak half way between the start of the first coil and the end of the 6th coil.
For a distributed winding to produce a sine wave, a gap is needed between the coils so the flux rise rate reduces towards the peak.
Regards
L192
-
Hi People,
These bloody H-Bridges...
Used to excite coil(s) with tricky arrangement(s) thereof might be one key for OU. No?
My question is (for low freq) :
How many relay(s) do you need to build such an H-Bridge?
My answer is : just one 4 poles relay.
Now, you, perhaps, might consider Duncan Pickthallp's more simple ideas.
Le bonsoir vous sied,
Jean
-
Here is the circuit:
-
OK. Here is the Duncan Pickthall'pdf
-
The Secret of DPDT:
-
Here is my analysis of P.C. circuit with flyback diodes. Who is, or is not, of my opinion?
Are the diodes well positioned and in the right direction?
FR
Voici mon analyse du circuit de P.C. avec les diodes flyback. Qui est, ou pas, de mon avis ?
Les diodes sont-elles bien positionnées et dans le bon sens ?
-
Hi Seaad,
With the rotor open circuit and rotated through 360 degs, the minimum inductance of 6 coils in series is 9.7mH and the maximum inductance is 98mH.
L192
Hi L
Some compared values (rough):
6 "free" (single coils) just mH added = 7.2 mH , 6 coils group overlapped "free" = 10 mH ( your min. value) "transformer effect" + 2.8mH extra
6 "close" (single coils) just mH added = 15 mH , 6 coils group overlapped "close"= 100 mH ( your max. value) "transformer effect" + 85mH extra
6 coils group overlapped impedanse values are :
20 Hz "free" Z= 6.5 Ohm , "close" Z= 12.1 Ohm
60 Hz "free" Z= 15.4 Ohm , "close" Z= 40.5 Ohm
To improve the loss values it is important to have some "semicore sections" at the free parts of the stator see my pic. Or make two output cores separated from each other.
Another suggestion is to remove / disconnect (not use) all coils nearby the semi core sections??
Regards Arne
-
TinselKoala:
http://tinyurl.com/yatk8sgk
hmmmmm....
-
Here is my analysis of P.C. circuit with flyback diodes. Who is, or is not, of my opinion?
Are the diodes well positioned and in the right direction?
The below diodes are for grounding the negative peak. In your drawing they don't.
Hi Jeg,
Whats wrong with using the body diodes, or are you concerned about heat?
It is always a better practice to share body's diode strain with an external fast diode.
It prolongs mosfet's life.
Regards
-
Hi MichelM
Are the diodes well positioned and in the right direction?
The diodes are placed in parallel. D1+//D-, D2+//D2- etc. Half of the diodes can be omitted or else put the D- diodes in parallel to the bottom switches just like the D+ diodes are in parallel to the top switches. The D- diodes are then to be placed reverse biased like the top diodes. E.g. put the anode to the negative supply voltage and the cathode to the coil junctions.
Placed as described here is the way the parasitic diode points in power MOSFETs or the protective diode points in bipolar transistors if having a protective diode.
Regards
Ole
-
Hi People,
These bloody H-Bridges...
Used to excite coil(s) with tricky arrangement(s) thereof might be one key for OU. No?
My question is (for low freq) :
How many relay(s) do you need to build such an H-Bridge?
My answer is : just one 4 poles relay.
Now, you, perhaps, might consider Duncan Pickthallp's more simple ideas.
Le bonsoir vous sied,
Jean
Hi NerzhDishual,
Yes it may be the best replication would be to first use relays.
The opto isolated boards available on Ebay seem to be single pole only and are cheap enough to just use two relays for each half bridge.
If you find such boards with double pole single throw relays, please let us know.
Regards
L192
-
Jeg, onielsen,
Pierre shows in his first video that all the outputs of the diodes converge towards the positive of the bank of capacitors (red wire).
So, if each diode has a utility, what is the good sense of the diodes? Or yes, half is useless.
Luc showed us his video with the flyback diode on an assembly with a single switch, and with a recovery that is discharged into a capacitor.
We need to know how to place the flyback diodes with another device, which has two switches - one underneath, and the other above the coil.
The idea is to put this energy back into the source.
Luc can you also give your opinion?
FR
Pierre montre dans sa première vidéo que toutes les sorties des diodes convergent vers le positif de la banque de condensateurs (fil rouge).
Donc, si chaque diode a une utilité, quelle est le bon sens des diodes ? Ou alors oui, la moitié est inutile.
Luc nous a montré sa vidéo avec la diode flyback sur un montage avec un seul interrupteur, et avec une récupération qui est déchargée dans un condensateur.
Nous avons besoin de savoir comment placer les diodes flyback avec un dispositif autre, qui dispose de deux interrupteurs - l'un en-dessous, et l'autre en dessus de la bobine. L'idée étant de remettre cette énergie dans la source.
Luc pouvez-vous aussi donner votre avis ?
-
Hi MichelM,
Pierre's image:
http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/dlattach/attach/166918/image// (http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/dlattach/attach/166918/image//)
As the current through an inductor is always continuous (no sudden jumps) this makes the voltage doing the jumps or even changing sign to preserve the value of the current at any given moment. For capacitors the voltage is continuous while the current is discontinuous which is opposite to inductors. When disconnecting a coil the current continues to run through it which makes the voltage across it change sign. The coil changes from receiving energy (sink) to giving off the stored energy (source).
(http://zone.ni.com/images/reference/en-XX/help/370736U-01/loc_eps_quadrant.gif)
This image is from here: http://zone.ni.com/reference/en-XX/help/370736U-01/ni_dc_power_supplies_help/sinking_sourcing/ (http://zone.ni.com/reference/en-XX/help/370736U-01/ni_dc_power_supplies_help/sinking_sourcing/)
Looking at Pierre's image the left hand side coil has the current going to the right when the top left and the center bottom switches are closed. The coil sinks power and stores it as magnetic energy. If opening one of the switches the current through the coil continues running but the voltage across the coil changes sign. The coil is now a source and gives off the stored magnetic energy. The voltage across it immediately adjusts to fit the current running. If the impedance the coil sees is high the insulation breaks down or a spark forms across the switch opening or the coil has enough capacitance between the winding to store the magnetic energy as electric energy.
Putting diodes to the supply rails prevents the destructive flyback voltages. The current instead takes the path through the diodes. The diode from the right hand side of the coil lets the current go to the positive supply rail. A diode from the negative supply rail across the bottom switch of the negative hand side is needed to close the circuit if the bottom switch is opened.
Regards
Ole
-
L192
The maximum current that arduino 2560 can give across its outputs is 200mA in total. That means 200/30=7mA max per pin output. I tried to find how much current L298 board needs at its input but no luck. What do you think? Will arduino be able to drive 30 of such boards?
-
L192
The maximum current that arduino 2560 can give across its outputs is 200mA in total. That means 200/30=7mA max per pin output. I tried to find how much current L298 board needs at its input but no luck. What do you think? Will arduino be able to drive 30 of such boards?
Hi Jeg, that should not be a problem. The inputs to the L298 board are digital CMOS/TTL compatible inputs so they consume no current, typically 10-30uA per input, see the datasheet:
https://www.sparkfun.com/datasheets/Robotics/L298_H_Bridge.pdf
PmgR
-
A 12 step simulation at 5Hz.
-
Hi Jeg, that should not be a problem. The inputs to the L298 board are digital CMOS/TTL compatible inputs so they consume no current, typically 10-30uA per input, see the datasheet:
https://www.sparkfun.com/datasheets/Robotics/L298_H_Bridge.pdf
PmgR
Thank you PMGR. Indeed 10-30uA is nothing. I was trying to find a good opto-isolator for the inputs when i realized this 200mA limit.
-
Don't forget options.. ;D as a relay replacement. http://www.crydom.com/en/
-
Those Crydom SSRs seem to be selling for between about 12 and 20 dollars US each, depending on ratings and quantity purchased. So say you need 72 of them to replace Pierre's relays.... Well, nobody ever said Free Energy would be cheap, I guess.
Who is going to spend that kind of money on something where the original claims are still not verified?
For this application a jarfull of cheap SMD mosfets, mosfet drivers, and a custom-designed PCB could probably be built to handle all the switching for under a hundred bux (estimated of course). The major time consumer would be designing the PCB and sending the design off to a fab house in China.
-
Those Crydom SSRs seem to be selling for between about 12 and 20 dollars US each, depending on ratings and quantity purchased. So say you need 72 of them to replace Pierre's relays.... Well, nobody ever said Free Energy would be cheap, I guess.
Who is going to spend that kind of money on something where the original claims are still not verified?
For this application a jarfull of cheap SMD mosfets, mosfet drivers, and a custom-designed PCB could probably be built to handle all the switching for under a hundred bux (estimated of course). The major time consumer would be designing the PCB and sending the design off to a fab house in China.
Why buy. You can do it cheaper 2$
For example: DIY
AC and DC version:
-
A 12 step simulation now at 52 Hz. N.b. wave voltage drops suddenly!
Compared with the 5 Hz version the total Amperage draw don't decrease so much !
-
A 12 step simulation now at 52 Hz. N.b. wave voltage drops suddenly!
That makes sense. The time constant of a coil is L/R, so maximum frequency is f=R/(2*pi*L). At 52Hz you are hitting the limit. If you decrease L, you will increase maximum frequency. Alternatively, you can increase the series resistance of the inductor.
PmgR
-
That makes sense. The time constant of a coil is L/R, so maximum frequency is f=R/(2*pi*L). At 52Hz you are hitting the limit. If you decrease L, you will increase maximum frequency. Alternatively, you can increase the series resistance of the inductor.
PmgR
Here at 52 hz all coils 1mH and NO protection diodes at all. Nice curves! I seems to be wrong about my prediction about high spikes.
N.b. Current draw! 6-7 Amp the same as at 5Hz!
N.b. 2 I can't simulate power suction from the secondary fixed core & coil here.
That can absolutely affect the cenario!
For switching I'm using Standard Transistors !!
-
Test mosfet 2xirf540n; 1 coil in stator;
8Hz
5V@1.2A
6V@2.2A
6.5V@3.8A
20V@ ??? A ???
-
Test mosfet 2xirf540n; 1 coil in stator; 8Hz
5V@1.2A
6V@2.2A
6.5V@3.8A 20V@ ??? A ???
So help you God! ;D ;D
-
New video guyz : how to wind the stator!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cF2MHOouwG8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cF2MHOouwG8)
-
Test mosfet 2xirf540n; 1 coil in stator;
8Hz
5V@1.2A
6V@2.2A
6.5V@3.8A
20V@ ??? A ???
IRF540 will overheat due to his high drain-source ON resistance Rds(on). Use IRF3205, it has Rds(on)= 0,008 ohm and can handle up to 110 Amp. And the most important thing is to use a proper gate driver circuit like IR2301. http://www.hobbytronics.co.uk/datasheets/IR2301.pdf
-
Stefan, all
N-N or S-S ends opposing each other makes the Flux Lines to "escape" from the iron core where they collides! Is an iron core (perpendicular) nearby it sucs in the flux. , Regards / Arne
About Pierre's "100 % free energy step by step dz générator 2 ( part 1)" film.
-
Pierre's new build is starting to look like the reciprocal of the attached.
It also would seem from his previous comments about leaving a gap between the poles, that the idea is to keep the flux in the stator in the form of alternating polarity & rotating pole sections, except for where the rotor is located, where the flux would cross the rotor to the opposite pole.
L192
-
Enhansed N-field with three coils or just coil A and B. Just playing.
SN-NS coils is more power consuming than SN-SN. (AC)
listener191 Not fed from DC anymore?
-
Those Crydom SSRs seem to be selling for between about 12 and 20 dollars US each, depending on ratings and quantity purchased. So say you need 72 of them to replace Pierre's relays.... Well, nobody ever said Free Energy would be cheap, I guess.
Who is going to spend that kind of money on something where the original claims are still not verified?
For this application a jarfull of cheap SMD mosfets, mosfet drivers, and a custom-designed PCB could probably be built to handle all the switching for under a hundred bux (estimated of course). The major time consumer would be designing the PCB and sending the design off to a fab house in China.
Yes SSR's would not be cheap. $20 x 72 = $1440 or $12 x 72 = $864. Or make your own as r2fpl said $2 x 72 = $144 and you have to build all those yourself. So why not just do it the way Pierre did as I mentioned earlier for $45 you can get all 72 relays mounted with the Arduino ready board with 8 relays per board which appearidentical to what Pierre used? For $45 you can verify if it all works versus spending hundreds of dollars to find out if a different method works which has never been shown to work yet. Then if it works this way builders could try one of the solid state methods. Seems the most logical and affordable way to go about this. It also avoids introducing variables into a build which may prevent it from working.
Pierre's boards below and identical one from eBay for $4.87 each:
-
Different coil topology. I am really curious to see how Pierre's secondary will be placed now. Same as before? Or winding like all normal torroid cores?
Pierre, merci de partager vos innovations. Bon travail ;)
Pierre, thanks for sharing your innovations. Great work ;)
Regards
-
Test mosfet 2xirf540n; 1 coil in stator;
8Hz
5V@1.2A
6V@2.2A
6.5V@3.8A
20V@ ??? A ???
Thanks for the report, and nice work. How many KW is your stator? Looks like 10 as Pierre's one.
Regards
-
Thanks for the report, and nice work. How many KW is your stator? Looks like 10 as Pierre's one.
Regards
3,5Kw from e.motor
I have new 5,5Kw. Only 1cm diameter more.
-
Hi Everyone
I just got a 30 pole stator ready to go - saved all the plastic inserts - and am ready to wind a "DZ generator" stator as also I have a big spool of 22GA magnet wire, rated for motors and generators....
BUT now I am confused (as is usual) and watched Pierres most recent video (part 2) of his 10hp size stator, and he is now winding the coils on it very much different than his previous DZ generator (it seems) as now he is doing it straight across the core more or less rather than skipping over 5 or 6 slots as before....
So what should I do?
I like his newer stator windings method better just looking at that single coil he did in the part 2 video seems like it will make more power BUT perhaps since experiment and "improvement" maybe it will kill the whole reasons the DZ generator is so much overunity and looping?
What do you guys think? What would you do very briefly for some advice if you also had a 30 pole stator to wind up??
I am anxious to start but want to do it right....Gotoluc left message few days ago that his windings do not seem to be like Pierres (????_ in Poerres first prototype.. so am worried now about doing it exactly like Gotoluc did but maybe that is best idea?
Also it would be fun and very important too, to come to grips upoin exactly WHY this design of generator loops and gives so much overunity power!!! If we had really good idea it would not only help replications and improved designs and builds we all do, but will help out Pierre by giving him idea and reasons for the looping and overunity so he will also understand much better....
-
Hi Everyone
I just got a 30 pole stator ready to go - saved all the plastic inserts - and am ready to wind a "DZ generator" stator as also I have a big spool of 22GA magnet wire, rated for motors and generators....
BUT now I am confused (as is usual) and watched Pierres most recent video (part 2) of his 10hp size stator, and he is now winding the coils on it very much different than his previous DZ generator (it seems) as now he is doing it straight across the core more or less rather than skipping over 5 or 6 slots as before....
So what should I do?
I like his newer stator windings method better just looking at that single coil he did in the part 2 video seems like it will make more power BUT perhaps since experiment and "improvement" maybe it will kill the whole reasons the DZ generator is so much overunity and looping?
What do you guys think? What would you do very briefly for some advice if you also had a 30 pole stator to wind up??
I am anxious to start but want to do it right....Gotoluc left message few days ago that his windings do not seem to be like Pierres (????_ in Poerres first prototype.. so am worried now about doing it exactly like Gotoluc did but maybe that is best idea?
Also it would be fun and very important too, to come to grips upoin exactly WHY this design of generator loops and gives so much overunity power!!! If we had really good idea it would not only help replications and improved designs and builds we all do, but will help out Pierre by giving him idea and reasons for the looping and overunity so he will also understand much better....
Start with electronics because it will be the same for the old and new generator. I think so.
-
Hi Kone,
I don't think it matters much if the coils are spanning several slots or being split up into smaller coils between two neighboring slots. What matters is mixing the magnetic fields into coherence which represents more energy than single coils added do. I'm preparing an experiment using small ferrite transformers instead of a motor stator. You know from your forum that I like doing the experiments in small scale as electronics are scalable. It looks like Pierre's device isn't depending on resonance as the load can be changed without affecting its running. This is unlike the Jensen UDT and Hector transformer that both are affected by changing the load and both have to be fed reactive power for overunity. Pierre's new winding is more like Bob Boyce's way of putting poly phases into a single ring core. Tesla also did that in some of his patents. This forms rotating poles extending out of the ring core.
Pierre's first stator has the magnetic fields in parallel while the current is in series. This makes the stored energy coherent and makes the stored energy increase to the square of the current. In his new stator the magnetic fields are in series and the current is still in series I guess. The field through the blocked rotor core may still be in parallel and thus could become coherent. I.e. the field from two neighboring similar poles may become mixed into a coherent field representing more energy than the single fields added before being mixed. This is the principle of inversion of Wilbert B. Smith.
I'm currently designing only six bridge outputs for running six transformers which probably is the smallest number possible if it has to work like the device of Pierre. Pierre's device has some of the coils shorted which makes them act like permanent magnets even though having loss because of the resistance of the wires. It can be made simpler if the coils don't have to be shorted. Perhaps I should prepare for making it possible to switch between shorted and not shorted coils. The non-shorted coils will demagnetize and 'discharge' to the voltage supply rails through the parasitic diodes in the MOSFET outputs.
By the way people should also know about the Molina-Martinez (https://patents.google.com/patent/US20030168921A1/en (https://patents.google.com/patent/US20030168921A1/en)) and Hyun (https://patents.google.com/patent/US20040007932 (https://patents.google.com/patent/US20040007932)) patent applications. They both claim overunity from ordinary three phased rotating fields and even from two phased fields (Hyun). They both use a locked rotor as secondary. This makes it possible to use a standard stator without having to rewind it by feeding it with three-phased AC. I haven't seen proof of this concept before the Pierre Cotnoir device.
Regards
Ole
-
Hi R2
I plan on making brush copper commutator for this (15 pole and two N S brushes)
thanks for the good advice however but I am itching to wind the stator...
I wish I knew how and why it loops and is overunity I can only guess right now
-
Hi Kone,
I wish I knew how and why it loops and is overunity I can only guess right now
It mixes the magnetic fields into a coherent field.
The mathematics behind coherent fields as opposed to just fields of superposition by Janos Vajda: 'VIOLATION OF THE LAW OF ENERGY CONSERVATION IN WAVE FIELDS' https://feprinciples.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/energy_from_wave_fields_1-21.pdf (https://feprinciples.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/energy_from_wave_fields_1-21.pdf).
Andrei Melnichanko also explains the principle: 'Opinion 1. Transgeneratsiya.'
http://www.google.dk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2F13750%2Fmelnicenko-self-running-device%2Fdlattach%2Fattach%2F126928%2F&ei=qI4qUpjsI6fx4QTFxYEo&usg=AFQjCNH0k4YN33F_CslpOovifoNqOtsAIg&bvm=bv.51773540,d.bGE&cad=rja (http://www.google.dk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2F13750%2Fmelnicenko-self-running-device%2Fdlattach%2Fattach%2F126928%2F&ei=qI4qUpjsI6fx4QTFxYEo&usg=AFQjCNH0k4YN33F_CslpOovifoNqOtsAIg&bvm=bv.51773540,d.bGE&cad=rja)
and part two: http://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=en&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&tl=en&twu=1&u=http://izob.narod.ru/p0007.html (http://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=en&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&tl=en&twu=1&u=http://izob.narod.ru/p0007.html)
And of course Wilbert B. Smith in 'The New Science' in chapter X explains the Principle of Inversion without telling exactly how to practically do it: https://www.wanttoknow.info/energy/wilbur_smith_new_science#ch10forces (https://www.wanttoknow.info/energy/wilbur_smith_new_science#ch10forces).
Magnetic energy stored in a coil is coherent as it increases to the square of the current creating the field. Two equal but separate coils having the same current through them each represents say one unit of energy. Now let the coils share the same core (space) but having the turns in series and the same current as before through them. By doubling the number of turns quadruples the inductance of the coil. Having the same current through the coil gives four times the energy of a single coil. This makes the single coil of double the number of turns store twice the amount of energy as that of the two separate coils of the same current. This is just by mixing the magnetic fields into the same space.
The trick then is to input the fields in separate forms and mix them into a coherent field. Normally separate fields just pass through each other like beams of light and separates from each other like ocean waves crossing (superposition). But the fields have to become one single new field (coherent) just like a LASER beam which doesn't break up in different directions after having formed.
Regards
Ole
-
What do you guys think? What would you do very briefly for some advice if you also had a 30 pole stator to wind up??'[/size]
[/size]
i think better replicate first generator. but maybe all his dz generators is fake? [/size]
i not be replicate any generator, because not enaught information how replicate and maybe this generators is fake. maybe i wrong.[/size]
-
What do you guys think? What would you do very briefly for some advice if you also had a 30 pole stator to wind up??'[/size]
[/size]
i think better replicate first generator. but maybe all his dz generators is fake? [/size]
i not be replicate any generator, because not enaught information how replicate and maybe this generators is fake. maybe i wrong.[/size]
Hi MenofFather,
Several theories have been tabled in this thread but I would say you need to rely on your own belief in a theory of operation.
If you don't believe that this has at least a 50% chance of producing a favorable result, then don't attempt a replication, as there is a lot of work and cost associated with the build.
Regards
L192
-
Hi Kone,
I don't think it matters much if the coils are spanning several slots or being split up into smaller coils between two neighboring slots. What matters is mixing the magnetic fields into coherence which represents more energy than single coils added do. I'm preparing an experiment using small ferrite transformers instead of a motor stator. You know from your forum that I like doing the experiments in small scale as electronics are scalable. It looks like Pierre's device isn't depending on resonance as the load can be changed without affecting its running. This is unlike the Jensen UDT and Hector transformer that both are affected by changing the load and both have to be fed reactive power for overunity. Pierre's new winding is more like Bob Boyce's way of putting poly phases into a single ring core. Tesla also did that in some of his patents. This forms rotating poles extending out of the ring core.
Pierre's first stator has the magnetic fields in parallel while the current is in series. This makes the stored energy coherent and makes the stored energy increase to the square of the current. In his new stator the magnetic fields are in series and the current is still in series I guess. The field through the blocked rotor core may still be in parallel and thus could become coherent. I.e. the field from two neighboring similar poles may become mixed into a coherent field representing more energy than the single fields added before being mixed. This is the principle of inversion of Wilbert B. Smith.
I'm currently designing only six bridge outputs for running six transformers which probably is the smallest number possible if it has to work like the device of Pierre. Pierre's device has some of the coils shorted which makes them act like permanent magnets even though having loss because of the resistance of the wires. It can be made simpler if the coils don't have to be shorted. Perhaps I should prepare for making it possible to switch between shorted and not shorted coils. The non-shorted coils will demagnetize and 'discharge' to the voltage supply rails through the parasitic diodes in the MOSFET outputs.
By the way people should also know about the Molina-Martinez (https://patents.google.com/patent/US20030168921A1/en (https://patents.google.com/patent/US20030168921A1/en)) and Hyun (https://patents.google.com/patent/US20040007932 (https://patents.google.com/patent/US20040007932)) patent applications. They both claim overunity from ordinary three phased rotating fields and even from two phased fields (Hyun). They both use a locked rotor as secondary. This makes it possible to use a standard stator without having to rewind it by feeding it with three-phased AC. I haven't seen proof of this concept before the Pierre Cotnoir device.
Regards
Ole
Hi Onielsen,
I posted a picture of a Hyun replication in the other thread, for the simple two phase device. This one did not yield a positive result, as the shaded pole technique consumed too much power.
I tried a linear version of the three phase transformer (picture also posted) however, this did not develop the traveling wave component, so nothing special there.
I have the facility to cut silicon steel lamination's now, so it might be interesting to revisit the concept and cut the circular infill section required to complete design.
The rotary flux transformer only needs a VFD to work, so a much simpler build with a good sine output.
Regards
L192
-
Hi MenofFather,
Several theories have been tabled in this thread but I would say you need to rely on your own belief in a theory of operation.
If you don't believe that this has at least a 50% chance of producing a favorable result, then don't attempt a replication, as there is a lot of work and cost associated with the build.
Regards
L192
Some people need> 100%, sometimes it is not enough.
They wait as it will be in the store.
-
BUT now I am confused (as is usual) and watched Pierres most recent video (part 2) of his 10hp size stator, and he is now winding the coils on it very much different than his previous DZ generator (it seems) as now he is doing it straight across the core more or less rather than skipping over 5 or 6 slots as before....
So what should I do?
Same question here. I just received my 3phase 4KW scrap motor. I still need to salvage it so i have some time to think it more. The new topology will experience 100% the transformer effect between primaries, but this is not necessarily a bad thing if someone count it and raise the input voltage.
Regards
-
Same question here. I just received my 3phase 4KW scrap motor. I still need to salvage it so i have some time to think it more. The new topology will experience 100% the transformer effect between primaries, but this is not necessarily a bad thing if someone count it and raise the input voltage.
Regards
How many slots ? I need 36 like Pierre.
-
How many slots ? I need 36 like Pierre.
I will answer you in two days, as due to the holly days i have no time for this right now. ;)
-
Hi MenofFather,
Several theories have been tabled in this thread but I would say you need to rely on your own belief in a theory of operation.
If you don't believe that this has at least a 50% chance of producing a favorable result, then don't attempt a replication, as there is a lot of work and cost associated with the build.
Regards
L192
agree.
-
From Y.T. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cF2MHOouwG8
" pierre Cotnoir
one day ago
I only rely on the operation of a generator the rest comes from the logic how the magnetic field interplay test and error
all does not work as I want it sometimes , like the new prototype
I have no idea if it goes to work
but one thing is sure if you have an idea and you do not put it into practice it will never work."
-
How many slots ? I need 36 like Pierre.
36 poles 5,5KW
I see that there are some wedges circumstantially placed between stator and housing. Should i hammer them for extracting the stator out?
-
36 poles 5,5KW
I see that there are some wedges circumstantially placed between stator and housing. Should i hammer them for extracting the stator out?
Take it out of the housing and remove the wires. It took me 4 hours, I did it for the first time as probably you. Good luck, it's hard to do.
My rotor is different. It's from a generator.
-
Take it out of the housing and remove the wires. It took me 4 hours, I did it for the first time as probably you. Good luck, it's hard to do.
My rotor is different. It's from a generator.
Just like my rotor the overlap is a lot more than 6 stator poles, about 11 on this one and about 9 on mine.
Pierre looks like he has a custom rotor, as his covers only 6 stator poles.
They could be trimmed down to 6 poles, but a bobbin edge would have to be created to hold the windings.
Regards
L192
-
Just like my rotor the overlap is a lot more than 6 stator poles, about 11 on this one and about 9 on mine.
Pierre looks like he has a custom rotor, as his covers only 6 stator poles.
They could be trimmed down to 6 poles, but a bobbin edge would have to be created to hold the windings.
Regards
L192
Hi L192,
Maybe it has a core from the welder or sheet metal packaged.
Yes 6 slots size.
-
From Y.T. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cF2MHOouwG8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cF2MHOouwG8)
This video have different magnetic poles arrangement. This time the resulting magnetic polarity will be on 90 degrees from previous setup.
Still interesting to see if he will be able to make proper induction... ;)
Cheers!
-
Take it out of the housing and remove the wires.
How did you extract your stator from motor's housing? The outer casing looks like an iron cast.
-
How did you extract your stator from motor's housing? The outer casing looks like an iron cast.
Just push under the press or cut.
Next ...answer is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgkM3qxPjtw
-
If anyone thinks this is an easy build you better think again. Winding a stator is only 25% of the job. See below video of my finished product. Testing will begin tomorrow after winding the center core.
Fr. Si quelqu'un pense que c'est une construction facile, il vaut mieux réfléchir à nouveau. L'enroulement d'un stator ne représente que 25% du travail. Voir ci-dessous la vidéo de mon produit fini. Les tests commenceront demain après avoir enroulé le noyau central.
Video: https://youtu.be/m16qvt9-2Kk
-
Thanks for the update. Fantastic. Looks like a life form.
Garry
-
all,
Je me demande si les moteurs universels comme sur l'image ci dessous ne pourraient pas convenir pour ce type d'expérimentation..[.......].
juste une idée ;)
A clever lazy man very good idea, IMHO.
Français (Coluchien): Voila une idée qu'elle est très bonne, selon moi!
Sinon:
-
Thanks for the update. Fantastic. Looks like a life form.
Garry
Thanks Garry
I also received this personal message from Pierre:
very nice job, except for the location of the arduino, there's a good chance it will be affected by the magnetic field being so close. Would be better not to put the electronics so close to the magnetic field.
Fr. J'ai aussi reçu ce message personnel de Pierre:
Fr. très beau travail sauf l'emplacement de l'arduino il y a de grosse chance qu'il bug a cause des champs magnétique qui sont coller dessus il serait préférable de ne pas mettre l'électronique aussi près du champ magnétique
-
If anyone thinks this is an easy build you better think again. Winding a stator is only 25% of the job. See below video of my finished product. Testing will begin tomorrow after winding the center core.
Fr. Si quelqu'un pense que c'est une construction facile, il vaut mieux réfléchir à nouveau. L'enroulement d'un stator ne représente que 25% du travail. Voir ci-dessous la vidéo de mon produit fini. Les tests commenceront demain après avoir enroulé le noyau central.
Video: https://youtu.be/m16qvt9-2Kk (https://youtu.be/m16qvt9-2Kk)
Amazingly nice build Luc!
What you can do as a first experiment is mount a small magnet on an axis that can rotate and place it in the middle of the stator (take the rotor out) and upload the Arduino sketch with a 1Hz frequency (x=50 in your Arduino sketch). It will then take 3secs for the magnet to spin around once (or you can decrease the x value to something else if that is too slow).
Start with a voltage as low as possible so you don't overheat any H bridges. The on-time for each bridge is in that case 3*x, so 3*50ms=150ms, off time is 17*50ms=850ms, so 15% duty cycle.
With about 0.5ohms per coil and five coils in series, that is about 2.5ohms. And then each bridge drives 2 coil sets in series, so 1.25 ohm load. So your voltage should be around 5 volts (4amps per red/black output) plus whatever is lost over two transistors inside a bridge, which is probably another 2-3 volts or so. So don't take the voltage above 7-8 volts for now.
Just see if you can get the magnet to spin around at the desired speed of the Arduino sketch.
PmgR
-
gotoluc:
Wonderful hard work, I know something about it :)
I wanted to write the same as Pierre that Arduino should be further away from the magnetic field as well as the control wires. Of course, it can work.
-
gotoluc:
Wonderful hard work, I know something about it :)
I wanted to write the same as Pierre that Arduino should be further away from the magnetic field as well as the control wires. Of course, it can work.
Majority of the magnetic field will be contained within the steel and on the inside of the stator. Anything else is leakage and probably won't be large enough too cause any issues. Try it out to see if it works. If it doesn't you can always move the Arduino farther away from the stator.
PmgR
-
Majority of the magnetic field will be contained within the steel and on the inside of the stator. Anything else is leakage and probably won't be large enough too cause any issues. Try it out to see if it works. If it doesn't you can always move the Arduino farther away from the stator.
PmgR
Where the coils come out of the stator is a large magnetic field. But test this position Arduino.
-
So don't take the voltage above 7-8 volts for now.
Is that possible when he uses 12V as gate pulses? His drain voltage has to be >=12V.
Luc, this is an art-work! Well done!!! How did you pull out your stator from motor's casing?
-
Hi Luc,
Looks great, One question though, Pierre has 18 super caps (1/2 the 36 coils) , Should yours not have 15 half the 30? I only see ten.
Beautiful workmanship none the less.
Thanks artv
-
Amazingly nice build Luc!
What you can do as a first experiment is mount a small magnet on an axis that can rotate and place it in the middle of the stator (take the rotor out) and upload the Arduino sketch with a 1Hz frequency (x=50 in your Arduino sketch). It will then take 3secs for the magnet to spin around once (or you can decrease the x value to something else if that is too slow).
Start with a voltage as low as possible so you don't overheat any H bridges. The on-time for each bridge is in that case 3*x, so 3*50ms=150ms, off time is 17*50ms=850ms, so 15% duty cycle.
With about 0.5ohms per coil and five coils in series, that is about 2.5ohms. And then each bridge drives 2 coil sets in series, so 1.25 ohm load. So your voltage should be around 5 volts (4amps per red/black output) plus whatever is lost over two transistors inside a bridge, which is probably another 2-3 volts or so. So don't take the voltage above 7-8 volts for now.
Just see if you can get the magnet to spin around at the desired speed of the Arduino sketch.
PmgR
Thanks PmgR and for all your help in the background, as I couldn't of done a solid state version without your assistance.
I'll first try with a magnet as you suggest.
gotoluc:
Wonderful hard work, I know something about it
I wanted to write the same as Pierre that Arduino should be further away from the magnetic field as well as the control wires. Of course, it can work.
Thanks r2fpl. I'm not planing to push the device anywhere close to what Pierre demonstrated like powering a 1kW microwave oven. I'll be happy if it can just sustain itself.
I also think like PmgR answered below that the majority of the magnetic field will be contained in the steel lamination core. So far in all my experiments I've never seen a magnetic field affect a solid state component. However, if I was using mechanical switching that's another story, as they cause RF and would most definitely not work in a close proximity as my design.
Majority of the magnetic field will be contained within the steel and on the inside of the stator. Anything else is leakage and probably won't be large enough too cause any issues. Try it out to see if it works. If it doesn't you can always move the Arduino farther away from the stator.
PmgR
That's the way I see and understand it as well. However, anyone using mechanical switching that would be a problem in close proximity as my design since the switch RF would most definitely cause problems for the Arduino.
Is that possible when he uses 12V as gate pulses? His drain voltage has to be >=12V.
Luc, this is an art-work! Well done!!! How did you pull out your stator from motor's casing?
I've tested these L298N and they operated all the way down to 4vdc.
Thanks. My stator and rotor came from a generator, so it's easy to take apart: https://youtu.be/iYullLkW9rc (https://youtu.be/iYullLkW9rc)
Hi Luc,
Looks great, One question though, Pierre has 18 super caps (1/2 the 36 coils) , Should yours not have 15 half the 30? I only see ten.
Beautiful workmanship none the less.
Thanks artv
The quantity of super caps is not important. What is most important is the Voltage, since each super cap can only handle 2.7vdc . The ones Pierre used has 6 mounted on one board, so he used 3 boards thinking he could go up to 48vdc. When he first tested he realized that he only needed around 22 volts. He just didn't bother to remove the extra board.
As you noticed mine has 10, so it can handle up to 27vdc. However, I don't think I'll need to go to that high of an input voltage and can easily reduce the quantity which will boost their storage capacity since they're connected in series.
Regards
Luc
-
However, I don't think I'll need to go to that high of an input voltage and can easily reduce the quantity which will boost their storage capacity since they're connected in series.
Does it? Consider an example.
Let's use 100 F, 2.7 V caps and put 4 in series. So we now have 25 F capacitance and 10.8 volts maximum. Energy storage capacity at max voltage will be E = (CV2)/2 = (25 x 10.8 x 10. 8) /2 = 1458 J.
Now let's remove one capacitor and calculate energy storage capacity for 3 in series. We now have 33.3 F capacitance and 8.1 volts maximum. Energy storage capacity at max voltage will be E = (33.3 x 8.1 x 8.1)/2 = 1092.4 J.
So while capacitance is increased by removing a capacitor from the series chain, the decrease in maximum voltage more than compensates, and energy storage capacity goes down. Makes sense: fewer capacitors, less energy storage.
However... at the same voltage, say 8.1 volts, the energy storage of the 4-series stack is only (25 x 8.1 x 8.1)/2 = 820.1 J.
So in that sense (equal voltages) the stack with fewer series caps does store more energy.
-
This is an earth-shattering, paradigm-shifting, Nobel-prize-winning claim
I wish you good luck with the test results Luc!
Arne
-
Does it? Consider an example.
Let's use 100 F, 2.7 V caps and put 4 in series. So we now have 25 F capacitance and 10.8 volts maximum. Energy storage capacity at max voltage will be E = (CV2)/2 = (25 x 10.8 x 10. 8) /2 = 1458 J.
Now let's remove one capacitor and calculate energy storage capacity for 3 in series. We now have 33.3 F capacitance and 8.1 volts maximum. Energy storage capacity at max voltage will be E = (33.3 x 8.1 x 8.1)/2 = 1092.4 J.
So while capacitance is increased by removing a capacitor from the series chain, the decrease in maximum voltage more than compensates, and energy storage capacity goes down. Makes sense: fewer capacitors, less energy storage.
However... at the same voltage, say 8.1 volts, the energy storage of the 4-series stack is only (25 x 8.1 x 8.1)/2 = 820.1 J.
So in that sense (equal voltages) the stack with fewer series caps does store more energy.
Yes, you're right of course as far as total Joule energy value goes if you keep voltage the same. Sorry I didn't write in a way that makes sense to your education.
What I was trying to say is, the less capacitors you have in series the less you divide the capacitors rated Farad value.
Lets say my tests show I only need 10vdc. If I leave the 10 cap in series of 50 Farads each = 5 Farads total storage @ 10V = 250 Joules
However, if I remove 6 caps, I now have 4 caps in series of 50 Farads each = 12.5 Farads total storage @ 10V = 625 Joules
Do you now understand?
Regards
Luc
-
Those super cap boards are not just PCB's, they have active balancing circuitry to ensure even charge distribution.
This ensures that no single cap is taken over 2.7V during charging.
I have three of those boards.
See https://www.electronicsweekly.com/news/products/analogue-linear-mixed-signal-ics/design-supercapacitor-charger-balancing-2014-08/
Regards
L192
-
First test with magnet as rotor. Without current limitation and magnet rotor the device consumes exactly 1 Amp at 3.50 Volts.
Fr. Premier test avec aimant comme rotor. Sans limitation de courant et rotor magnétique, l'appareil consomme exactement 1 ampère à 3,50 volts.
Video demo: https://youtu.be/w_z7tcq2N9E (https://youtu.be/w_z7tcq2N9E)
-
Great to see it rotating :)
For the 'x' question...the one to change is the one without // in front of it, x = 5.
(at 3:33 in your video)
The line at the top which says 'int x = 0;' is what's called a variable declaration. It's saying that a variable called x will be an integer. If that wasn't there it wouldn't know what x was.
When you see // it means a comment, something the program doesn't use as it's code.
Another example would be:
// Hello Luc
-
Made one change and got an error uploading to Arduino
Video: https://youtu.be/1hS1KNXARLw
-
[/size]First test with magnet as rotor. Without current limitation and magnet rotor the device consumes exactly 1 Amp at 3.50 Volts.Fr. Premier test avec aimant comme rotor. Sans limitation de courant et rotor magnétique, l'appareil consomme exactement 1 ampère à 3,50 volts.
Video demo: https://youtu.be/w_z7tcq2N9E (https://youtu.be/w_z7tcq2N9E)[/size]
Hi Luc, very nice demonstration.
You need to change the line that says:
x=5; //total loop delay is 20*x = 100ms. f=10Hz
You can change it to any of the the lines below:
x=1; // x=1ms, loop delay is 20ms, results in 50Hz loop speed, or 1/3*50Hz magnet spin speed
x=2; // x=2ms, loop delay is 40ms, results in 25Hz loop speed, or 1/3*25Hz magnet spin speed
x=3; // x=3ms, loop delay is 60ms, results in 16.66Hz loop speed, or 1/3*16.66Hz magnet spin speed
x=4; // x=4ms, loop delay is 80ms, results in 12.5Hz loop speed, or 1/3*12.5Hz magnet spin speed
x=5; // x=5ms,loop delay is 100ms, results in 10Hz loop speed, or 1/3*10Hz magnet spin speed
x=10; // x=10ms, loop delay is 200ms results in 5Hz loop speed, or 1/3*5Hz magnet spin speed
x=20; // x=20ms, loop delay is 400ms results in 2.5Hz loop speed, or 1/3*2.5Hz magnet spin speed
x=25; // x=25ms, loop delay is 500ms results in 2Hz loop speed, or 1/3*2Hz magnet spin speed
x=50; // x=50ms, loop delay is 1000ms results in 1Hz loop speed, or 1/3*1Hz magnet spin speed
I note that it takes three times looping to go around the stator one time, so the magnet speed is 1/3 of the loop speed. Currently the loop speed is set (x=5) at 10Hz, so your magnet is spinning at 1/3*10Hz=3.33Hz.
PmgR
-
Hi Luc, very nice demonstration.
You need to change the line that says:
x=5; //total loop delay is 20*x = 100ms. f=10Hz
You can change it to any of the the lines below:
x=1; // x=1ms, loop delay is 20ms, results in 50Hz loop speed, or 1/3*50Hz magnet spin speed
x=2; // x=2ms, loop delay is 40ms, results in 25Hz loop speed, or 1/3*25Hz magnet spin speed
x=3; // x=3ms, loop delay is 60ms, results in 16.66Hz loop speed, or 1/3*16.66Hz magnet spin speed
x=4; // x=4ms, loop delay is 80ms, results in 12.5Hz loop speed, or 1/3*12.5Hz magnet spin speed
x=5; // x=5ms,loop delay is 100ms, results in 10Hz loop speed, or 1/3*10Hz magnet spin speed
x=10; // x=10ms, loop delay is 200ms results in 5Hz loop speed, or 1/3*5Hz magnet spin speed
x=20; // x=20ms, loop delay is 400ms results in 2.5Hz loop speed, or 1/3*2.5Hz magnet spin speed
x=25; // x=25ms, loop delay is 500ms results in 2Hz loop speed, or 1/3*2Hz magnet spin speed
x=50; // x=50ms, loop delay is 1000ms results in 1Hz loop speed, or 1/3*1Hz magnet spin speed
I note that it takes three times looping to go around the stator one time, so the magnet speed is 1/3 of the loop speed. Currently the loop speed is set (x=5) at 10Hz, so your magnet is spinning at 1/3*10Hz=3.33Hz.
PmgR
Thanks
I changed line x=5; //total loop delay is 20*x = 100ms. f=10Hz to x=50; //total loop delay is 20*x = 100ms. f=10Hz and got an upload error!
See Video: https://youtu.be/1hS1KNXARLw (https://youtu.be/1hS1KNXARLw)
What next?
Thanks for your help
Luc
-
Made one change and got an error uploading to Arduino
Video: https://youtu.be/1hS1KNXARLw (https://youtu.be/1hS1KNXARLw)
Luc, check the serial port settings in your laptop Arduino program (the program you upload the sketch with). Most likely the wrong serial port is selected so it can't talk to the Arduino. Also make sure the correct Arduino is selected: should be the 2560 which is the board you are using.
PmgR
-
L298 boards : WARNING :
Connect IN1 to IN4 and IN2 to IN3 for full paralleling .
OUT1 to OUT4 and OUT2 to OUT3.
ENABLEA to ENABLEB
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Connect IN1 to IN2 and IN3 to IN4 for semi paralleling .
OUT1 to OUT2 and OUT3 to OUT4.
ENABLEA and ENABLEB separated
Refer to datasheet:
http://www.st.com/content/ccc/resource/technical/document/datasheet/82/cc/3f/39/0a/29/4d/f0/CD00000240.pdf/files/CD00000240.pdf/jcr:content/translations/en.CD00000240.pdf (http://www.st.com/content/ccc/resource/technical/document/datasheet/82/cc/3f/39/0a/29/4d/f0/CD00000240.pdf/files/CD00000240.pdf/jcr:content/translations/en.CD00000240.pdf)
-
Luc, check the serial port settings in your laptop Arduino program (the program you upload the sketch with). Most likely the wrong serial port is selected so it can't talk to the Arduino. Also make sure the correct Arduino is selected: should be the 2560 which is the board you are using.
PmgR
Yes, I've checked all that. It's the same laptop I used and all parameters are correctly selected.
Could it be when I change x=5; //total loop delay is 20*x = 100ms. f=10Hz to x=50; //total loop delay is 20*x = 100ms. f=10Hz I also need to change the 100ms. f=10Hz to 1000ms. f=1Hz ?
Thanks
Luc
-
Yes, I've checked all that. It's the same laptop I used and all parameters are correctly selected.
Could it be when I change x=5; //total loop delay is 20*x = 100ms. f=10Hz to x=50; //total loop delay is 20*x = 100ms. f=10Hz I also need to change the 100ms. f=10Hz to 1000ms. f=1Hz ?
Thanks
Luc
No, that doesn't matter. It's behind // which is a comment. Besides, the sketch compiles fine you said. Just doesn't upload. I suggest rebooting your laptop and unplugging and replugging the USB that goes to the Arduino. If you can't figure it out, I can assist you later tonight after I get home.
PmgR
-
Okay, thanks for helping while you're still at work.
I think there may be a usb port conflict. I'm rebooting to try to resolve it.
Regards
Luc
-
Yeah, it's just the port by the looks of it.
Nothing wrong with the code.
At the bottom of your screen it shows you've selected the right type of Arduino and indeed it compiles fine. The only thing different would be the Port.
Click 'Tools', then 'Port' and see what it says there...you should only have 1 or 2 to select from and it seems like it's picking the wrong one as default.
Another way, is to unplug the Arduino USB cable and plug it back in, the other port will then be selected. At least here on Linux Mint it does, from USB0 to USB1 even if it's the same device being plugged in and out.
-
Yeah, it's just the port by the looks of it.
Nothing wrong with the code.
At the bottom of your screen it shows you've selected the right type of Arduino and indeed it compiles fine. The only thing different would be the Port.
Click 'Tools', then 'Port' and see what it says there...you should only have 1 or 2 to select from and it seems like it's picking the wrong one as default.
Another way, is to unplug the Arduino USB cable and plug it back in, the other port will then be selected. At least here on Linux Mint it does, from USB0 to USB1 even if it's the same device being plugged in and out.
I had a similar problem, but by installing the "driver" and reinstall of the complete Arduino program resolved identifying the port connection identification... : ]
-
Might look into that.
It's worthwhile pointing out because of easily understood frustrations for new folks.
-
Well, it looks like the Arduino board itself has a communication issue. The program is working but I can't upload any changes. See video.
So if someone can send me or buy me a replacement that would be great. Meanwhile I can test as is and need to know if I add a potentiometer (to vary frequency) is that part still in the program?
Fr. Eh bien, il semble que la carte Arduino elle-même a un problème de communication. Le programme fonctionne, mais je ne peux pas télécharger de modifications. Voir la vidéo
Donc si quelqu'un peut m'envoyer ou m'acheter un remplacement ce serait génial. En attendant je peux tester tel quel et j'ai besoin de savoir si j'ajoute un potentiomètre (pour faire varier la fréquence) cette partie est-elle encore dans le programme?
Video: https://youtu.be/8B2NOU0NaYw
-
Well, it looks like the Arduino board itself has a communication issue. The program is working but I can't upload any changes. See video.
So if someone can send me or buy me a replacement that would be great. Meanwhile I can test as is and need to know if I add a potentiometer (to vary frequency) is that part still in the program?
Fr. Eh bien, il semble que la carte Arduino elle-même a un problème de communication. Le programme fonctionne, mais je ne peux pas télécharger de modifications. Voir la vidéo
Donc si quelqu'un peut m'envoyer ou m'acheter un remplacement ce serait génial. En attendant je peux tester tel quel et j'ai besoin de savoir si j'ajoute un potentiomètre (pour faire varier la fréquence) cette partie est-elle encore dans le programme?
Video: https://youtu.be/8B2NOU0NaYw (https://youtu.be/8B2NOU0NaYw)
One more thing you should check is the serial port baud rate. You can change this under the device manager in Windows. I am not sure what the rate should be for the Arduino, but try the following rates:
9600, 14400, 19200, 28800, 38400, 57600, or 115200
For the potentiometer, you can uncomment Pierre's old lines:
int y= analogRead(0); // transforme x en une valeur de 0 à 20 (millisecondes)
x= map(y,0,1000 ,1,100);
and then comment your x=50 line:
// x=5; //total loop delay is 20*x = 100ms. f=10Hz
The potentiometer has 3 leads. Two outer ones should be hooked up to GND and 5V and the center one should be hooked up to the analog 0 input.
Also, see: https://www.arduino.cc/reference/en/language/functions/analog-io/analogread/
PmgR
-
Well, it looks like the Arduino board itself has a communication issue. The program is working but I can't upload any changes. See video.
So if someone can send me or buy me a replacement that would be great. Meanwhile I can test as is and need to know if I add a potentiometer (to vary frequency) is that part still in the program?
Fr. Eh bien, il semble que la carte Arduino elle-même a un problème de communication. Le programme fonctionne, mais je ne peux pas télécharger de modifications. Voir la vidéo
Donc si quelqu'un peut m'envoyer ou m'acheter un remplacement ce serait génial. En attendant je peux tester tel quel et j'ai besoin de savoir si j'ajoute un potentiomètre (pour faire varier la fréquence) cette partie est-elle encore dans le programme?
Video: https://youtu.be/8B2NOU0NaYw (https://youtu.be/8B2NOU0NaYw)
Options;
1). Remove board / UN-plug completely from device and re-program.
2).Add the following to the sketch....
void setup() {
// initialize serial communications at 9600 bps:
Serial.begin(9600);
}
It initializes the serial connection at 9600 bits per second. Both sides of the serial connection (i.e. the Arduino and your computer) need to be set to use the same speed serial connection in order to get any sort of intelligible data. If there's a mismatch between what the two systems think the speed is then the data will be garbled.
9600 bits per second is the default for the Arduino, and is perfectly adequate for the majority of users, but you could change it to other speeds: Serial.begin(57600) would set the Arduino to transmit at 57600 bits per second. You'd need to set whatever software you're using on your computer (like the Arduino IDE's serial monitor) to the same speed in order to see the data being sent.
3) Looks like board is running when you re-programed, which is fine, that can be done, however Pierre may have been correct in pointing out the "field" may interfere with the board ?
That's all I have to comment... : {
-
Another thing to try is to plug in a wall-outlet power plug (9V or 12V) into the Arduino instead of depending on the laptop USB 5V. Maybe the thing needs more than 500mA of current when programming and the USB on your laptop is only providing 500mA max.
PmgR
-
gotoluc:
This is "normal" problem with arduino.
1.Check power from USB.
2.Add power to Arduino +5V from power supply.
3.Driver is corrupt, but see good in view. Must reinstall with this program: see attachments.
Check version arduino (if version china maybe driver still problem)
ad.3:
Option/List all devices
Select Arduino port from select bar
Press Replace Driver
If make 1,2,3 steps correct Arduino go to normal programme.
Is possible corrupt Arduino because changes fuse bit. Little possible but possible. You can save make DFU process but is very problematic for new users.
-
I have noted that using pin mode on digital pin 1 is actually using the UART port bit TX1 used for USB communication.
Perhaps we should shift all 30/36 pins down one i.e. 2 to 31/37?
Regards
L192
-
Well, it looks like the Arduino board itself has a communication issue. The program is working but I can't upload any changes. See video.
So if someone can send me or buy me a replacement that would be great. Meanwhile I can test as is and need to know if I add a potentiometer (to vary frequency) is that part still in the program?
Fr. Eh bien, il semble que la carte Arduino elle-même a un problème de communication. Le programme fonctionne, mais je ne peux pas télécharger de modifications. Voir la vidéo
Donc si quelqu'un peut m'envoyer ou m'acheter un remplacement ce serait génial. En attendant je peux tester tel quel et j'ai besoin de savoir si j'ajoute un potentiomètre (pour faire varier la fréquence) cette partie est-elle encore dans le programme?
Video: https://youtu.be/8B2NOU0NaYw (https://youtu.be/8B2NOU0NaYw)
Luc, have you tried unplugging all of the OUTPUT connections to the Mega and then reprogramming? It is barely possible that the current draw is too high during programming with all of the outputs capable of drawing current.
The fact that you've tried several laptops without success may mean that there is something wrong with the Mega itself, OR that there is something about the way you have it connected to the rest of the circuitry. Before you replace the Mega let's at least rule out the external connections.
More to follow:
-
One more thing you should check is the serial port baud rate. You can change this under the device manager in Windows. I am not sure what the rate should be for the Arduino, but try the following rates:
9600, 14400, 19200, 28800, 38400, 57600, or 115200
It is extremely unlikely that this is the cause. Especially since Luc has checked different versions of Windows on different machines, and his friend used an Apple computer running OSX and still failed. I have never seen this port speed setting in Windows to have an effect on uploading to the board.
For the potentiometer, you can uncomment Pierre's old lines:
int y= analogRead(0); // transforme x en une valeur de 0 à 20 (millisecondes)
x= map(y,0,1000 ,1,100);
and then comment your x=50 line:
// x=5; //total loop delay is 20*x = 100ms. f=10Hz
The potentiometer has 3 leads. Two outer ones should be hooked up to GND and 5V and the center one should be hooked up to the analog 0 input.
Also, see: https://www.arduino.cc/reference/en/language/functions/analog-io/analogread/ (https://www.arduino.cc/reference/en/language/functions/analog-io/analogread/)
PmgR
The ADC inputs of the Arduino return values between 0 (0 volts) and 1023 (5 volts, OR what is supplied to A_ref pin). So for full range of the pot setting the map() statement should go from 0 to 1023, not stop at 1000. Otherwise values of the pot when adjusted near the 5v end will give strange results.
Like this:
x= map(y,0,1023 ,1,100);
Also, in my previous code revisions I've shown where this statement goes for realtime speed control (don't have to finish one full loop before speed setting takes effect).
More follows:
-
Options;
1). Remove board / UN-plug completely from device and re-program.
I and others have also suggested this. It's a good idea before giving up totally on the Mega unit in use.
2).Add the following to the sketch....
void setup() {
// initialize serial communications at 9600 bps:
Serial.begin(9600);
}
It initializes the serial connection at 9600 bits per second. Both sides of the serial connection (i.e. the Arduino and your computer) need to be set to use the same speed serial connection in order to get any sort of intelligible data. If there's a mismatch between what the two systems think the speed is then the data will be garbled.
9600 bits per second is the default for the Arduino, and is perfectly adequate for the majority of users, but you could change it to other speeds: Serial.begin(57600) would set the Arduino to transmit at 57600 bits per second. You'd need to set whatever software you're using on your computer (like the Arduino IDE's serial monitor) to the same speed in order to see the data being sent.
As far as I can tell this use of the Serial communications system has nothing to do with uploading programs to the board. It enables serial communication to a serial monitor which can be accessed from the IDE, but then you have to send data to and from the serial monitor using write and read statements in the sketch. Serial comm statements also slow the program down quite a bit. You can certainly try this but I would be amazed if it made any difference to the main problem here.
3) Looks like board is running when you re-programed, which is fine, that can be done, however Pierre may have been correct in pointing out the "field" may interfere with the board ?
That's all I have to comment... : {
Again, I think this is not a likely cause. I've never encountered _magnetic_ interference that affected the Arduino. Electrical interference is something else though. I would worry about the USB cable picking up electrical noise from the system, and cleanliness of power supplied to the Arduino when the USB cable isn't in use.
By the way, the Arduino should NOT be powered through the +5v pin(s) unless you have absolutely stable regulated and filtered +5 volts to feed it. It is far better to supply +9 to +12 volts to the regular coaxial power jack so that the board's own VR circuitry can handle the power conditioning.
-
I have noted that using pin mode on digital pin 1 is actually using the UART port bit TX1 used for USB communication.
Perhaps we should shift all 30/36 pins down one i.e. 2 to 31/37?
Regards
L192
I have mentioned this before, because I have occasionally had problems using digital pins 0 and 1 for certain purposes. So I tend to avoid them if possible. However I've tested versions of the sketch (my versions of other versions!) on my local Mega using Pin 1 and didn't see any problems, with either running or uploading. I would be surprised to find that the uploading problem is related to the use of Pin 1 in the sketch.
-
Hello Luc,
in my opinion, the influence of the magnetic field is probably the cause of the problem.
The easiest way is to remove the magnetic field to transfer the program.
For that, maybe you just have to unplug the GND.
FR
à mon avis, l'influence du champ magnétique est probablement à l'origine du problème.
Le plus simple, est de supprimer le champ magnétique pour transférer le programme.
Pour cela, peut-être qu'il suffit de débrancher seulement la GND.
-
I would still like to see the _exact_ sketch that Luc is now running (or trying to run) so that I can check the sketch for problems on my Mega. I have both Linux and Windows computers that I can use to check for uploading problems related to the sketch (although there are not likely to be any.)
But please--- do post the exact sketch that is being used currently so that I can review it.
-
in my opinion, the influence of the magnetic field is probably the cause of the problem.
There is no magnetic field when the program is not running. From Luc's video it clearly shows programmer interface issue (damaged usb/serial port or drivers)...
And when it iwill be running there are lots of ways to shield magnetic field from the Arduino.
Cheers!
-
Hello Luc,
in my opinion, the influence of the magnetic field is probably the cause of the problem.
The easiest way is to remove the magnetic field to transfer the program.
For that, maybe you just have to unplug the GND.
FR
à mon avis, l'influence du champ magnétique est probablement à l'origine du problème.
Le plus simple, est de supprimer le champ magnétique pour transférer le programme.
Pour cela, peut-être qu'il suffit de débrancher seulement la GND.
I disagree. I don't think that the magnetic field could be causing the problem. At least magnetic fields have never caused any problems with my own Arduinos. (I use UNOs, Megas, and ProMinis for many projects.)
However I _do_ think it is possible that something in the external circuitry and/or power supply may be causing the problem. So I'd like to see Luc try programming the Mega with it disconnected totally from the external circuitry. Then if the program uploads properly, the Mega can be reconnected to the external circuits and we can see what happens then. If the program will still not upload even with nothing connected to the Mega except the programming USB cable... AND if I can get the sketch to upload properly to my own Mega using Windows here at my lab... then we may suspect a hardware problem with Luc's Mega board.
-
The untested code that I listed for 30 slots, would have required OR gates on the L298N enable inputs, otherwise there would be Output pin clashes for the enable lines.
I now have 5 unique sequences use for enable that avoid that issue.
I just mention this in case this code was used by anybody.
Regards
L192
-
I have noted that using pin mode on digital pin 1 is actually using the UART port bit TX1 used for USB communication.
Perhaps we should shift all 30/36 pins down one i.e. 2 to 31/37?
Regards
L192
I agree too !
-
Definitely TX/RX problem (pin 0,1)
Solution:
Push reset baton and upload immediately or disconnect/connect and immediately upload
But probably same problem will still persist next time.
Do not use 0,1
d.
-
Yeah, it's just the port by the looks of it.
Nothing wrong with the code.
At the bottom of your screen it shows you've selected the right type of Arduino and indeed it compiles fine. The only thing different would be the Port.
Click 'Tools', then 'Port' and see what it says there...you should only have 1 or 2 to select from and it seems like it's picking the wrong one as default.
Another way, is to unplug the Arduino USB cable and plug it back in, the other port will then be selected. At least here on Linux Mint it does, from USB0 to USB1 even if it's the same device being plugged in and out.
With the Chinese 2560 boards USB is on Com 4 not 1, as you would expect from an original.
L192
-
With the Chinese 2560 boards USB is on Com 4 not 1, as you would expect from an original.
L192
Actually, with Windows especially, this will depend on several factors, like what else you have plugged in, where you have it all plugged in, the day of the week, and whether or not you've sacrificed a mouse to Micro$haft lately.
For example, I am looking at a fresh installation of the Arduino IDE on my Win7Pro laptop, and the choices offered to me in the Tools>Port menu are COM3 and COM11 (yes, COM Eleven) and the Mega is using COM11. I'm pretty sure if I plug it into a different USB port on the Lenovo laptop, a different COM port will be assigned. That's Windows messing with us, not the Arduino IDE.
(My Mega is an OSEPP brand, which is a Canadian company, but I can't tell where the board was actually manufactured.)
As long as the IDE is installed correctly, along with the drivers, the COM-to-USB connection should be automatic, and all the user needs to do is to identify which of the port choices in the Port menu correspond to the Arduino device you have connected.
-
If pressing board reset restores USB comms, I would check C8, (missing or broken) assuming this is a CH340G board not an original board with FTDI in which case that would be C7.
This cap couples a line from the CH340G, to assert a reset and communication with the 2560.
L192
-
It is not only the magnetic field a possible source of interaction. Displacement currents move perpendicular to the mag field, charging any plate in that direction. In any case, a sheet of grounded copper underneath arduino will hopefully ground them.
-
Wow, that's a lot of communications about a failed Arduino com port.
Today I'm going to do some in out power power test at the fixed frequency it's presently working at.
If someone can write the same program for Popeller (shown in video) that would be great.
Thanks everyone for your help.
Fr. Wow, c'est beaucoup de communications sur un port de com Arduino échoué.
Aujourd'hui, je vais faire un test de puissance à la fréquence fixe sur laquelle il travaille actuellement.
Si quelqu'un peut écrire le même programme pour Popeller (montré dans la vidéo) ce serait génial.
Merci à tous pour votre aide.
Video: https://youtu.be/LAC33oRHGvs
-
Guys, please. Input power and 5V power to H-Brige has always been off when I communicate with the Arduino. So there is no possibility this problem is related to any magnetic fields.
Fr. s'il te plait. La puissance d'entrée et l'alimentation 5V de H-Bridge ont toujours été coupées lorsque je communique avec l'Arduino. Il n'y a donc aucune possibilité que ce problème soit lié à des champs magnétiques.
-
I have noted that using pin mode on digital pin 1 is actually using the UART port bit TX1 used for USB communication.
Perhaps we should shift all 30/36 pins down one i.e. 2 to 31/37?
Regards
L192
This is a very good point. As soon as the Arduino exits the bootloader and enters the sketch, it will no longer be possible to communicate with it through the UART port as it is used in the sketch.
So Luc, take the board out of the setup so all external wires are disconnected, and try uploading immediately after resetting the board (I am not too familiar with this specific board, so not sure how long the delay is before the bootloader exits and or if there is a reset button you can press if the board is already powered on). Maybe there is another way to make it stay in the bootloader and not execute the current sketch.
PmgR
-
Actually, there is a reset button on the board, see attached image. Try pushing that and then immediately after uploading the sketch, or the other way around, start the sketch upload, then press the reset button.
PmgR
-
http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg519722/#msg519722
!!! ZADIG !!!
-
I stand corrected. The Arduino talks to the computer over its own USB pins, not a TX/RX UART, see the schematic here
https://www.arduino.cc/en/uploads/Main/arduino-mega2560-schematic.pdf? (https://www.arduino.cc/en/uploads/Main/arduino-mega2560-schematic.pdf?)
Only thing I can think of is that the Arduino does not stay long enough in the bootloader to establish communication with the PC. So try that reset button trick that I described in the previous post and play with the timing of pressing that button versus pressing the upload button on the PC.
PmgR
-
I stand corrected. The Arduino talks to the computer over its own USB pins, not a TX/RX UART, see the schematic here
https://www.arduino.cc/en/uploads/Main/arduino-mega2560-schematic.pdf? (https://www.arduino.cc/en/uploads/Main/arduino-mega2560-schematic.pdf?)
Only thing I can think of is that the Arduino does not stay long enough in the bootloader to establish communication with the PC. So try that reset button trick that I described in the previous post and play with the timing of pressing that button versus pressing the upload button on the PC.
PmgR
Hi PmgR,
That's the schematic for the original arduino Mega 2560.
The Chinese imports use the CH340G chip for serial communication.
Tried to find a schematic for this board but failed.
Regards
L192
-
All,
To maybe help sort out the the confusion, the 2560 board I shipped to Luc uses An Atmel Mega16U2 as compared to the original Arduino AtMega8u2 for USB communications.
Regards,
Pm
-
Actually, there is a reset button on the board, see attached image. Try pushing that and then immediately after uploading the sketch, or the other way around, start the sketch upload, then press the reset button.
PmgR
Good idea Pmgr and it worked. So now I have a successful high frequency upload. So before trying it again I'm going to do some (in out) power tests at this frequency.
When you get the chance can you please add the potentiometer function to the program you modified for me so I can have that available if my next upload is also successful.
The below video contains some scope shoots of the device operating.
Thanks for everyones help
Luc
Fr. Bonne idée Pmgr et ça marché. Alors maintenant, j'ai un téléchargement à haute fréquence réussie. Donc, avant d'essayer à nouveau, je vais faire des tests (in out) de puissance à cette fréquence.
Quand vous en avez l'opportunité, veuillez ajouter la fonction potentiomètre au programme que vous avez modifié pour que je puisse l'avoir si mon prochain téléchargement réussit.
La vidéo ci-dessous contient quelques prises d'oscilloscope de l'appareil en fonctionnement.
Merci pour l'aide de tout le monde
Luc
Video demo: https://youtu.be/I0Rjjhuayf4
-
Use linux, not need drivers.
Sorry, I see it's fixed now
-
When you get the chance can you please add the potentiometer function to the program you modified for me so I can have that available if my next upload is also successful.
Attached is the sketch with the potentiometer added back in (other line with x=5 commented out).
PmgR
-
Hi Luc,
Impressive build.
I rewrote an alternative version to be more adaptive, it compiled fine but haven't tested on hardware. The only line you have to change is:
const int msDelay = 0;
When set to 0 it will take the delay value from the attached potentiometer.
When set to anything other than zero it will use that for the delay in milliseconds.
I noticed the L298n can switch down to the microseconds but doesn't like long delays >100ms maybe it's the board or my setup but it slopes off quickly. So delay() could be replaced with delayMicroseconds() later on.
-
First output coil test
Fr. Premier test de bobine de sortie
Video demo: https://youtu.be/9ybgmyOsFdM
-
First output coil test
Video demo: https://youtu.be/9ybgmyOsFdM (https://youtu.be/9ybgmyOsFdM)
Nice test Luc :)
In regards to polarities on output core you probably will want some rotating magnetic field detection probes installed. That might be multiple hall sensors inside of diamagnetic material pointing to different directions for seeing 360 degrees rotation or similar setup.
Cheers!
-
Thanks DreamThinkBuild
The below video is the last for today and the results of reducing the center I core to contact with 4 I stator surfaces. It's a small improvement but not as good as I was hoping for.
Fr. La vidéo ci-dessous est la dernière pour aujourd'hui et les résultats de la réduction du noyau centre I à contacter avec 4 surfaces de I dustator. C'est une petite amélioration mais pas aussi bonne que j'espérais.
Video demo: https://youtu.be/EIdsx61qGec
-
Luc
I saw on the scope that the peak voltage across your primary coils?? was some volts below your feeding voltage so some power loss is hiding somewere.
In my over unity contraptions I have to use a higher reisistance value to the resistive load, than the resistance giving maximum power, to come above the ingoing power. And a short circut (or open) output barely affected the input parameters.
Regards Arne
-
Luc
I saw on the scope that the peak voltage across your primary coils?? was some volts below your feeding voltage so some power loss is hiding somewere.
In my over unity contraptions I have to use a higher reisistance value to the resistive load, than the resistance giving maximum power, to come above the ingoing power. And a short circut (or open) output barely affected the input parameters.
Regards Arne
Those voltage readings are 2 of the Arduino outputs triggers to the H=Bridges. They are there for reference.
Luc
-
Hi Luc
I saw and translated Pierre's reply on your newest video he was asking what are you doing with your coils "return" and said this is the secret if you want it to work.
So will guess he means the backemf/recoil/flyback diodes...
Are you relying on the internal diodes in the H bridges to do this work - and can these actually work to fill the caps??
I would think the internal diodes would only suppress spark flash/backemf/recoil to prevent switching damage and not serve any function to be filling up caps in overunity fashion...
My feelings have always been the backemf/recoil from pulsed inductor is actually much
more power and energy than what the primary power into inductor is, but we just do not know how to harness and contain and release this energy into loads very well since everyone has been brainwashed to thinking this is only destructive transients that needs to be suppressed and maybe there is something about Pierres device that makes this backwards spikey energy manifest to extreme overunity but I don't know as is usual ....anyways I will guess you need a lot of very fast steering diodes added to your machine is what he is saying....two for each relay...
Also a big spool of 20 GA magnet wire would really help too if someone can donate this your way to wind that rotor like Pierre did.
So GREAT WORK keep going and don't stop too long to admire how beautiful your creation is!
-
Just received PM from MH:
I tried posting some technical comments on Luc's clip but he deleted them right away and accused me of trolling. It must be miserable to live in an Orwellian nightmare sometimes, sort of like the movie Fahrenheit 451. So let's break out of the straitjacket and actually use our critical thinking skills and rebel against the thought-control oppressors that want to stomp out free thought and burn books, much to the chagrin of Luc.Here you go, think free and live free or get zapped by a discharging inductor:So you have done the build and you have the working code to energize the coils to make a rotating magnetic field. So now it all comes down to basics. The energizing coils will put flux through the stationary rotor. Naturally when the coils that line up with the stationary rotor are energized, then more flux passes through the stationary rotor. By the same token, the coils that do not line up with the stationary rotor put zero or very little flux through the stationary rotor. Makes sense, correct? So when the Arduino energizes these coils that don't line up with the stationary rotor, that represents the burning of input power with no real output power. It represents power being poured down the drain and all that it really does is heat the coils. Let's say for the sake of argument you are losing 1/4 of your input power to heat because of the energizing of the coils that don't line up with the stationary rotor. You have enough experience under your belt such that I don't think that you are going to disagree with me on this critical point. Pierre has already said the classic line, collect the back-EMF pulses from all of the coils. You have been though that exercise 100 times by now, and you know there is no magic there and you are not even close to considering changing your H-bridge setup to collect back-EMF pulse energy into a capacitor. That's a dead horse that you have seen too many times by now such that you can almost do it in your sleep.So let's talk about the output now. You have a coil wrapped around the stationary rotor and that is where you get the output from the device. So we are talking about the basic nuts and bolts of a generator here. The more turns you use for the output coil, the higher the voltage output. And of course the higher the total resistance of the wire. The more turns you have, the higher the voltage, and therefore the higher value of load resistor the output coil can drive. In general terms, let's suppose that you wrap enough turns where the wire resistance is 10 ohms. That implies that you will get the most output power when you have an impedance-matching load resistor of 10 ohms. However, a note of caution here in the sense that the 10-ohm coil will also dissipate the same amount of power as the 10-ohm load resistor, which means right away that you are only 50% efficient in getting output power from the coil. If you increase the load resistor to say 30 ohms, you will get less total output power in the load resistor, and less dissipated power in the 10-ohm resistance of the coil, giving you a more efficient coil-to-load resistor output power efficiency, but less total output power. So what's the take-away? The take-away is to experiment with different load resistors where the load resistor is less than the coil resistance, equal to the coil resistance, and greater than the coil resistance.So this glorified Arduino setup with the fancy rotating magnetic field is doing on primary thing - putting changing flux through the stationary rotor. When you wrap a coil around the stationary rotor and have no load resistor you are seeing the pure EMF being generated by the output coil. That EMF waveform represents the rate of change of magnetic flux through the stationary rotor with respect to time. Also known as the first derivative of the flux with respect to time. I don't know if Luc's DSO has an integration function. Why do you want the integration function? The answer is that if you integrate on the EMF waveform then you will get a waveform for the actual amount of flux that is passing through the stationary rotor from the Arduino setup. Even if you don't have an integration function in the DSO, you can do it by hand on paper. Why do you do it? Because it is interesting to know how much flux is passing through the stationary rotor.Let's discuss the output when there is an appropriate load resistor. When there is a lot of current flowing through the load resistor that means that the stator coils that are lined up with the stationary rotor are doing real work, and there should be a corresponding increased current draw when those coils are doing work. That implies that when you scope the current draw for the whole device you should see lower current draw for the stator coils that don't line up with the stationary rotor (the "dead" current draw that does nothing but heat the stator coils) and increased current draw for the stator coils that do line up with the stationary rotor.Wrapping more turns around the stationary rotor will NOT give you more output power. That is just an old wives' tale. The amount of power you can extract from the stationary rotor is dependent on the amount of changing flux that passes though the rotor, not the amount of turns. The amount of turns determines the best value for the load resistor, that's all.So, let's ballpark the maximum output power to input power efficiency for this device. I have already stated it above. It's roughly 75% efficient for the stator coils because half of them are "dead" and do nothing. I am saying this because the unloaded stator coils that do nothing will actually draw very little current, and I am bundling in all of the H-bridge overhead. Then we know on the output coil side when you use an impedance matching load for maximum power output the efficiency is maximum 50%. So the ballpark efficiency will be 0.75 x 0.5 = less than 37% efficient.That's a lot of spicy meatballs worth of work with no secret spicy meatball sauce in sight to get less than 37% efficiency.
Due that is standard response from typical conventional science standpoint I am sure the similar response would be from any theorists.
The problem we all having are case of alternators where no single permanent magnet exists. In classic example such as car we use battery to energize alternator and yet still getting charged battery from moving magnetic fields. If you replace moving rotor to moving magnetic fields on stator and eliminate any need of kinetic force no one can exactly tell what results will be. The classic theory do not have such cases and this is where Pierre's situation is really interesting to look for answers.
Sorry for long post but I think the positive criticism is also needed here.
Cheers!
-
Hi Luc
I saw and translated Pierre's reply on your newest video he was asking what are you doing with your coils "return" and said this is the secret if you want it to work.
So will guess he means the backemf/recoil/flyback diodes...
In typical stepper motors we have KHz range pulsed DC going to the coils. This maximizes BEMF. Yet in Pierre's case there is no such thing due mechanical switching in relays.
Unless there is autotransformer mode going inside of the coils on stator the power consumption is much greater than BEMF being returned.
So it is good question what Pierre had in mind on that response.
-
T-1000 Reply #397
You have exactly pinpointed "the cat's tail" that one we are chasing.
Reply #398 For each step as we move the rotating magnetic field we also 'kills' two magnetic fields (coils) up and running without harnessing??
/Arne
-
Those voltage readings are 2 of the Arduino outputs triggers to the H=Bridges. They are there for reference.
Luc
Hi Gotoluc,
How did you connect the L298N boards, as H bridges, or as half bridges?
Regards
L192
-
Hi Luc
I saw and translated Pierre's reply on your newest video he was asking what are you doing with your coils "return" and said this is the secret if you want it to work.
So will guess he means the backemf/recoil/flyback diodes...
If this was the case we could do it with just a simple coil wrapped on a simple core. But IMHO this is not the case and never was.
-
Hi Gotoluc,
How did you connect the L298N boards, as H bridges, or as half bridges?
Regards
L192
Please see attached image for how they are hooked up. Red is output 1-2 of H-bridge, black is output 3-4 of H-bridge.
PmgR
-
Continuing on alternator conversion - http://www.pirate4x4.com/tech/billavista/Wiring/Part2/ (http://www.pirate4x4.com/tech/billavista/Wiring/Part2/)
Pierre's simulated field movement makes three phases around stator. If we make output coil in same way as in alternator and have 3 overlapping coils on stator with outputs from each junction this would complete the cycle. Then just create 3 phase switching around 36 (3x12) stator coil contacts and take output on stationary rotor.
Would be really interesting to see what you guys could get on output...
-
My connection scheme is a little different, I only switch one half bridge at a time on the same board. This reduces the heat dissipation on each L298N.
Also I use the enable lines to switch the transistors, so the high and low side transistors float when enable is low
I achieved a reasonable rotor output waveform until I pushed the setup too hard at about 4A per half bridge. This was after about 20 mins of running. This took out at least 5-6 boards, after one L298N exploded. No heatsink was over about 40 deg C.
I had done this before without problem however , this time we have the shorted coils due to the overlap. In each coil line you could see the overlap current step.
I rechecked all connections and drive signals, everything appears to be in order. There were no apparent voltage spikes on the power +rail. Each board had its +/- power lines taken from a distribution strip with heavy duty cable linking to the super caps.
I have three spare boards but I am thinking that I will use relays next.
Disappointed but not surprised.
L192
-
I achieved a reasonable rotor output waveform until I pushed the setup too hard at about 4A per half bridge. This was after about 20 mins of running. This took out at least 5-6 boards, after one L298N exploded. No heatsink was over about 40 deg C.
L192
If you use just few coils instead of 12 in series for single phase it will take lots of amps and will be energy waste.
Also if you watch Pierre's video and see how coils are made they are overlapping just like in car alternator and can be used with 3x12 sets.
EDIT: In Pierre's video I noticed 5 overlapping coils when started from 1st then counted to 5th position going back to stator.
-
L192
If you use just few coils instead of 12 in series for single phase it will take lots of amps and will be energy waste.
Also if you watch Pierre's video and see how coils are made they are overlapping just like in car alternator and can be used with 3x12 sets.
EDIT: In Pierre's video I noticed 5 overlapping coils when started from 1st then counted to 5th position going back to stator.
Hi T-1000,
My stator is wound for 30 slots with a 5 coil pole, so 30 coils in a series loop, lapped at a 5 pole pitch.
Basically the 30 slot version of Pierres 36 slot.
36 Turns per coil.
The problem is the harmonics created with this scheme.
If you pulse just a single set of 5 coils with overlap turned off, you can achieve 80 volts on the rotor with dim illumination of a 25V 230V lamp. Note, this rotor has the (original 230V generator windings). This is achieved with a 2amp drive.
As soon as you start introducing other coils group, the harmonics start to cause destructive cancellation. I would be not be surprised if this is what caused the L298N failure(s).
Attached is the test I conducted with 6 coils (no overlap)
Regards
L192
-
My connection scheme is a little different, I only switch one half bridge at a time on the same board. This reduces the heat dissipation on each L298N.
Also I use the enable lines to switch the transistors, so the high and low side transistors float when enable is low
I achieved a reasonable rotor output waveform until I pushed the setup too hard at about 4A per half bridge. This was after about 20 mins of running. This took out at least 5-6 boards, after one L298N exploded. No heatsink was over about 40 deg C.
I had done this before without problem however , this time we have the shorted coils due to the overlap. In each coil line you could see the overlap current step.
I rechecked all connections and drive signals, everything appears to be in order. There were no apparent voltage spikes on the power +rail. Each board had its +/- power lines taken from a distribution strip with heavy duty cable linking to the super caps.
I have three spare boards but I am thinking that I will use relays next.
Disappointed but not surprised.
L192
Luc has similar setup: H bridges are switched by the EN pins (both tied together going to Arduino). Inputs 1-2 are tied to Vcc, inputs 3 and 4 to GND, so bridges are floating as well when Arduino signal is low.
PmgR
-
Hi T-1000,
My stator is wound for 30 slots with a 5 coil pole, so 30 coils in a series loop, lapped at a 5 pole pitch.
Basically the 30 slot version of Pierres 36 slot.
36 Turns per coil.
The problem is the harmonics created with this scheme.
If you pulse just a single set of 5 coils with overlap turned off, you can achieve 80 volts on the rotor with dim illumination of a 25V 230V lamp. Note, this rotor has the (original 230V generator windings). This is achieved with a 2amp drive.
As soon as you start introducing other coils group, the harmonics start to cause destructive cancellation. I would be not be surprised if this is what caused the L298N failure(s).
I am assuming you still have 3 coils overlapping each other and if lets say:
1) the coil A begin is on 1st pin the coil end is on 4th?
2) the coil B begin is on 2nd pin the coil end is on 5th?
3) the coil C begin is on 3th pin the coil end is on 6th?
Please remind me your coils arrangement on stator.
The reason why am asking is how we make three phase on alternator stator. Please see diagram attached.
You also may try to think what resulting polarity should be on the output coil core which is covering positions from 1th to 3th and from 15th to 18th.
Ideally we should do from 3 phase to 1 phase conversion.
-
I am assuming you still have 3 coils overlapping each other and if lets say:
1) the coil A begin is on 1st pin the coil end is on 4th?
2) the coil B begin is on 2nd pin the coil end is on 5th?
3) the coil C begin is on 3th pin the coil end is on 6th?
Please remind me your coils arrangement on stator.
The reason why am asking is how we make three phase on alternator stator. Please see diagram attached.
You also may try to think what resulting polarity should be on the output coil core which is covering positions from 1th to 3th and from 15th to 18th.
Ideally we should do from 3 phase to 1 phase conversion.
Hi T-1000,
My coils bridge 4 poles, whereas Gotolucs stator bridge 5 poles.
5 coils per N/S pole overlapped 1 slot.
Regards
L192
-
Hi T-1000,
My coils bridge 4 poles, whereas Gotolucs stator bridge 5 poles.
5 coils per N/S pole overlapped 1 slot.
Regards
L192
Hi L192,
I just tried to see in Excel spreadsheet what output would be like when merging 3 phase arrangement over different amounts of coils.
No joy for 2/4 coils for results. The best was 3 rolling coils around ring.
Please see spreadsheet attached. Maybe you will have some ideas how to properly simulate moving magnetic fields around the ring without too much losses.
Cheers!
-
My coils bridge 4 poles, whereas Gotolucs stator bridge 5 poles.
5 coils per N/S pole overlapped 1 slot.
Regards
L192
Looks like I have a problem. I spaced my coils 6 slot wide and I'm having terrible results. PmgR said it shouldn't matter but maybe it does?... I need opinions as something is not right.
See results: https://youtu.be/aFQB-WOx-Oc (https://youtu.be/aFQB-WOx-Oc)
I think we need to use the Propeller controller instead of the Arduino. Any reason why it can't be used?
The below is the program Pmgr modified for me:
/*
Blink This example code is in the public domain.
modified 8 May 2014
by Scott Fitzgerald
*/
/* modified by PmgR 4/6/2018 to accomodate 30coil stator */
// the setup function runs once when you press reset or power the board
void setup() {
pinMode( 1, OUTPUT);
pinMode( 2, OUTPUT);
pinMode( 3, OUTPUT);
pinMode( 4, OUTPUT);
pinMode( 5, OUTPUT);
pinMode( 6, OUTPUT);
pinMode( 7, OUTPUT);
pinMode( 8, OUTPUT);
pinMode( 9, OUTPUT);
pinMode(10, OUTPUT);
pinMode(11, OUTPUT);
pinMode(12, OUTPUT);
pinMode(13, OUTPUT);
pinMode(14, OUTPUT);
pinMode(15, OUTPUT);
pinMode(16, OUTPUT);
pinMode(17, OUTPUT);
pinMode(18, OUTPUT);
pinMode(19, OUTPUT);
pinMode(20, OUTPUT);
pinMode(21, OUTPUT);
pinMode(22, OUTPUT);
pinMode(23, OUTPUT);
pinMode(24, OUTPUT);
pinMode(25, OUTPUT);
pinMode(26, OUTPUT);
pinMode(27, OUTPUT);
pinMode(28, OUTPUT);
pinMode(29, OUTPUT);
pinMode(30, OUTPUT);
}
int x = 0;
// the loop function runs over and over again forever
void loop(){
/*Old Pierre code*/
int y= analogRead(0); //Read out potentiometer setting
x= map(y,0,1024,1,100); //Map to a delay value from 1ms (50Hz loop speed, 1/3*50Hz magnet speed) to 100ms (0.5Hz loop speed, 1/3*0.5Hz magnet speed).
/* PmgR modifications below*/
// Change this x delay number to something else to change the frequency:
// 1ms results in 50Hz
// 2ms results in 25Hz
// 3ms results in 16.66Hz
// 4ms results in 12.5Hz
// 5ms results in 10Hz
// 10ms results in 5Hz
// x=1; //total loop delay is 20*x = 20ms. f=50Hz
// x=5; //total loop delay is 20*x = 100ms. f=10Hz
digitalWrite( 1,HIGH), digitalWrite(11,HIGH), digitalWrite(21,HIGH);
delay(x);
digitalWrite(10, LOW), digitalWrite(20, LOW), digitalWrite(30, LOW);
delay(x);
digitalWrite( 2,HIGH), digitalWrite(12,HIGH), digitalWrite(22,HIGH);
delay(x);
digitalWrite( 1, LOW), digitalWrite(11, LOW), digitalWrite(21, LOW);
delay(x);
digitalWrite( 3,HIGH), digitalWrite(13,HIGH), digitalWrite(23,HIGH);
delay(x);
digitalWrite( 2, LOW), digitalWrite(12, LOW), digitalWrite(22, LOW);
delay(x);
digitalWrite( 4,HIGH), digitalWrite(14,HIGH), digitalWrite(24,HIGH);
delay(x);
digitalWrite( 3, LOW), digitalWrite(13, LOW), digitalWrite(23, LOW);
delay(x);
digitalWrite( 5,HIGH), digitalWrite(15,HIGH), digitalWrite(25,HIGH);
delay(x);
digitalWrite( 4, LOW), digitalWrite(14, LOW), digitalWrite(24, LOW);
delay(x);
digitalWrite( 6,HIGH), digitalWrite(16,HIGH), digitalWrite(26,HIGH);
delay(x);
digitalWrite( 5, LOW), digitalWrite(15, LOW), digitalWrite(25, LOW);
delay(x);
digitalWrite( 7,HIGH), digitalWrite(17,HIGH), digitalWrite(27,HIGH);
delay(x);
digitalWrite( 6, LOW), digitalWrite(16, LOW), digitalWrite(26, LOW);
delay(x);
digitalWrite( 8,HIGH), digitalWrite(18,HIGH), digitalWrite(28,HIGH);
delay(x);
digitalWrite( 7, LOW), digitalWrite(17, LOW), digitalWrite(27, LOW);
delay(x);
digitalWrite( 9,HIGH), digitalWrite(19,HIGH), digitalWrite(29,HIGH);
delay(x);
digitalWrite( 8, LOW), digitalWrite(18, LOW), digitalWrite(28, LOW);
delay(x);
digitalWrite(10,HIGH), digitalWrite(20,HIGH), digitalWrite(30,HIGH);
delay(x);
digitalWrite( 9, LOW), digitalWrite(19, LOW), digitalWrite(29, LOW);
delay(x);
}
-
Guys what do you think about the "return" of the coils as Pierre suggested to work on?
In addition if you remember we were wondering what frequency Pierre's meter had measured. We saw the 60Hz but we didn't know if his meter was counting the coil stepping. So if it is possible for Luc or L192 to check this out.
Regards
-
Guys what do you think about the "return" of the coils as Pierre suggested to work on?
In addition if you remember we were wondering what frequency Pierre's meter had measured. We saw the 60Hz but we didn't know if his meter was counting the coil stepping. So if it is possible for Luc or L192 to check this out.
Regards
Really no coils turn off as such. The previous lead coil just gets a polarity change, so it has a current path through the coils prior to it, back to the next low side switch.
I checked with just a 5 coil group and there is no recovery current back to the supply from the L298N board, while the coils are connected in a series loop.
If you break the coil loop then coil recovery current appears on the L298N supply, back to the cap bank.
L192
-
Looks like I have a problem. I spaced my coils 6 slot wide and I'm having terrible results. PmgR said it shouldn't matter but maybe it does?... I need opinions as something is not right.
See results: https://youtu.be/aFQB-WOx-Oc (https://youtu.be/aFQB-WOx-Oc)
Luc, how did you connect the LEDs? Did you use a serial resistor with them? If not, each of them is probably at least drawing 20-30mA if not more. Multiply that with 30 and you are drawing 750mA. The Arduino can't supply that and the computer USB can't supply that either (probably only 500mA), yet the battery can supply the current, but the Arduino is turning on and off (Arduino fuse on board is probably heating up and disconnecting; I believe that board has a thermal 500mA fuse).
You should remove your LEDs as the Arduino can't supply that much current directly. Even with a series resistor in place, it might not be able to handle it. This is also why the USB no longer shows up at your computer. The Arduino board simply can't handle the current load and so everything gets messed up.
PmgR
-
If you break the coil loop then coil recovery current appears on the L298N supply, back to the cap bank.
L192
Thanks L192.
By breaking the loop do you mean keeping one coil off between N and S poles?
Luc
As you correctly said, Leds are an unnecessary load for your Arduino outputs, which demand more total current than your Arduino can provide.
-
Guys what do you think about the "return" of the coils as Pierre suggested to work on?
In addition if you remember we were wondering what frequency Pierre's meter had measured. We saw the 60Hz but we didn't know if his meter was counting the coil stepping. So if it is possible for Luc or L192 to check this out.
Regards
Luc's H-bridges have recovery diodes on them and Luc also shows in his video the negative current (current return back to the source).
PmgR
-
Hi Jeg,
I mean just opening one coil junction, so the coils are not looped.
Regards
L192
-
Guys what do you think about the "return" of the coils as Pierre suggested to work on?
Regards
i think, return is back emf going back to source.
-
i think, return is back emf going back to source.
From diodes and coils.
-
Thank you guys!
Personally i don't think that by return he means the recovering of the flyback spikes. This by itself alone is not enough to overcome the input consumption. Especially when we speak of about X10 energy amplification.
-
The first scope shot shows the coil current including the low side switch period.
So just 5 coils switching no overlap.
The second shot shows the board supply current.
Note the low side switch is on another board so you don't see that current.
No sign of any recovery current to the cap bank.
Perhaps the local cap on the board is taking this charge, so it does not appear on the supply rail?
I disconnected the loop and it made no difference, so I was wrong about that.
Regards
L192
-
Luc, we have mentioned before that the maximum rated continuous current output of the Mega is 200 mA total. You definitely should be using a current-limiting resistor in series with _each_ LED to limit the current to something like 5 mA per LED. With modern bright LEDs this will be plenty bright for visual display purposes. Even though you aren't turning on all your LEDs at once, you still need some current limiting for the LEDs. For a Green LED with a Vf of say 1.8 V, and the 5 V supply, you need to calculate the resistor value like this: R=V/I so R =(Vsupply - Vf)/5 mA = (5-1. 8) /0.005 = 640 ohms. So use a resistor value close to this for each LED. (I'm using 470 ohms on my test board.) This way even if all 30 LEDs are on the system will draw 150 mA, well below the total limit. (The speed control pot will draw a little current also but if you use a reasonable sized pot this will be negligible.)
It is possible that your uploading and intermittent problems have to do with the high current draw. (At fast speeds it "looks like" all LEDs are on at once, causing the thermal overload problem.) This is why I suggested earlier that you try the uploading with all external circuitry disconnected from the Mega. If this solves your uploading problem then you will know the cause, and can most probably cure it with adding current-limiting resistors to all your LEDs.
Driving a mosfet, as has been pointed out before, doesn't need much current usually. So you should be able to drive the LED+resistor, and the mosfet, for each of the 30 switches with no additional problem, once the LED current is limited.
There is no need to switch to the Propeller system. It will have similar output current restrictions, and it uses a different IDE interface and IIRC it uses a variant of the BASIC programming language. While any program can be written in just about any language.... I think you will have more help available if you stick to the Arduino system and the C++ language. If it turns out that you have a defective Mega we can arrange for you to get a new one. If it turns out that you need more current than the raw Arduino can supply you can always put in current-amplification transistors between the Arduino outputs and the mosfets (or H bridges or relays, whatever).
But FIRST THINGS FIRST, try uploading to the Mega with _all external circuitry disconnected_ to see if the current draw is really the problem.
If it works fine this way, then you can probably cure the present problem simply by adding the current-limiting resistors to each LED.
-
Looks like I have a problem. I spaced my coils 6 slot wide and I'm having terrible results. PmgR said it shouldn't matter but maybe it does?... I need opinions as something is not right.
See results: https://youtu.be/aFQB-WOx-Oc (https://youtu.be/aFQB-WOx-Oc)
Hi Luc,
I am finding your coils aligment do not match Pierre's winding style.
Your setup have 2 coils in single slot while Pierre made just 1. Please see video screenshot attached.
The second very important thing to remember - the magnetic field strentgh weakens to the distance from coils squared. Which means in your setup you need to put out really strong magnetic field on stator to reach coil in the middle. Which also means the bare minimum power required will be high to induce current on the output. This is where bank of supercaps may play crucial role.
The third thing, when you attach 12V battery I suspect internal Arduino 5V stabilizer is messing up or is partially burned out. You may diagnose its issues or make external circuit to cope with power consumption on LEDs/etc. Personally I would introduce mosfet drivers to output transistors when driving coils.
Cheers!
-
Hi Luc,
I am finding your coils aligment do not match Pierre's winding style.
Your setup have 2 coils in single slot while Pierre made just 1. Please see video screenshot attached.
The second very important thing to remember - the magnetic field strentgh weakens to the distance from coils squared. Which means in your setup you need to put out really strong magnetic field on stator to reach coil in the middle. Which also means the bare minimum power required will be high to induce current on the output. This is where bank of supercaps may play crucial role.
The third thing, when you attach 12V battery I suspect internal Arduino 5V stabilizer is messing up or is partially burned out. You may diagnose its issues or make external circuit to cope with power consumption on LEDs/etc. Personally I would introduce mosfet drivers to output transistors when driving coils.
Cheers!
Re post 410 in the other thread.
These were the numbers that Pierre provided.
1-6,2-7,3-8,4-9,5-10,6-11,7-12,8-13,9-14,10-15,11-16, 12-17,13-18,14-19,15-20,16-21,17-22,18-23,19-24,20-25,21-26,22-27,23-28,24- 29,25-30,26-31,27-32,28-33,29-34,30-35,31-36,32-1,33-2,34-3,35-4,36-5
There are two coils in each slot.
Pierre's windings are very tight so you don't see the second coil entries behind the first.
L192
-
Pierre's windings are very tight so you don't see the second coil entries behind the first.
L192
Which is critical point in regards to magnetic field polarity. The closest to the center you see are just 1 way wiring making 1 magnet pole. The other coils looking to the outside of the stator make second pole.
So it is like magnet N/S looking towards center. When 2 coils are activated at once that makes N+N/S+S magnetic aligment towards center. A bit of tease for this case - the aligment of magnets in E. Leedskalnin generator in Coral castle - http://www.leedskalnin.com/LeedskalninImageArchive.html .
P.S> 1 slot I ment are 1 slot looking towards center and 1 slot looking towards outside of the stator.
Cheers!
-
Luc, how did you connect the LEDs? Did you use a serial resistor with them? If not, each of them is probably at least drawing 20-30mA if not more. Multiply that with 30 and you are drawing 750mA. The Arduino can't supply that and the computer USB can't supply that either (probably only 500mA), yet the battery can supply the current, but the Arduino is turning on and off (Arduino fuse on board is probably heating up and disconnecting; I believe that board has a thermal 500mA fuse).
Yes, I kind of figured the LED's are a little too much current demand for the Arduino. Are there LED's that use less current?
You should remove your LEDs as the Arduino can't supply that much current directly. Even with a series resistor in place, it might not be able to handle it. This is also why the USB no longer shows up at your computer. The Arduino board simply can't handle the current load and so everything gets messed up.
PmgR
Sorry, that's not why the USB no longer shows up at your computer. I remove the ground between Arduino and the L298N which shuts off the load on the Arduino and no difference.
I've had nothing but communications errors and problems with this Chinese Arduino version right from day one (new out of the box). Only ever got 2 successful uploads out of 60 tries.
It needs to be replaced, period.
Regards
Luc
-
Luc, we have mentioned before that the maximum rated continuous current output of the Mega is 200 mA total. You definitely should be using a current-limiting resistor in series with _each_ LED to limit the current to something like 5 mA per LED. With modern bright LEDs this will be plenty bright for visual display purposes. Even though you aren't turning on all your LEDs at once, you still need some current limiting for the LEDs. For a Green LED with a Vf of say 1.8 V, and the 5 V supply, you need to calculate the resistor value like this: R=V/I so R =(Vsupply - Vf)/5 mA = (5-1. 8) /0.005 = 640 ohms. So use a resistor value close to this for each LED. (I'm using 470 ohms on my test board.) This way even if all 30 LEDs are on the system will draw 150 mA, well below the total limit. (The speed control pot will draw a little current also but if you use a reasonable sized pot this will be negligible.)
It is possible that your uploading and intermittent problems have to do with the high current draw. (At fast speeds it "looks like" all LEDs are on at once, causing the thermal overload problem.) This is why I suggested earlier that you try the uploading with all external circuitry disconnected from the Mega. If this solves your uploading problem then you will know the cause, and can most probably cure it with adding current-limiting resistors to all your LEDs.
Driving a mosfet, as has been pointed out before, doesn't need much current usually. So you should be able to drive the LED+resistor, and the mosfet, for each of the 30 switches with no additional problem, once the LED current is limited.
There is no need to switch to the Propeller system. It will have similar output current restrictions, and it uses a different IDE interface and IIRC it uses a variant of the BASIC programming language. While any program can be written in just about any language.... I think you will have more help available if you stick to the Arduino system and the C++ language. If it turns out that you have a defective Mega we can arrange for you to get a new one. If it turns out that you need more current than the raw Arduino can supply you can always put in current-amplification transistors between the Arduino outputs and the mosfets (or H bridges or relays, whatever).
But FIRST THINGS FIRST, try uploading to the Mega with _all external circuitry disconnected_ to see if the current draw is really the problem.
If it works fine this way, then you can probably cure the present problem simply by adding the current-limiting resistors to each LED.
Thanks TK
The Arduino (communication side) is definitely defective and that was from day one right out of the box. The first time I tried it was on my Ubuntu laptop and I never got it to work.
Got it to work once with a new install on windows 7 but now every time I unplug it and plug it back in (without powering the LED's or L298N "ground removed") windows no longer recognizes it.
If I uninstall the Arduino software and reinstall then the first time I connect it it windows recognizes it but always get an upload error.
I've done everything possible. This is crazy.
Regards
Luc
-
Interesting no one here has picked up why my device has such a low current output!!!
Often in morning when I wake up I get a clear answer on something I've been contemplating on. I showed you all in my last video that my coils are 6 slot apart but it hasn't hit anyone.
It was clear to me this morning that in my configuration all my coils are Bucking... and no wonder I hardly get any output.
Pierre picked up on it and sent me a PM late last night which I only got this morning and he concluded the same thing.
Do you not see it?... 2 coils (in the same slot) are powered together but each with the current in the opposite direction.
I need to take all the stator coils out and reposition them to 5 slots apart.
I'll be busy for some days.
Regards
Luc
-
Hi Luc,
I am finding your coils aligment do not match Pierre's winding style.
Your setup have 2 coils in single slot while Pierre made just 1. Please see video screenshot attached.
The second very important thing to remember - the magnetic field strentgh weakens to the distance from coils squared. Which means in your setup you need to put out really strong magnetic field on stator to reach coil in the middle. Which also means the bare minimum power required will be high to induce current on the output. This is where bank of supercaps may play crucial role.
The third thing, when you attach 12V battery I suspect internal Arduino 5V stabilizer is messing up or is partially burned out. You may diagnose its issues or make external circuit to cope with power consumption on LEDs/etc. Personally I would introduce mosfet drivers to output transistors when driving coils.
Cheers!
Look at the pictures below, around 4 o-clock. You can clearly see the last winding goes into the slot over the previous winding.
Regards
Luc
-
Thanks TK
The Arduino (communication side) is definitely defective and that was from day one right out of the box. The first time I tried it was on my Ubuntu laptop and I never got it to work.
Got it to work once with a new install on windows 7 but now every time I unplug it and plug it back in (without powering the LED's or L298N "ground removed") windows no longer recognizes it.
If I uninstall the Arduino software and reinstall then the first time I connect it it windows recognizes it but always get an upload error.
I've done everything possible. This is crazy.
Regards
Luc
Luc, Does your Arduino have the CH340G serial chip? If it does that may be the problem. I recall something about that serial chip being blocked by a Windows update and it seems that this cheaper Chinese serial chip has caused a lot of headaches with drivers and connection to computers. Some Arduino's use that chip but better ones use a different serial chip (Atmega 16u2 ? ).
-
If you do have that CH340G serial chip I just found a possible fix for it. I'll try to attach it here. I've run it through Virustotal.com also and it is all clear but you can check it too at www.virustotal.com
-
I also have a problem with loading a file, but only when a magnetic field is generated. After turning off the power and waiting for 10 seconds, arduino is programmed again. This is not a driver problem or power supply.
-
Interesting no one here has picked up why my device has such a low current output!!!
Often in morning when I wake up I get a clear answer on something I've been contemplating on. I showed you all in my last video that my coils are 6 slot apart but it hasn't hit anyone.
It was clear to me this morning that in my configuration all my coils are Bucking... and no wonder I hardly get any output.
Pierre picked up on it and sent me a PM late last night which I only got this morning and he concluded the same thing.
Do you not see it?... 2 coils (in the same slot) are powered together but each with the current in the opposite direction.
I need to take all the stator coils out and reposition them to 5 slots apart.
I'll be busy for some days.
Regards
Luc
Hi Gotoluc,
I am finding that a single coil set outputs a reasonable voltage on the rotor however, when you add additional coil sets, output reduces and input current rises.
I have 4 poles between the coil 5 slot pitch, so there is a 1 pole gap between poles.
So far, I have not found an answer to this.
Regards
L192
-
Luc, Does your Arduino have the CH340G serial chip? If it does that may be the problem. I recall something about that serial chip being blocked by a Windows update and it seems that this cheaper Chinese serial chip has caused a lot of headaches with drivers and connection to computers. Some Arduino's use that chip but better ones use a different serial chip (Atmega 16u2 ? ).
Hi e2matrix. Listener191 sent me the same information (see his below message) Turns out the Arduino I have is the 16U2
However, just got it working again but using my Ubuntu laptop. Don't know why it's working now since this was the first laptop I used and only had errors ???
I'm uploading a video now of the LED firring sequence.
Regards
Luc
PM from L192
If you have the original board then I would look at the components around the reset button and make sure you don't have a missing cap. Some of these boards have deliberately left a coupling cap to the reset line out so you have to manual reset the board each time.
http://forums.reprap.org/read.php?146,705810 (http://forums.reprap.org/read.php?146,705810)
Check which board you have, if its the CH340 chip then you need to load a driver for it.
If you see the board listed under ports in device manager, does it have an exclamation mark against it? if so click on it to open the window and select search for driver.
Regards
L192
-
A visual of the Arduino firring sequence program to the L298N's
Video demo: https://youtu.be/fO2vIJj5xtI (https://youtu.be/fO2vIJj5xtI)
The below Images are made by PmgR
-
Hi Gotoluc,
I am finding that a single coil set outputs a reasonable voltage on the rotor however, when you add additional coil sets, output reduces and input current rises.
I have 4 poles between the coil 5 slot pitch, so there is a 1 pole gap between poles.
So far, I have not found an answer to this.
Regards
L192
Well, that's interesting!
PmgR is certain there is no bucking coils event in my configuration even though I have 6 slot space compared to 5 slots.
Please have a look at the video I just posted (above post) for a visual confirmation of the coil firring and have a look at the wiring chart PmgR made to see if you can find something that could cause the ridiculously low output. Maybe the Half bridges are conducting through another path?
Thanks and everyones input is welcome. Please have a look TK to see if we are missing something. Keep in mind that 5 coils are powered in series plus one 50% overlap.
Regards
Luc
-
If you do have that CH340G serial chip I just found a possible fix for it. I'll try to attach it here. I've run it through Virustotal.com also and it is all clear but you can check it too at www.virustotal.com
Again, quoted from my post #386-
All,
To maybe help sort out the the confusion, the 2560 board I shipped to Luc uses An Atmel Mega16U2 as compared to the original Arduino AtMega8u2 for USB communications.
Regards,
Pm
-
Well, that's interesting!
PmgR is certain there is no bucking coils event in my configuration even though I have 6 slot space compared to 5 slots.
Please have a look at the video I just posted (above post) for a visual confirmation of the coil firring and have a look at the wiring chart PmgR made to see if you can find something that could cause the ridiculously low output. Maybe the Half bridges are conducting through another path?
Thanks and everyones input is welcome. Please have a look TK to see if we are missing something. Keep in mind that 5 coils are powered in series plus one 50% overlap.
Regards
Luc
Hi Gotoluc,
I cannot see anything in either your build, or mine causing this problem, so I think my next move is to set up two opposing poles N&S, positioned across the rotor, initially just one coil each, then just statically pulse them.
I want to see what happens with rotor induction.
Then add more coils in each pole group and check the result.
Regards
L192
-
Hi Gotoluc,
I cannot see anything in either your build, or mine causing this problem, so I think my next move is to set up two opposing poles N&S, positioned across the rotor, initially just one coil each, then just statically pulse them.
I want to see what happens with rotor induction.
Then add more coils in each pole group and check the result.
Regards
L192
Yes, I agree! A better plan then rewinding my stator coils to a 5 slot space just to find the same issue ???
Baby steps for now.
Thanks for coming forward with this.
Regards
Luc
-
Well, that's interesting!
PmgR is certain there is no bucking coils event in my configuration even though I have 6 slot space compared to 5 slots.
Please have a look at the video I just posted (above post) for a visual confirmation of the coil firring and have a look at the wiring chart PmgR made to see if you can find something that could cause the ridiculously low output. Maybe the Half bridges are conducting through another path?
Thanks and everyones input is welcome. Please have a look TK to see if we are missing something. Keep in mind that 5 coils are powered in series plus one 50% overlap.
Regards
Luc
luc ,
j'ai visionné ta vidéo je remarque que seul 6 led sont actif ,si je comprend bien le schéma de pmgR ,il faudrait 12 contacte actif
par pas ,on dirais que dans ton cas présent 3x10 bobine sont actif au lieu de 6x5 bobine ?
Mosha
I saw your video I noticed that only 6 led are active, if I understand the diagram of pmgR, it would take 12 active contact by step, we would say that in this case 3x10 coil are active instead of 6x5 coil?
-
I just observed in Lucs last video with the consecutive LEDs in ultra slow sequence that the LED comes on and goes off in "two brightness steps" !
Maybe the camera fools me?
-
See the rough sketch attached.
For 5 coils on a 5 slot pitch, 63 slots would allow all applied current to be realized as flux through the rotor.
You need a 5 + 1 slot gap between the coil groups to ensure the poles don't overlap.
The way we are proceeding at the moment much of the flux is cancelled out.
L192
-
Well, that's interesting!
PmgR is certain there is no bucking coils event in my configuration even though I have 6 slot space compared to 5 slots.
Please have a look at the video I just posted (above post) for a visual confirmation of the coil firring and have a look at the wiring chart PmgR made to see if you can find something that could cause the ridiculously low output. Maybe the Half bridges are conducting through another path?
Thanks and everyones input is welcome. Please have a look TK to see if we are missing something. Keep in mind that 5 coils are powered in series plus one 50% overlap.
Regards
Luc
Luc, I made this drawing to help with the reflection. This is your configuration on the 30-groove rotor, with each coil on 6 grooves. All pairs of coils in each of the grooves are in opposition.
I'm sure yes, but I ask the question anyway, did you mate the ends of the coil wires in series, joining the end of the previous coil with the beginning of the next coil (considering the direction of the 'winding)?
FR
Luc, j'ai fait ce dessin pour aider à la réflexion. C'est votre configuration sur le rotor à 30 rainures, avec chaque bobine sur 6 rainures. Toutes les paires de bobines dans chacune des 30 rainures sont en opposition.
Je suis certain que oui, mais je pose la question quand même, avez-vous bien accouplé les extrémités des fils des bobines en série, en joignant la fin de la bobine précédente avec le début de la bobine suivante (en considérant le sens de l'enroulement) ?
-
Hi Luc,
I think Mosha points out the problem:
I saw your video I noticed that only 6 led are active, if I understand the diagram of pmgR, it would take 12 active contact by step, we would say that in this case 3x10 coil are active instead of 6x5 coil?
The number of magnetic half poles have to be an even number as magnetic fields always curls back forming loops. This is a problem in your stator! It is a 1.5 poled stator as it has 1.5 pole sets. Thus a return path for the last pole is missing or actually 1.5 poles are missing if making a three poled stator.
Regards
Ole
-
Flux path with two positive and one negative input. If all three inputs have the same polarity there's no magnetic field generated.
Regards
Ole
-
Hi Luc,
I think Mosha points out the problem:
The number of magnetic half poles have to be an even number as magnetic fields always curls back forming loops. This is a problem in your stator! It is a 1.5 poled stator as it has 1.5 pole sets. Thus a return path for the last pole is missing or actually 1.5 poles are missing if making a three poled stator.
Regards
Ole
Ole, that is not correct. Take a look at the H-bridge image from before (with red and black wires) and the one below. One LED in Luc's setup controls 1 H-bridge. Each H-bridge makes a connection to +Vss with red output and to GND with black output. So even though you only see 3 LEDs on, 6 connections are made (three to Vss and three to GND).
See the image below when H-bridges 1, 11 and 21 are on: all 6 poles are activated in this case in opposite directions from eachother.
The only thing I can think of is that maybe the frequency is too high for L/R coil times and iron stator/rotor, or coils where not connected properly on the stator (start and end of winding reversed, or coil put in while rotated 180deg. But I asked Luc this same question and he said he carefully paid attention to all this when assembling the rotor.
The other thing is that he was able to spin the small magnet without problem, so the only thing I can think of is that the current Arduino frequency is too high.
Luc, I suggest you upload the sketch with the potentiometer so you can change the frequency to a lower/higher one easily and see what happens with the output coil voltage (make sure to leave it open, no load). Changing the frequency you should see the voltage increase when frequency goes higher (until you hit the R/L cut-off frequency). Voltage should go down when the frequency goes down. I suggest playing with it in the lower frequency range like 1-20Hz or so.
Also, put the magnet back in and start at a low frequency and let it spin, then turn up the frequency to see when it cuts out so you know how high you can go in frequency before it stops spinning (of course the thing has some mass, so it will not be an exact cut-off but it will give you a ball-park value).
PmgR
-
Hi PmgR,
See the image below when H-bridges 1, 11 and 21 are on: all 6 poles are activated in this case in opposite directions from eachother.
The only thing I can think of is that maybe the frequency is too high for L/R coil times and iron stator/rotor, or coils where not connected properly on the stator (start and end of winding reversed, or coil put in while rotated 180deg. But I asked Luc this same question and he said he carefully paid attention to all this when assembling the rotor.
The other thing is that he was able to spin the small magnet without problem, so the only thing I can think of is that the current Arduino frequency is too high.
That looks OK then.
I would suggest increasing the frequency as transformers and inductors have to have quite much inductance at low frequencies. The parasitic resistance of the wire becomes dominating which is just waste of power as heat. If using ferrite as magnetic conductor the frequency could be say 50kHz or more depending on ferrite type. This gives a very much higher power density. Just look at how light weight a several hundred Watts power supply of high switching frequency is compared to a 50Hz power supply of the same power. The high frequency requires less inductance of the coils. The motor stator can't take that high frequency but should be OK for perhaps 100Hz.
Regards
Ole
-
Hi Luc, i think that little details can change everything, i see that Pierre stator winding is similar to the attached image, and your winding, look different.
Regards,
GM
-
Hi Luc, i think that little details can change everything, i see that Pierre stator winding is similar to the attached image, and your winding, look different.
Regards,
GM
I agree that looks more like Pierre's windings but your drawing does not explain how it is wound.
Can you explain more of what you think is going on?
Regards
Luc
-
I made 2 videos, the first one in English and the next in French.
These videos are to explain the coils firring sequence and what I believe to be the reason why there's next to no flux going through the center core coil.
English video: https://youtu.be/wnHXpeu-Szo (https://youtu.be/wnHXpeu-Szo)
Fr. J'ai fait 2 vidéos, la première en anglais et la suivante en français.
Cette vidéo a pour but d'expliquer la séquence d'allumage des bobines et ce que je crois être la raison pour laquelle il n'y a pas de flux passant par la bobine du noyau central.
Video en français: https://youtu.be/b4io8wZCb-s (https://youtu.be/b4io8wZCb-s)
-
Look very carefully at the code differences between PMGR and Pierre's code posted from
http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued -moderated / msg518835 / # msg518835 (http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg518835/#msg518835)
There is an OFFSET !!!!!
THERE IS A FULL ON / OFF POSITION AT THE BEGINNING / END of Pierre's Code! This would allow a very strong SINGLE coil magnetic field to be placed with no overlap!
The offset allows for the inductive kickback to be pulled around for a full cycle before released!
-
Hello, I am following this thread from the beginning. I was very impressed by Pierre generator. Very professional thread, all which are involved here have a lot of experience in these issues.
All my respect to Luc, his prototype is very impressive and expensive.
I am not an expert, not even a professional, I am more like an amator.
I want share with my point of view, because I know that if you focus too much to one idea, you miss other solutions.
From my point of amator view, there no 30/36 coils energized all time, as you Luc mentioned in the last video. I believe that only the coils which are energized are exactly the coils where the LEDs are on. When led is off, the coils not energized anymore, allowing bemf to go to caps. If all coils are energized, how bemf can take place?
I believe like this: all the time is on three coils from stator and Pierre made the "rotor" with a certain number of turns like in a normal transformer. So all the time only 3 coils are inducing the current to the rotor.
Again, I am just an amator, please ignore if this is wrong.
Cheers!
Alex
-
Hi Luc
Three suggestions:
Put in some proper backemf/recoil collecting steering diodes!!!!!
Pierre said plain as day this is the secret.
Do not rely on the internal diodes within the H switches to do anything at all....they certainly will not be filling up any capacitors!!!
Squeeze in a big vise the stator assembly so that it actually squeezes the stator onto the rotor and there is very good contact between the rotor and stator and near no airgap.
You can see how Pierre has hard time installing his rotor and it is very tight squeeze plus looks like good contact between rotor and stator surfaces. and no airgap.
Use the same wire and same length of wire as Pierre uses in his rotor - parallel bifilar 20 GA and I think it was 900 feet in each bifilar half??? that rubeer coated wire I saw you use will be very lousy stuff to use my opinion
Anyways keep going don't stop!! Stay positive don't give up until it loops. (then work on it even more)
-
luc ,
j'ai visionné ta vidéo je remarque que seul 6 led sont actif ,si je comprend bien le schéma de pmgR ,il faudrait 12 contacte actif
par pas ,on dirais que dans ton cas présent 3x10 bobine sont actif au lieu de 6x5 bobine ?
Mosha
I saw your video I noticed that only 6 led are active, if I understand the diagram of pmgR, it would take 12 active contact by step, we would say that in this case 3x10 coil are active instead of 6x5 coil?
hi,all
désolé ,j'ai mal interpreté l'action que représente une LED actif ,merci à L192 d'avoir clarifier les chose .et pardon pour cette
confusion .
cordialement ,Mosha
sorry, I misinterpreted the action of an active LED, thanks to L192 for clarifying the things .and sorry for this confusion .
-
?
-
Hello Luc,
did I miss something ; can you explain to me how is ordered the closing of the contact (green arrow) which allows the passage of the negative current?
Thank you
FR
Bonjour Luc,
j'ai loupé quelque chose ; pouvez-vous m'expliquer comment est commandée la fermeture du contact (flèche verte) qui permet le passage du courant négatif ?
Merci
-
I made 2 videos, the first one in English and the next in French.
These videos are to explain the coils firring sequence and what I believe to be the reason why there's next to no flux going through the center core coil.
English video: https://youtu.be/wnHXpeu-Szo (https://youtu.be/wnHXpeu-Szo)
Fr. J'ai fait 2 vidéos, la première en anglais et la suivante en français.
Cette vidéo a pour but d'expliquer la séquence d'allumage des bobines et ce que je crois être la raison pour laquelle il n'y a pas de flux passant par la bobine du noyau central.
Video en français: https://youtu.be/b4io8wZCb-s (https://youtu.be/b4io8wZCb-s)
Hi Gotoluc,
Actually it was 5 coils not a single coil and when I added the next coil group (5 coils) opposite polarity the output dropped due to the partial cancellation of the MMF.
I was going to conduct a single coil test but now I know what is happening I don't need to do that.
Regards
L192
-
Pic 1 Recapitulation
Pic 2 Two types of winding Overlapped Non overlapped
-
Luc,
The way you showed your sequence in the latest video to me is totally wrong.
I think it should be ,5 coils putting out a north, at the same time 180 degrees away 5 coils putting out a south, and then progress the fields one slot at a time.
You have 3 fields n,s,n....n,s,n?? I'm not sure if this is what you have ,but if it is this would explain the low output.
confused artv
-
Hi Gotoluc,
Actually it was 5 coils not a single coil and when I added the next coil group (5 coils) opposite polarity the output dropped due to the partial cancellation of the MMF.
I was going to conduct a single coil test but now I know what is happening I don't need to do that.
Regards
L192
Hi L192
When you say "one slot as a gap" between poles, do you mean that the slot should be completely blank/empty? Or this slot contains the last coil of the previous pole and the first coil of the next pole? Is that possible for a winding graphic representation of your idea?
Luc, is there any chance for a mistake when you were connecting your coils between each other? Out of the "no-current at all" result, looks like that you accidentally have connected them as cw+ccw+cw+ccw...etc. Can you verify this easily? Or else you can fire them one by one and check the polarity with a compass.
-
Hi Jeg,
Its in post 496.
Regards
L192
-
Attached represents about the best we can do for a 30 or 36 slot stator whilst generating 6 poles.
So in the case of the 30 slot stator it would be 4 coils at a 3 slot pitch and for the 36 pole stator it would be 4 coils at a 4 slot pitch.
I have added Pierre's 36 slot stator 6 coil scheme. I think semiconductor switches will have a hard time with the clashing poles.
Regards
L192
-
Good morning everyone,
Just to let you all know that 2 new members have joined, so their posts were not visible and waiting for my Moderator approval and Listener191 also had an email issue which also needed moderator approval.
So please see all posts above to read these now visible posts
I will also be translating Pierre's new PM he sent me. So stay tuned for those updates.
Regards
Luc
Fr. Bonjour à tous,
Juste pour vous faire savoir que 2 nouveaux membres ont rejoint, donc leurs messages n'étaient pas visibles et attendaient l'approbation de modérateur et Listener191 avait aussi un problème de courrier électronique qui nécessitait également l'approbation de modérateur.
Alors s'il vous plaît voir tous les messages ci-dessus pour lire ces messages maintenant visibles
Je traduirai aussi les nouveaux PM de Pierre qu'il m'a envoyé. Alors restez à l'écoute pour ces mises à jour.
Cordialement
Luc
-
The below are two new messages I received from Pierre after he viewed my last French video.
Fr. Ci-dessous son deux nouveaux messages que jai reçus de Pierre après avoir vu ma dernière vidéo française.
Yes, I know that 6 pole without current variation does not give much but my device has a variation of current. Congratulations you just discovered one of my secret. There still remains more to discover, then you will see the performance I achieved. And yes, there is really 6 field that rotate, except, there really is a variation which you need to know how to do so you can vary the coils. It may be possible that your configuration can achieve it but I'm not sure of your configuration, you will need to experiment. One thing is sure, if you had 5 pole it will not work. You see, you start to find solutions to the problems.
Sorry, I had left you a quick message since I was not home. Yes you can make a fluctuation between the field while having 6 magnetic field and can be all done in series. I was able to do it it. There are several ways to do it and you could have done it with only 2 pole in series, 1 north and 1 south with all coils on.
I would of needed to considerably increased the speed but with relays it is not possible. You can do it as you want but it is one of the conditions to get overunity.
You still have one solution to find but the basis is to have a good rotation of the field, a north at one end of the rotor and a south to the other side and a variation of current if you want a maximum of amperage and it's better kept all the coils in series in this configuration but you really are on the right track. Now I understand why you did not have much output with the program that I saw. Everything is explainable. Have a good day
Fr. Oui, je sait que 6 pole sans variation de courant ne donne pas grand chose, mais moi j'ai une variation de courant. Félicitations tu vient de découvrir un de mes secret. Il en reste encore un peut a devouvrir et tu va avoir le performance que j'ai fait. Mais oui, il y a vraiment 6 champ qui tourne sauf qu'il y a bien une variation, suffit de savoir comment faire pour varier les bobines. Il se peut que ta configuration faisse le travail mais je ne suis pas sure de ta configuration, tu peut experimenter. Une chose est sûre, si tu avait 5 pole cela ne fonctionnera pas tu voit, tu commence à trouver des solution au problème.
Fr. Bon désolé, je t'ai laisser un message rapidement mais je n'était pas chez moi. Oui tu peut faire une fluctuation entre les champ en ayant 6 champ magnétique et tu peut faire toute en série. Je l'ai fait. Il y a plusieurs façon de faire et tu aurait pu faire avec seulement 2 pole en série 1 nord et 1 sud et toute les bobine allumée.
J'aurais du considérablement augmenté la vitesse, mais avec des relais ce n'était pas possible. Tu peut le faire comme tu le veut mais c'est l'une des condition pour faire un overunity.
Il te reste qu'une solution a trouver, mais la base est de bien faire tourner le champ, un nord a une extrémité du rotor et un sud a l'autre coté et une variation de courant si tu veut un maximum d'ampérage et vaut mieux resté en série pour toute les bobine dans cette configuration mais tu est vraiment sur la bonne voie. Maintenant je comprend pourquoi tu n'avait pas grand chose a la sortie avec le program que j'ai vue. Tout s'explique. bonne journée
-
Hello Luc,
did I miss something ; can you explain to me how is ordered the closing of the contact (green arrow) which allows the passage of the negative current?
Thank you
FR
Bonjour Luc,
j'ai loupé quelque chose ; pouvez-vous m'expliquer comment est commandée la fermeture du contact (flèche verte) qui permet le passage du courant négatif ?
Merci
Hello MichelM, please see the below drawing to understand how the coils are powered and connected.
Fr. Bonjour MichelM, s'il vous plaît voir le dessin ci-dessous pour comprendre comment les bobines sont alimentées et connectées.
-
I received the below private message from MileHigh which I'm posting since it's content is participative.
@MileHigh, I think you can post in this topic but your post would only be visible once I approve them and could end up not being seen. So you can PM me and I'll post what is informative or constructive.
From MH
Listener191 put up a hand sketch in post #458 and better drawing in post #465 that shows the flux cancellation problems with overlapping north-south contiguous sets of 5+5 coils and then he proposes a "solution" by separating the north and south sets of coils far apart so that they don't "interfere" with each other.
But the problem is that with even the separation you still get massive amounts of flux cancellation.
Listener in his new diagram thinks a 3-slot pitch coil configuration looks like this:
NNN
_NNN
__NNN
And he thinks that that all looks "additive" and solves the flux cancellation problem.
But the reality is that this is false.
Let's look at a single 3-slot pitch coil and a single 5-slot pitch coil:
Do they look like this?
_NNN_
_NNNNN_
The answer is NO, they look like this:
...SSSSSNNNSSSSS...
...SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS...
On either side of each "north" coil you have SOUTH. And that will cancel out some of the flux on both sides.
So here is what a 5-slot pitch "solution" looks like just for one polarity:
SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS
_SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS
__SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS
___SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS
____SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS
Then on top of that, what about all of the net flux generated in the stator that is not lined up with the stationary rotor?
It doesn't really have a nice return path to complete the flux loop, does it? On either side of the coils in the stator there is air, and air sucks for conducting the magnetic flux. The vast majority of the flux is going to complete the loop inside the metal of the stator itself. That means some of the flux is not going to be "nice" and it is going to "punch though" the stator in the opposite direction that you think it should be going in because it has to loop back around the coil somehow. And that means even more flux cancellation will be taking place because there is no proper magnetic circuit to channel the flux in a proper loop.
It's a double-whammy mess.
-
I received the below private message from MileHigh which I'm posting since it's content is participative.
@MileHigh, I think you can post in this topic but your post would only be visible once I approve it and could end up not being seen. So you can PM me and I'll post what is informative or constructive.
From MH
Listener191 put up a hand sketch in post #458 and better drawing in post #465 that shows the flux cancellation problems with overlapping north-south contiguous sets of 5+5 coils and then he proposes a "solution" by separating the north and south sets of coils far apart so that they don't "interfere" with each other.
But the problem is that with even the separation you still get massive amounts of flux cancellation.
Listener in his new diagram thinks a 3-slot pitch coil configuration looks like this:
NNN
_NNN
__NNN
And he thinks that that all looks "additive" and solves the flux cancellation problem.
But the reality is that this is false.
Let's look at a single 3-slot pitch coil and a single 5-slot pitch coil:
Do they look like this?
_NNN_
_NNNNN_
The answer is NO, they look like this:
...SSSSSNNNSSSSS...
...SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS...
On either side of each "north" coil you have SOUTH. And that will cancel out some of the flux on both sides.
So here is what a 5-slot pitch "solution" looks like just for one polarity:
SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS
_SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS
__SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS
___SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS
____SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS
Then on top of that, what about all of the net flux generated in the stator that is not lined up with the stationary rotor?
It doesn't really have a nice return path to complete the flux loop, does it? On either side of the coils in the stator there is air, and air sucks for conducting the magnetic flux. The vast majority of the flux is going to complete the loop inside the metal of the stator itself. That means some of the flux is not going to be "nice" and it is going to "punch though" the stator in the opposite direction that you think it should be going in because it has to loop back around the coil somehow. And that means even more flux cancellation will be taking place because there is no proper magnetic circuit to channel the flux in a proper loop.
It's a double-whammy mess.
Yes he is correct about the stator poles coupling to the back stator either side of the pole group however, this situation changes when the rotor is in registration with a pole as the rotor then offers a lower reluctance path across to the opposite polarity pole.
L192
-
The below are two new messages I received from Pierre after he viewed my last French video.
Fr. Ci-dessous son deux nouveaux messages que jai reçus de Pierre après avoir vu ma dernière vidéo française.
Yes, I know that 6 pole without current variation does not give much but my device has a variation of current. Congratulations you just discovered one of my secret. There still remains more to discover, then you will see the performance I achieved. And yes, there is really 6 field that rotate, except, there really is a variation which you need to know how to do so you can vary the coils. It may be possible that your configuration can achieve it but I'm not sure of your configuration, you will need to experiment. One thing is sure, if you had 5 pole it will not work. You see, you start to find solutions to the problems.
Sorry, I had left you a quick message since I was not home. Yes you can make a fluctuation between the field while having 6 magnetic field and can be all done in series. I was able to do it it. There are several ways to do it and you could have done it with only 2 pole in series, 1 north and 1 south with all coils on.
I would of needed to considerably increased the speed but with relays it is not possible. You can do it as you want but it is one of the conditions to get overunity.
You still have one solution to find but the basis is to have a good rotation of the field, a north at one end of the rotor and a south to the other side and a variation of current if you want a maximum of amperage and it's better kept all the coils in series in this configuration but you really are on the right track. Now I understand why you did not have much output with the program that I saw. Everything is explainable. Have a good day
Fr. Oui, je sait que 6 pole sans variation de courant ne donne pas grand chose, mais moi j'ai une variation de courant. Félicitations tu vient de découvrir un de mes secret. Il en reste encore un peut a devouvrir et tu va avoir le performance que j'ai fait. Mais oui, il y a vraiment 6 champ qui tourne sauf qu'il y a bien une variation, suffit de savoir comment faire pour varier les bobines. Il se peut que ta configuration faisse le travail mais je ne suis pas sure de ta configuration, tu peut experimenter. Une chose est sûre, si tu avait 5 pole cela ne fonctionnera pas tu voit, tu commence à trouver des solution au problème.
Fr. Bon désolé, je t'ai laisser un message rapidement mais je n'était pas chez moi. Oui tu peut faire une fluctuation entre les champ en ayant 6 champ magnétique et tu peut faire toute en série. Je l'ai fait. Il y a plusieurs façon de faire et tu aurait pu faire avec seulement 2 pole en série 1 nord et 1 sud et toute les bobine allumée.
J'aurais du considérablement augmenté la vitesse, mais avec des relais ce n'était pas possible. Tu peut le faire comme tu le veut mais c'est l'une des condition pour faire un overunity.
Il te reste qu'une solution a trouver, mais la base est de bien faire tourner le champ, un nord a une extrémité du rotor et un sud a l'autre coté et une variation de courant si tu veut un maximum d'ampérage et vaut mieux resté en série pour toute les bobine dans cette configuration mais tu est vraiment sur la bonne voie. Maintenant je comprend pourquoi tu n'avait pas grand chose a la sortie avec le program que j'ai vue. Tout s'explique. bonne journée
Hi,
FR/
variation du flux magnétique ?
je pense qu'il y'a déjà une variation du flux du au fait de cour circuiter 1/5 bobine soit 20%. c'est peut être pas suffisant et qu'il
faudrait simplement en courcircuiter 2 à 3 bobine à la fois ca va permettre une augmentation du courant dans les autres bobines
qu'en penser vous ?
cordialement ,Mosha
ENvariation of the magnetic flux? I think there is already a variation in the flow of the fact of running circuit 1/5 coil or 20%. it may not be enough and we should simply short 2 to 3 coil at a time it will allow an increase in the current in the other coils
what do you think?
-
Hello, I am following this thread from the beginning. I was very impressed by Pierre generator. Very professional thread, all which are involved here have a lot of experience in these issues.
All my respect to Luc, his prototype is very impressive and expensive.
I am not an expert, not even a professional, I am more like an amator.
I want share with my point of view, because I know that if you focus too much to one idea, you miss other solutions.
From my point of amator view, there no 30/36 coils energized all time, as you Luc mentioned in the last video. I believe that only the coils which are energized are exactly the coils where the LEDs are on. When led is off, the coils not energized anymore, allowing bemf to go to caps. If all coils are energized, how bemf can take place?
I believe like this: all the time is on three coils from stator and Pierre made the "rotor" with a certain number of turns like in a normal transformer. So all the time only 3 coils are inducing the current to the rotor.
Again, I am just an amator, please ignore if this is wrong.
Cheers!
Alex
Hi Alex,
There is a rotary pattern of poles with a distributed amplitude of MMF however, you are correct, I have measured no coil recovery current from any of the half bridges in operation, as no coil actually turns off. We are missing something that Pierre has not shared.
Regards
L192
-
The below are two new messages I received from Pierre after he viewed my last French video.
Fr. Ci-dessous son deux nouveaux messages que jai reçus de Pierre après avoir vu ma dernière vidéo française.
Yes, I know that 6 pole without current variation does not give much but my device has a variation of current. Congratulations you just discovered one of my secret. There still remains more to discover, then you will see the performance I achieved. And yes, there is really 6 field that rotate, except, there really is a variation which you need to know how to do so you can vary the coils. It may be possible that your configuration can achieve it but I'm not sure of your configuration, you will need to experiment. One thing is sure, if you had 5 pole it will not work. You see, you start to find solutions to the problems.
Sorry, I had left you a quick message since I was not home. Yes you can make a fluctuation between the field while having 6 magnetic field and can be all done in series. I was able to do it it. There are several ways to do it and you could have done it with only 2 pole in series, 1 north and 1 south with all coils on.
I would of needed to considerably increased the speed but with relays it is not possible. You can do it as you want but it is one of the conditions to get overunity.
You still have one solution to find but the basis is to have a good rotation of the field, a north at one end of the rotor and a south to the other side and a variation of current if you want a maximum of amperage and it's better kept all the coils in series in this configuration but you really are on the right track. Now I understand why you did not have much output with the program that I saw. Everything is explainable. Have a good day
Fr. Oui, je sait que 6 pole sans variation de courant ne donne pas grand chose, mais moi j'ai une variation de courant. Félicitations tu vient de découvrir un de mes secret. Il en reste encore un peut a devouvrir et tu va avoir le performance que j'ai fait. Mais oui, il y a vraiment 6 champ qui tourne sauf qu'il y a bien une variation, suffit de savoir comment faire pour varier les bobines. Il se peut que ta configuration faisse le travail mais je ne suis pas sure de ta configuration, tu peut experimenter. Une chose est sûre, si tu avait 5 pole cela ne fonctionnera pas tu voit, tu commence à trouver des solution au problème.
Fr. Bon désolé, je t'ai laisser un message rapidement mais je n'était pas chez moi. Oui tu peut faire une fluctuation entre les champ en ayant 6 champ magnétique et tu peut faire toute en série. Je l'ai fait. Il y a plusieurs façon de faire et tu aurait pu faire avec seulement 2 pole en série 1 nord et 1 sud et toute les bobine allumée.
J'aurais du considérablement augmenté la vitesse, mais avec des relais ce n'était pas possible. Tu peut le faire comme tu le veut mais c'est l'une des condition pour faire un overunity.
Il te reste qu'une solution a trouver, mais la base est de bien faire tourner le champ, un nord a une extrémité du rotor et un sud a l'autre coté et une variation de courant si tu veut un maximum d'ampérage et vaut mieux resté en série pour toute les bobine dans cette configuration mais tu est vraiment sur la bonne voie. Maintenant je comprend pourquoi tu n'avait pas grand chose a la sortie avec le program que j'ai vue. Tout s'explique. bonne journée
The easiest way to vary the current through all of the coils is with PWM.
We are generating a travelling wave via the rotating poles lets say at 10Hz, then via PWM we superimpose 60Hz on top of the 10Hz wave?
L192
-
Just a repetition from my post in energeticforum:
I come to think of this when I reed Pierres last letter.
Part of the Figuera patent.
A)
(pat.1908) " circulates a proper current, which is taken from one foreign
origin into one or more electromagnets, magnetize one or more
electromagnets"
" and while the current is higher or lower the magnetization of
the electromagnets ((one or more)) is decreasing or increasing and varying"
decreasing or increasing and varying
B)
(pat.1914) " but in no case is there any communication between the induced coil
and the inductor coil "
C)
(pat.1914) " and we will collect from these induced ((y)) the resulting
phenomena experienced from those inductors. ((N, S)) "
-
Hi,
FR/
variation du flux magnétique ?
je pense qu'il y'a déjà une variation du flux du au fait de cour circuiter 1/5 bobine soit 20%. c'est peut être pas suffisant et qu'il
faudrait simplement en courcircuiter 2 à 3 bobine à la fois ca va permettre une augmentation du courant dans les autres bobines
qu'en penser vous ?
cordialement ,Mosha
ENvariation of the magnetic flux? I think there is already a variation in the flow of the fact of running circuit 1/5 coil or 20%. it may not be enough and we should simply short 2 to 3 coil at a time it will allow an increase in the current in the other coils
what do you think?
Oui, Mosha, c'est un très bon point et un moyen possible qui doit être pris en considération.
De plus, le programme original de Pierre qu'il m'a envoyé contenait un petit problème qui a été corrigé par PmgR et peut-être d'autres. Cependant, nous devrions considérer cela comme un indice possible et non comme une erreur de la part de Pierre.
Merci d'avoir porté cela à notre attention.
Nous avons beaucoup de bons esprits ici et en travaillant ensemble, nous serons en mesure de résoudre chaque problème au fur et à mesure.
Cordialement
Luc
Eng. Yes, Mosha, that is very good point and a possible way which needs consideration.
Also, Pierre's original program he sent me contained a glitch of some kind which was corrected by PmgR and maybe others. However, we should be looking at this as a possible hint and not an error on Pierre's part.
Thank you for bringing this to our attention.
We have a lot of good minds here and by working together we will be able to solve each issue as they come.
Regards
Luc
-
The easiest way to vary the current through all of the coils is with PWM.
We are generating a travelling wave via the rotating poles lets say at 10Hz, then via PWM we superimpose 60Hz on top of the 10Hz wave?
L192
The other way around. We have to build a low frequency with the help of a high frequency switching. The sketch needs a variable to be set so to increase the "on" time of the pulse, coil after coil and then back again to 50% for a full cycle. It is easy i guess but first lets solve the overlapping problem. Looks like Pierre's new topology solves this issue and still keeps the uniformity all around the stator.
-
Another very important variation we need to consider when using Solid State vs Relay switching is, we know Pierre is pushing his relays to their mechanical limits and he has said many times he would like to even go to higher frequencies but the relays can't handle it.
So the reality is, when pushing a relay to its mechanical limit you get to a point that even though you program tells the relay to stay on for x amount of time, it actually does much less. So when using solid state components which does not suffer from this issue (time reduction) we need to consider this. So we should have the ability to reduce duty cycle (on time) and overlap time to tune the device's input power and overall efficiency.
Regards
Luc
Fr. Une autre variation très importante que nous devons prendre en compte lors de l'utilisation de la commutation Solid State vs Relay est que nous savons que Pierre pousse ses relais à leurs limites mécaniques et il aimerait même aller à des fréquences plus élevées mais les relais ne peuvent pas le gérer.
Donc, en réalité, lorsque vous augmentez un relais à sa limite mécanique, vous arrivez à un point où, même si vous programmez le relais pour qu'il reste allumé pendant x temps, il en fait beaucoup moins. Donc, lorsque vous utilisez des composants à l'état solide qui ne souffre pas de ce problème (réductiont de temps), alors nous devons considérer cela et devrions avoir la possibilité de réduire le cycle de service (à temps) et le temps de chevauchement pour régler la puissance d'entrée de l'appareil et l'efficacité globale
Cordialement
Luc
-
The other way around. We have to build a low frequency with the help of a high frequency switching. The sketch needs a variable to be set so to increase the "on" time of the pulse, coil after coil and then back again to 50% for a full cycle. It is easy i guess but first lets solve the overlapping problem. Looks like Pierre's new topology solves this issue and still keeps the uniformity all around the stator.
Indeed, Luc, upload the potentiometer sketch to the Arduino and put the rotary magnet back in, start at a low frequency, get the magnet spinning and then turn up the frequency to see what happens.
PmgR
-
Hi Everyone
Why no backemf/recoil recovery steering diodes on each relay or H bridge switch???????
This energy is being totally disregarded and shoved into garbage can, like most electrical engineers with the proper schooling will do.
Again I mention Pierre said plain as day in Luc's video that the "coil return" (he calls it) is the secret!!!
Why not take what he points out as truth??
That backemf/recoil energy is very much stronger with mechanical switching since such low resistance to the switching....also note that you place steering diodes on the SWITCH, not really the inductor - the energy "comes" from the switch you could say.
So there is that point I want to make the other point maybe even more important (maybe not)
Lets say you shove that magnet wire up through slot 1 and down through slot 6....now you have created an electromagnets of that distance through the stator poles, N one end, S other for example....
So very simple.
Now what about all the winds in between 1 and 6?
They all become INDDUCED PICKUP WINDS (sharing common core) and they will for sure make lots and lots of power especially all combined together too....
BUT will only "make" this power if you put DIODES on those winds and guide this energy into a cap bank for example where to put it (what Pierre does!)
No diodes, you will see nothing!
My personal perhaps warped opinion is that THIS is where the huge amount of energy produced in Pierres DZ generator comes from (my theory sorry)
Pulse one coil - induce 4 or 5 in
concsequence but it is not a consequence it is a reinforcement of energy created and this energy fills up the cap bank, keeps it looping with no more input, once you also pre0charge the cap bank.
ALSO
There is a "combination" (coherence as Ole will call it) of the induced pickup winds, and the backemf/recoil/flyback energy - this makes the caps fill up even faster....
Anyways in conclusion it looks like to me the diodes are being completely ignored in Pierre's build, and I will guess everyone is thinking the internal diodes in the H-bridges are doing this work, but actually they will not do shit (sorry) they are only there to be a protection mechanism, not a steering mechanism of this energy....
Try to pull out the backemf/recoil with any transistor or mosfet without some fast steering diodes guiding into caps....
Try tp put any emergy into caps with induced pickup winds that share common core with primary pulse??
All will be fruitless without the diodes into caps.
-
72 diodes connected Only to + and somewhere ? (72 relays, 36 coils)
And middle connections without labels 35 empty 36 = one single point between two coils and two relays with TWO diodes in parallel ??
How are the diodes connected on the Arduino compared with Pierres connections?
-
Hi Everyone
Why no backemf/recoil recovery steering diodes on each relay or H bridge switch? ??? ???
This energy is being totally disregarded and shoved into garbage can, like most electrical engineers with the proper schooling will do.
Again I mention Pierre said plain as day in Luc's video that the "coil return" (he calls it) is the secret!!!
Why not take what he points out as truth??
That backemf/recoil energy is very much stronger with mechanical switching since such low resistance to the switching....also note that you place steering diodes on the SWITCH, not really the inductor - the energy "comes" from the switch you could say.
So there is that point I want to make the other point maybe even more important (maybe not)
Lets say you shove that magnet wire up through slot 1 and down through slot 6....now you have created an electromagnets of that distance through the stator poles, N one end, S other for example....
So very simple.
Now what about all the winds in between 1 and 6?
They all become INDDUCED PICKUP WINDS (sharing common core) and they will for sure make lots and lots of power especially all combined together too....
BUT will only "make" this power if you put DIODES on those winds and guide this energy into a cap bank for example where to put it (what Pierre does!)
No diodes, you will see nothing!
My personal perhaps warped opinion is that THIS is where the huge amount of energy produced in Pierres DZ generator comes from (my theory sorry)
Pulse one coil - induce 4 or 5 in
concsequence but it is not a consequence it is a reinforcement of energy created and this energy fills up the cap bank, keeps it looping with no more input, once you also pre0charge the cap bank.
ALSO
There is a "combination" (coherence as Ole will call it) of the induced pickup winds, and the backemf/recoil/flyback energy - this makes the caps fill up even faster....
Anyways in conclusion it looks like to me the diodes are being completely ignored in Pierre's build, and I will guess everyone is thinking the internal diodes in the H-bridges are doing this work, but actually they will not do shit (sorry) they are only there to be a protection mechanism, not a steering mechanism of this energy....
Try to pull out the backemf/recoil with any transistor or mosfet without some fast steering diodes guiding into caps....
Try tp put any emergy into caps with induced pickup winds that share common core with primary pulse??
All will be fruitless without the diodes into caps.
Hi konehead,
My test device collects all the coils return (inductive discharge) back into my 5 Farad super capacitor power rails.
You can see the current return from the current probe in this video which I made for programing but hasn't been shared yet.
The return may represent about 30% of the input power. However, my output coil sucks, maybe 1 or 2% of the input power.
We don't yet know of or understand all of Pierre's secrets.
Looking forward to seeing your test results and device.
Regards
Luc
Video Link: https://youtu.be/SSKH8qmb5VQ (https://youtu.be/SSKH8qmb5VQ)
-
Hi Luc, in my understanding of this device, you need first magnetize the core and after them sustain this with much little requeriments of energy, for that reason the field can't be detroyed, because if you destroy the field destroy the core magnetization, in Pierre video when he connect power supply to the arduino, begin first one initial sequence (i suppose that is for the core magnetization) and after that the working sequence well knowed.
Regards,
GM
-
Hi Luc, in my understanding of this device, you need first magnetize the core and after them sustain this with much little requeriments of energy, for that reason the field can't be detroyed, because if you destroy the field destroy the core magnetization, in Pierre video when he connect power supply to the arduino, begin first one initial sequence (i suppose that is for the core magnetization) and after that the working sequence well knowed.
GM
" in Pierre video when he connect power supply to the arduino, begin first one initial sequence (i suppose that is for the core magnetization) and after that the working sequence well knowed. "
I can confirm that. It's easy to see in slow mo.
Has that something to do with all Pierres diodes going to plus?
It is strange that Pierres digital voltmeter COMES ON and lits BEFORE the main 5 Hz Arduino sequence starts ???
3:rd film 10.0 min.
-
" in Pierre video when he connect power supply to the arduino, begin first one initial sequence (i suppose that is for the core magnetization) and after that the working sequence well knowed. "
I can confirm that. It's easy to see in slow mo.
Has that something to do with all Pierres diodes going to plus?
It is strange that Pierres digital voltmeter COMES ON and lits BEFORE the main 5 Hz Arduino sequence starts ???
3:rd film 10.0 min.
I believe he is talking about this....I thought the same ?
-
72 diodes connected Only to + and somewhere ? (72 relays, 36 coils)
And middle connections without labels 35 empty 36 = one single point between two coils and two relays with TWO diodes in parallel ??
How are the diodes connected on the Arduino compared with Pierres connections?
35 36
coil relay 2xdiodes
orange|blue|black,green
-
Hello
Try it.
Which type of diode does Pierre use?
Are sb 580 schottky diode sufficient?
80V, 5A
-
Andy71
Thanks.Very valuable circuit.I wonder if we can make smaller scale model this way. How to eliminate trigger coil and turn both MPS transistors from Arduino at the same moment ? Can you post such modified version too ?
-
The easiest way to vary the current through all of the coils is with PWM.
We are generating a travelling wave via the rotating poles lets say at 10Hz, then via PWM we superimpose 60Hz on top of the 10Hz wave?
L192
I believe you are on the right track! Look at Peirre's scope shot, you clearly see the variations of pulse width. Pierre has 24 lines of code, while PMGR(LUC's code) has 20 lines of code. BTW, the bug discussed earlier in the code, does not make a huge enough difference in the current variation. You have three ways to approach variation. 1. Time, 2. Amplitude, 3. Frequency. Just like sound has three principle elements.
If we divide the code into 4 quarters, you can think of each quarter as a typical quarter wave! Set each quarter of the code with alternating delay values. The total freq can remain the same, in Luc's code, 20 total lines = 1 cycle or one FULL WAVE. We already know that varying the freq. of the loop with delays varies the current draw. Why not purposely set alternating groups of delays to simulate variation of current!! Does this make sense?
Other thoughts,
1. Do the variation of delay values on the half wave. Not sure this will work, but worth a try.
2. Vary the offsets (instead of 5,5,5,5 make it 1,5,5,5,4)
3. Alternating on the the full-wave!
I don't believe variations of delay between the HIGH's and LOW's will make a difference! You don't establish WAVE, you just establish overlap control of the windings. So you can't think of delay variation based on the switch, you have to think of it as a variation on the wave, in quarters, half, fullwave.
Cheers,
JerDee
-
We already know that varying the freq. of the loop with delays varies the current draw. Why not purposely set alternating groups of delays to simulate variation of current!! Does this make sense?
JerDee
A simple test: Set the Arduino to 50Hz and via a cap modulate the pot-input from a signal-generator (sinus, square? etc.) with a lower freq.
/ Arne
-
A simple test: Set the Arduino to 50Hz and via a cap modulate the pot-input from a signal-generator (sinus, square? etc.) with a lower freq.
/ Arne
Yes, I believe this has to be synced to a harmonic of the FULLWAVE of the code. I may be wrong on this.
Also, along your thoughts, the original code had a ADC value mapped to the delay value. So yes, a sine, square..etc.. to the ADC is a possibility. If you look at this approach, Pierre could have used a SQUARE wave to alternate the delay values. I see alternation of two sets on his scope shot!
JerDee
-
Update video: https://youtu.be/cpce2mnn5G8
-
A very interesting video Luc.
Am glad the Propeller has sorted things, perhaps also because your friend nearby can actually look at any problems to fix them and likely could do so far quicker than shooting videos etc for help here.
If it works it works :)
So...you pull coil 30 and things improve. Do you think that there is a secondly function of the microcontroller code ?
To create an imbalance and, for want of better words, the natural entropy is what manifests as an OU situation for those split microseconds of every time it changes ? That section would tie into the PWM thoughts and apologies to all if i'm slow on that one !
Or, perhaps, remove 30, 24, 18, 12, 6 and see what happens.
-
For comparison
Actually your waveform is not too bad Gotoluc!
Added the adjacent poles.
L192
-
New results using a Variation program written by jerdee: https://youtu.be/bLJsMcGm6AQ (https://youtu.be/bLJsMcGm6AQ)
The below pictures are Pierre's Stator windings then My Stator windings (related to video)
-
Scope shot of current with H30 Connected and then without H30 connected using the Variation program by jerdee demonstrated in above video.
-
New results using a Variation program written by jerdee: https://youtu.be/bLJsMcGm6AQ (https://youtu.be/bLJsMcGm6AQ)
The below pictures are Pierre's Stator windings then My Stator windings (related to video)
I think it is still a 6 slot pitch.
L192
-
New results using a Variation program written by jerdee: https://youtu.be/bLJsMcGm6AQ (https://youtu.be/bLJsMcGm6AQ)
The below pictures are Pierre's Stator windings then My Stator windings (related to video)
Take a look at my stator from another angle. See how the top winding twists.
If these were wound tighter they would look very much like Pierre's.
L192
-
New video from Pierre about his stator windings (Correct link this time)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSnjIoQ2rh8
Maybe someone can transcribe the French and then translate it into English.
It is not clear to me (I can't understand spoken French very well) why he has coils grouped in sets of three (not six) and what the numbers at the bottom of his chart mean. I think he also states the number of windings per coil and talks about a spiral wind?
PmgR
-
this one works!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSnjIoQ2rh8
-
I was away for 4 hours and it is now past 1am. I made a copy of Pierre's winding instructions video and will explain tomorrow after viewing it after 10am New York time.
Pierre will probably delete the video from his youtube account when he knows I have a copy.
Regards
Luc
Fr. J'étais absent pendant 4 heures et il est maintenant passé 1h du matin. J'ai fait une copie de la vidéo des instructions bobinage de Pierre et j'expliquerai demain après l'avoir vu a 10h heure de New York.
Pierre probablement supprimera la vidéo de son compte YouTube lorsqu'il sait que jai une copie.
Cordialement
Luc
-
this one works!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSnjIoQ2rh8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSnjIoQ2rh8)
Thanks Pierre for taking the time to make a video of exactly how your stator coil winding were done.
Regards
Luc
Fr. Merci à Pierre d'avoir pris le temps de faire une vidéo de la façon exacte dont le bobinage de votre stator a été réalisé.
Cordialement
Luc
-
5 connectors , confirmation
-
Frequency, current switching ??
-
Transcription (j'espère sans erreur) de l'audio de la vidéo "filage première bobine" de Pierre :
FR
Bonsoir Luc,
je vais t'expliquer quand même comment j'ai filé mon ancien rotor.
Tu vois, c'est pas bien compliqué. Là, moi j'ai fait comme tu as fait, un coup de six bobines.
En principe, j'ai monté comme ça. Je suis allé dans le sixième? Je suis revenu.
J'ai fait trente-cinq tours, je crois.
Une fois que les trente-cinq tours ont été faits, je me suis sorti un fil ici.
puis j'ai continué. Au lieu de retourner ici, je suis reparti ici.
Puis j'ai refait encore 35 tours, puis là, je me suis mis encore dans celle d'à-côté.
Puis j'ai fait ça jusqu'au bout.
Puis arrivé au bout, et bien là, il fallait que je remplisse parce que là, moi j'avais deux espaces, deux étages de fil.
Ça fait que le premier étage était monté ici, mais il fallait que ça revienne.
Et ça, ce sont les fils de l'autre bout. C'est comme la trente-deux, elle se termine ici, et est revenue à la première.
Après, il fallait que je fasse l'autre après, ainsi de suite.
Cela a tout bouclé ma spire au complet.
C'est juste pour ça que ça donne la moitié d'une spire différente.
En fait, comme une boucle carrée, je pense que ça fait la même chose.
c'est juste que tous sont comme décalés un peu. Moi, c'est juste vraiment une spirale que j'ai faite.
Là, tu vois, je pense que ça donne le même résultat que la mienne.
C'est pour ça qu'on n'a pas le même résultat visuel, mais physiquement, je pense que ça donne la la même chose.
C'est pour ça qu'à la fin, moi j'ai comme une grosse motte qui s'est faite.
C'est parce que les fils ne devaient pas être égaux comme les tiens parce que tu as roulé ça sur un rouleau.
Moi, j'ai tout fait ça sur une mitaine. C'est pour ça que c'est moins beau visuellement.
Mais en théorie ça devrait donner le même résultat que l'autre.
Si tu veux comparer la prochaine bobine, là, avec celle-là, là.
Il y a une bonne différence de grosseur.
J'en suis juste là. J'avance pas vite. Je ne passe pas beaucoup d'heures là-dessus par semaine.
Une étape à la fois, une bobine à la fois.
Dès que je serai plus avancé que ça, je te montrerai la vidéo de suite.
Merci.
-
Frequency, current switching ??
Right. Something is varying
The funny thing is that I thougt I could hear that variation or see it at the films beceause it is a relativily wide variation as we can see from the osc.scope shot.
My Reply #472 on: April 15, 2018
(Figuera pat.1908) " circulates a proper current, which is taken from one foreign
origin into one or more electromagnets, magnetize one or more
electromagnets"
" and while
A)) the current is higher or lower the magnetization of the electromagnets
B )) one or more (electromagnets )
C)) is decreasing or increasing and varying " (frequency variation?? )
Regards Arne
-
New video from Pierre about his stator windings (Correct link this time)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSnjIoQ2rh8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSnjIoQ2rh8)
Maybe someone can transcribe the French and then translate it into English.
It is not clear to me (I can't understand spoken French very well) why he has coils grouped in sets of three (not six) and what the numbers at the bottom of his chart mean. I think he also states the number of windings per coil and talks about a spiral wind?
PmgR
Good morning everyone,
Pierre's video confirms we had the coil winding instructions correct. The reason why his winding look so different is he wound his coils directly on the stator itself one wire turn at a time compared to me and probably others we pre-wound our coils on a form. So a 36 slot stator has 36 coils with a 6 slot space and once the first 6 coils are in place the beginning of coil 7 merges in the same slot (slot 6) of the end of coil 1 and you keep this pattern all the way around to the end. which is exactly what I did. However, it may of been better for my 30 slot stator to use a 5 slot space.
Then all the coils are connected in series, end of coil 36 connects to the beginning of coil 1 and end of coil 1 connects to the beginning of coil 2 and you keep this pattern all the way around. All coils must be wound the same direction and set in the slots the exact same way.
This confirms we don't need any unusual variation in our windings themselves and that we only need to focus on the switching sequence to achieve the desired effect.
Thanks Pierre for helping clear that question.
Regards
Luc
Fr. La vidéo de Pierre confirme que nous avions les instructions d'enroulement de les bobines correctes. La raison pour laquelle son enroulement a l'air si différent est qu'il a enroulé ses bobines directement sur le stator un tour de fil à la fois par rapport à moi et probablement d'autres nous pré-enroulons nos bobines sur une forme. Donc, un stator de 36 fentes a 36 bobines avec un espace de 6 fentes et une fois que les premières 6 bobines sont en place, le début de la bobine 7 fusionne dans la même fente (fente 6) de la fin de la bobine 1 et vous gardez ce motif jusqu'à les 36 bobine sont en place. ce qui est exactement ce que j'ai fait. Cependant, il a peut-être été préférable que mon stator à 30 emplacements utilise un espace de 5 fentes.
Après, toutes les bobines sont connectées en série, la fin de la bobine 36 se connecte au début de la bobine 1 et la fin de la bobine 1 se connecte au début de la bobine 2 et vous gardez ce motif tout autour. Toutes les bobines doivent être enroulées dans le même sens et placées dans les fentes exactement de la même manière.
Cela confirme que nous n'avons pas besoin d'une variation dans nos enroulements de bobine eux-mêmes et que nous devons nous concentrer sur la séquence de commutation pour obtenir l'effet désiré.
Merci Pierre d'avoir aidé à clarifier cette question.
Cordialement
Luc
-
FR:
Quelques autres questions non répondues:
- pourquoi 37 transistors? Quel est le rôle du 37 ème ?
- Il semble qu'il y a un ou plusieurs fils supplémentaires connectés directement au stator. Ces fils ne passent pas par l'un des 5 connecteurs verts. A quoi servent-ils ?
- Comme Pierre cache encore un secret es-ce vrai que le programme Arduino publié est celui vraiment utilisé ?
EN:
Some other unanswered questions:
- why 37 transistors? What is the role of the 37th?
- It seems that there is one or more additional wires connected directly to the stator. These wires do not go through one of the 5 green connectors. What are they doing?
- As Pierre still hides a secret is it true that the Arduino program published is the one really used?
-
Good morning everyone,
Pierre's video confirms we had the coil winding instructions correct. The reason why his winding look so different is he wound his coils directly on the stator itself one wire turn at a time compared to me and probably others we pre-wound our coils on a form. So a 36 slot stator has 36 coils with a 6 slot space and once the first 6 coils are in place the beginning of coil 7 merges in the same slot (slot 6) of the end of coil 1 and you keep this pattern all the way around to the end. which is exactly what I did. However, it may of been better for my 30 slot stator to use a 5 slot space.
Then all the coils are connected in series, end of coil 36 connects to the beginning of coil 1 and end of coil 1 connects to the beginning of coil 2 and you keep this pattern all the way around. All coils must be wound the same direction and set in the slots the exact same way.
This confirms we don't need any unusual variation in our windings themselves and that we only need to focus on the switching sequence to achieve the desired effect.
Thanks Pierre for helping clear that question.
Regards
Luc
Fr. La vidéo de Pierre confirme que nous avions les instructions d'enroulement de les bobines correctes. La raison pour laquelle son enroulement a l'air si différent est qu'il a enroulé ses bobines directement sur le stator un tour de fil à la fois par rapport à moi et probablement d'autres nous pré-enroulons nos bobines sur une forme. Donc, un stator de 36 fentes a 36 bobines avec un espace de 6 fentes et une fois que les premières 6 bobines sont en place, le début de la bobine 7 fusionne dans la même fente (fente 6) de la fin de la bobine 1 et vous gardez ce motif jusqu'à les 36 bobine sont en place. ce qui est exactement ce que j'ai fait. Cependant, il a peut-être été préférable que mon stator à 30 emplacements utilise un espace de 5 fentes.
Après, toutes les bobines sont connectées en série, la fin de la bobine 36 se connecte au début de la bobine 1 et la fin de la bobine 1 se connecte au début de la bobine 2 et vous gardez ce motif tout autour. Toutes les bobines doivent être enroulées dans le même sens et placées dans les fentes exactement de la même manière.
Cela confirme que nous n'avons pas besoin d'une variation dans nos enroulements de bobine eux-mêmes et que nous devons nous concentrer sur la séquence de commutation pour obtenir l'effet désiré.
Merci Pierre d'avoir aidé à clarifier cette question.
Cordialement
Luc
Hi Gotoluc,
If you look at my post 491, you will see that your distribution is better than mine, for forming a sine, so I would keep what you have.
The overlap however, is not efficient and to get a good sine distribution without overlap, 6 coils and 6 poles requires a much larger stator than 36 slots.
I think Pierre realized this when he was talking about reducing to 4 coils on the original stator. He realized he would loose too much MMF.
Anyway he still achieved OU, so push on with what we know.
Regards
L192
-
FR:
Quelques autres questions non répondues:
- pourquoi 37 transistors? Quel est le rôle du 37 ème ?
- Il semble qu'il y a un ou plusieurs fils supplémentaires connectés directement au stator. Ces fils ne passent pas par l'un des 5 connecteurs verts. A quoi servent-ils ?
- Comme Pierre cache encore un secret es-ce vrai que le programme Arduino publié est celui vraiment utilisé ?
EN:
Some other unanswered questions:
- why 37 transistors? What is the role of the 37th?
- It seems that there is one or more additional wires connected directly to the stator. These wires do not go through one of the 5 green connectors. What are they doing?
- As Pierre still hides a secret is it true that the Arduino program published is the one really used?
Yes, there was a 37 pinMode listed in Pierres original code, so it controlled something, but not a relay (at least not one we can see), as relay boards are fully occupied with slot switches.
My guess would be a PWM controlled semiconductor switch for the DC supply into the switches.
Regards
L192
-
Update video: https://youtu.be/cpce2mnn5G8
Fantastic build and very interesting. Can your measuring equipment calculate integral of the current waveform? Those figures would be interesting.
-
Pole strength fluctuation, transition and coil shorted:
Yellow:
*coil connection and polarity, first phase, continues for all (not shown)
*(+1,-5), (+1,+2,-5), (+1,+2,+3,-5) firing sequence, strength and shorted
*Apples for positive and negative connection (negative not shown)
White:
*(+2,-6), pole movement, next phase (+2,+3,-6),(+2,+3,+4,-6) and everything repeats again
1 2
2 3
3 4
(Does anybody see how end where counter flux go’s? I tried principle on the small DC motor/generator, didn’t work good as I had 3 coils rotor only,( 3, 5,.. problem). I will try it with 4 coils rotor)
PS.
Luc, you have everything there so if you see it correct jus reprogram little bit.
(Just like heating/cooling pump :-))
Thanks
d.
-
Can Pierre tell us the type of diodes?
-
The deductive powers here are amazing.
There's 36 independantly wound coils. This gives the experimenter the absolute most control over what gets activated when.
There could roughly be 5 phases with 6 coils each in series... However, the timing on the LEDs of the transistors show that only 3 sets are active at a time a set being 1 or 2 coils on...
There board had 7 transistors across and 5 rows; which is only 35, but there is one toward the upper left that's like #36.
In the first two rows - 7 LEDs across, the LEDs light first going from right to left across the first and third rows. As third row ends, the right side of row 2 starts. Row 3 is just 2 LEDs ahead of row one. But then the end of row 2 is reached and then 3 and 1 start again...
So there's not just 5 phases...
the 4th row starts at the right, goes across to the left and then starts again immediately. when it gets to the 4th LED to the left, the 5th row starts... and remains offset 2 les...
// this really needs mono font/preformat... it's not \[code\] ...
row 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . o . . . . . o o . . . . o o . . . o o . . . o o . . .
row 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o . . . . o o
I really liked andy's animation in the other thread, though it should be made more obvious it's more of a stepping like ....
coil 1,2 on;
coil 1 going off, coil 3 coming on,
coil 2,3 on
coil 2 going off, coil 4 coming on,
coil 3,4 on
etc....
There's a few stutters on the 4th and 5th rows... where it kinda stops...
Kinda like the iron filings moved around in two semi-circles and kinda stopped at the two sides; I thought maybe it was because that was also where the laminated core was ... but it's not quite.
-
The numbers at the bottom of my sketch have no relation with what I explained in the video. The sketch is something I made for myself at beginning of my project. It is useless to look it try to find an answer to your questions. If you understood French, then you would know the sketch was only used to explain how I wound my stator.
Regards
Pierre Cotnoir
-
Blue LED sequence
https://youtu.be/vii6o20_Vv8 (https://youtu.be/vii6o20_Vv8)
Sorry i forgot to publish the video.
i'ts Ok now.
-
Hi Luc, in my understanding of this device, you need first magnetize the core and after them sustain this with much little requeriments of energy, for that reason the field can't be detroyed, because if you destroy the field destroy the core magnetization, in Pierre video when he connect power supply to the arduino, begin first one initial sequence (i suppose that is for the core magnetization) and after that the working sequence well knowed.
Regards,
GM
DC magnetization around the stator reduces output with either polarity.
AC magnetization around the stator does increase output although I have only tested this asynchronously, which results in a cyclic boost in output.
Sine modulation of the DC rail also boosts output but once again I have only tested asynchronously, so this was also cyclic.
Also I have placed a 20V AC transformer secondary in series with the 30 coils (30 slot stator), this also cyclically boosts output .
Regards
L192
-
DC magnetization around the stator reduces output with either polarity.
AC magnetization around the stator does increase output although I have only tested this asynchronously, which results in a cyclic boost in output.
Sine modulation of the DC rail also boosts output but once again I have only tested asynchronously, so this was also cyclic.
Also I have placed a 20V AC transformer secondary in series with the 30 coils (30 slot stator), this also cyclically boosts output .
Regards
L192
You can't have any DC flux. The rotor needs AC flux, only that way can you generate a voltage.
This setup is a combo of a 2 phase and 3 phase generator. The way each of the 6 coils (6 poles) needs to be biased is as follows (assuming they are numbered 1 through 6 in clock wise direction):
Coilset 1 and Coilset 4 needs to be biased 180deg out of sync (so if coilset 1 = +1, coilset 4 is -1 or 180deg).
Same for coilset 3 and coilset 6.
Same for coilset 5 and coilset 2.
Coilset 1, 5 and 3 need to be biased 120deg out of phase so if coilset 1 is 0deg, coilset 5 needs to be at 120deg and coilset 3 at 240deg.
Only in that way will the flux properly add up when it goes through the stator. You need to make sure that you can bias your coils in this way while looping around.
PmgR
-
It's a moving magnetic field.... literally, and the hard way...
in the case of allowed induction paths; (as tinman recently demonstrated, a incomplete loop is not likely to absorbe collapsing/expanding flux)
It's like those radus mag boos/( magnetic reluctance motor? conventionally?) Flux-gate generator?
the thing is, it has a north in one semi-path and a south on the other, and they rotate, and skip back to the start and rotate again... and probably the thrash from left to right is more of the cycle's power than any other... it'd be nice to see what the output wave at the output coil (with a load) on the static-rotor, vs a logic state of the 36 others... though I'd take a raw pulse train at the capacitors... before any filtering/recapture diodes.
In the case of self induction (to go back to the first point )
As one field is energed and de-energizeswhat current is generated in the on the's going from no energy to positive current? Does the current just sort of continue in the winding with near 0 resistance instead of the one with infinite (relay open) resistance... well that's not what the arduino is doing huh? Because it entirely dis... well there is an overlap of each 2, but not 3... so I suppose the new one that's been enabled gets 2x the current? (The field resists the colapse....)? It's actually a dc(edit:NO!) output huh? Because the field never reverses through the center stator-rotor(?)
When the circuit is opened, the current that generated a magnetic does NOT instananously reverse... but rather it wants to continue. Or else, they wouldn't use filtering beads to smooth instantanous peaks/lulls in current. it(the current) will be induced in the same direction until the magneitc field is no more. In this case, the general field is not no more.
Perhaps that's where the stutter mapps... because it does get a good deal of mangic reluctance builtup in the iron... Probably there's a de-gaussing direction momentarily....(?)
I don't see how you will ever get anywhere near this with any of the coils in series with any other coil. (@gotoluc)
Edit:
Otherwise it's PMH's ... setting up magnetic loops between all of the possible stator fins through the block, and then collapsing them?
Oh i remember; there was a frequency measure on the output that was 60 hz So no it's not DC... but then 60 RPM
Edit2: Based on the last arduino video... This is the pattern...
Some of the coils are north, some are south.
Are the 72 relays connected power->relay->coil->relay->transistor drive/diode recapture so DPDT relays could work there?
1 transistor controls 2 relays... do the relays engage two pairs of coils? Or is it 2 breaks in the same circuit? (Only inventory can really answer)
I would think though that the polarity of any single coil is always the same....
The colored vertical bands group what seems to be a cyclic sub-group. The cycle block color changes going down for each cycle. A full pass (red blocks, or yellow, the green overflows into what would partially be the next cycle...) would be 16.666ms
-
Thank you for your help Pierre, looking forward to the translation from LUC.
Everyone, listen to the MP3 file attached.
I was able to do forensic audio on the YT vids and extract the timing pattern.
This was pitched down considerably and slowed down to hear the pattern clearly.
You will hear immediately the pattern that was placed in the original code. Pierre has been very honest! Two HIGH's at the beginning of 12 and TWO lows at the end of 12 pulses.
Each clack of the audio is a HIGH in the repeating pulsings of relays in the code. His code is correct!
1-High
2-High
low
3-High
low
4-High
low
5-High
low
6-High
low
7-High
low
8-High
low
9-High
low
10-High
low
11-High
low
12-High
low
low
Just wanted everyone to know that this is the pattern, and there is no confusion on this. This was meant to be in the code !!!
Jerdee
-
Why have we not thought of utilzing both a 36 and the 30 pole in normal generator cycles?
It is very clear that Pierre is using overlap of the code to push the magnetic field from set to another set of coils. He is also reversing the coils!
I believe the CODE pins are not suppose to line up with coil numbers in succession. The code is correct, its the connection to the coils. The HUGE clue is the TWO HIGH's and the TWO LOW in the code. LEARN the cycle of a generator.
We have to think about another way to connect the code pins to the correct arrangement of coils. Luc is only using 1/2 of his bridges and diode recovery. I REPEAT HE IS ONLY USING HALF BRIDGES. The coils need to be flipped just like a normal generator!!! This is why we are getting a very weak field and very little output.
Maybe this gif will help you all to think about a three phase system. THINK THINK THINK!
Look at the gif.
JerDee
[size=78%]https://solidstateelectricgenerator.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/syncron-generator.gif (https://solidstateelectricgenerator.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/syncron-generator.gif)[/size]
-
bonsoir a tous ,
j'ai regarder les progret que vous fesiez sur le site de overunity et naturelement j'ai vue l'exellent travail de luc et de sont superbe appareil qu'il a réussi a faire tourner un champ magnétique et il semble être sur la bonne voie mais il va toujour vous manquer quelque chose et je ne voit pas grand monde penser a ces points crutiaux vous êtes trop concentrer a faire une réplique de mon prototype les bobines,3pole ,6pole le nombre de transistor etc
je voit que personne ne sait jamais poser la vrai question de comment peut-on faire du courant et qu'est ce qui se passe en décomposant le cycle d'une génératrice ,si vous comprener vraiment cela par la suite vous serez en mesure de mieux comprendre le principe du dz générateur et vous n'aurez plus besoin d'essayer de copier le dz générateur qui est loin d'être parfait il y a beaucoup de chose a améliorer sur cette version
-permièrement ,que se passe t-il quand l'on approche une aimant d'une bobine il y a une variation du champ magnétique et plus l'on approche de la bobine collectrice il y a un champ d'opposition qui se crée donc une variation et l'intensité de cette aimant a une grande importance
donc VARIATION ET INTENSITÉ sont les mots a retenir
-deuxièmement ,quand la vitesse de déplacement de ce champ magnétique est passer rapidement plus grande seras la fluctuation sauf quand c'est une bobine électro-aimant il faut prendre note qu'il y a unTEMPS DE CHARGE de la bobine et si le champ magnétique est déplacé trop rapidement avant que la charge soit completement charger vous aurez une perte a ce niveau en plus de la perte du retour de bobine .
-troisiement ,le MOUVEMENT de ce champ magnétique que vous avez commencer a expérimenter donc vous commencer a comprendre
-et finalement il y a les RETOUR DE BOBINE si vous les canaliser au bon endroit et au bon moment vous aurez un alier très puissant et non seulement un destructeur de mosfet cela s'avère un partenaire très intéressant a utiliser
bien sure il y a des pertes dans les bobines et dans la resistance etc, mais si l'on compare le dz générateur a une génératrice avec un moteur a combustion qui a des perte de friction de chaleur et l'électro-aimant du rotor que l'on doit alimenter l'on doit frôler le 70% ou plus de perte cela ne se compare pas au dz générateur au quelle j'ai éliminer la plus grosse perte c'est a dire le moteur a combustion ,dans mon premier prototype j'ai fait des erreurs de conception
dans la bobine je croit que le fait de croiser les champs peuvent nuire a la performance c'est pour cela que j'ai changer ma méthode dans mon second prototype il y a surment plusieurs façon de concevoir un dz générateur je vient de vous fournir tout les ingrédient pour faire un tel apareil il suffit de faire votre propre recette avec les 4 point que je vous ait donner et il est très probable que vous obtiendrez un overunity il y a juste a mettre le bon dosage au bon endroit j'espère que vous prendrez note de ce message car c'est le secret du dz générateur ce sont les 4 point qui on été mentionner plus haut si un de ces points n'est pas dans le montage que vous faite vous n'aurez jamais un surplus d'énergie j'espère que mon commentaire vous seras utile pour la suite et je ne traduirai pas ce message je vais laisser une autre personne faire la traduction car il parait que google traduction n'est pas très bon pour avoir une bonne traduction bonne soirée la dessus .
pierre cotnoir
Thank you Pierre for the explanation.
This is my take on his four points:
1. He mentions the CHANGE of a magnetic field (which is achieved by rotating the magnetic poles at a frequency f by the Arduino) and he talks about the change in the STRENGTH of the magnetic field itself (which is achieved by the change in current through the coils). The largest current change occurs for the coils that are shorted for a short time during the Arduino overlap; before the overlap, the current through this coil is e.g. positive, during the overlap the current is constant, then after the overlap it reverses direction and becomes negative). So it changes from a positive current to a negative current (large dI/dt), so on top of the rotating magnetic field, there is an additional change in magnetic field due to the change in current direction. As a side note: generated voltage at output coil (and for BEMF) V=-dflux/dt where flux=L*I (inductance*current), so V=-(I*dL/dt+L*dI/dt), first term is caused by the spinning magnetic field (also called parametric variation), second term is caused by change of current (caused by switching of current direction).
2. He talks about how fast the magnetic field changes which is proportional to the frequency at which the field spins around (frequency f). So the faster you spin the field the larger the generated voltage. However he mentions the TIME CONSTANT (load speed) of a coil. The highest frequency a coil can respond to is f=R/(2*pi*L). He says that if you spin the field too fast, you will get a loss trying to charge coil and thus also in the return of the coil. In order to get the highest possible frequency, there is a trade-off between R and L. R is proportional to the number of windings, L is proportional to N^2 (square of N), so frequency is proportional to 1/N. So if you want a large frequency, you can't make too many windings per coil.
3. He talks about the MOVEMENT of the magnetic field here which is done by the Arduino and he says that is we need to study that first. This is why I suggested Luc go back to the small magnet and play with the Arduino code and speed it up and down to see where the TIME CONSTANT (load speed) of his coils are. For Luc's coils, inductance is about L=2mH and R=0.5ohms, so highest frequency possible is about 40Hz. This might explain why he has no output at 50Hz as the coils can't respond fast enough. Typical safety factor is a factor of 2 below the f_max, so keep the spin speed at 20Hz or below.
4. Lastly he talks about the RETURN OF THE COIL (output coil) which will be reflected back to each of the six coil sets. He says that if you collect them at the right spot (coil) and at the right point in time, it will provide useful energy instead of destroying your mosfet. He says this is the most important point. In my understanding, this will also explain why his device is not dependent on load. Actually, the more load he puts on, the higher the collected current will be.
PmgR
-
bonsoir a tous ,
champ d'opposition qui se crée donc une variation et l'intensité de cette aimant a une grande importance
donc VARIATION ET INTENSITÉ sont les mots a retenir
pierre cotnoir
How do you accomplish variance using digital relays?
-
How do you accomplish variance using digital relays?
I believe this is achieved during the overlap time of the Arduino when a coil is shorted, see my post above. The current in that particular coil will change direction, e.g. from +1 to -1 in a very short period of time (determined by L/R time of coil).
PmgR
-
Thank you Pierre for the explanation.
This is my take on his four points:
1. He mentions the CHANGE of a magnetic field (which is achieved by rotating the magnetic poles at a frequency f by the Arduino) and he talks about the change in the STRENGTH of the magnetic field itself (which is achieved by the change in current through the coils). The largest current change occurs for the coils that are shorted for a short time during the Arduino overlap; before the overlap, the current through this coil is e.g. positive, during the overlap the current is constant, then after the overlap it reverses direction and becomes negative). So it changes from a positive current to a negative current (large dI/dt), so on top of the rotating magnetic field, there is an additional change in magnetic field due to the change in current direction. As a side note: generated voltage at output coil (and for BEMF) V=-dflux/dt where flux=L*I (inductance*current), so V=-(I*dL/dt+L*dI/dt), first term is caused by the spinning magnetic field (also called parametric variation), second term is caused by change of current (caused by switching of current direction).
2. He talks about how fast the magnetic field changes which is proportional to the frequency at which the field spins around (frequency f). So the faster you spin the field the larger the generated voltage. However he mentions the TIME CONSTANT (load speed) of a coil. The highest frequency a coil can respond to is f=R/(2*pi*L). He says that if you spin the field too fast, you will get a loss trying to charge coil and thus also in the return of the coil. In order to get the highest possible frequency, there is a trade-off between R and L. R is proportional to the number of windings, L is proportional to N^2 (square of N), so frequency is proportional to 1/N. So if you want a large frequency, you can't make too many windings per coil.
3. He talks about the MOVEMENT of the magnetic field here which is done by the Arduino and he says that is we need to study that first. This is why I suggested Luc go back to the small magnet and play with the Arduino code and speed it up and down to see where the TIME CONSTANT (load speed) of his coils are. For Luc's coils, inductance is about L=2mH and R=0.5ohms, so highest frequency possible is about 40Hz. This might explain why he has no output at 50Hz as the coils can't respond fast enough. Typical safety factor is a factor of 2 below the f_max, so keep the spin speed at 20Hz or below.
4. Lastly he talks about the RETURN OF THE COIL (output coil) which will be reflected back to each of the six coil sets. He says that if you collect them at the right spot (coil) and at the right point in time, it will provide useful energy instead of destroying your mosfet. He says this is the most important point. In my understanding, this will also explain why his device is not dependent on load. Actually, the more load he puts on, the higher the collected current will be.
PmgR
To look at what we have at the moment running...
The distributed (lapped) windings that a pole consists of, create an increasing and then decreasing MMF in the rotor as the pole approaches and departs, then continuing with an opposite polarity pole in the same manner. It does this without having to increase the current through the pole coil group.
As we know that does not induce much EMF in the rotor winding, there must be something else of which I have still not seen anybody clearly explain. Pierre previously referred to his system having a variation in current.
1. Did he mean a variation in current that would result in a further variation of MMF already occuring due to the distributed windings? If so how so?
2. Or did mean something more drastic such as a complete reversal of current for the whole system, at some point i.e. swapping the relay feed rail polarity?
Regards
L192
-
I believe this is achieved during the overlap time of the Arduino when a coil is shorted, see my post above. The current in that particular coil will change direction, e.g. from +1 to -1 in a very short period of time (determined by L/R time of coil).
PmgR
ya could be more or less windings inbetween tap points too ...
like here if the coils were in series too I suppose you could activate sets of them... and for some, just reverse the polarity on the tap which would generate 'instant' opposite parlaity
http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg519932/#msg519932
-
Sine modulation of the DC rail also boosts output but once again I have only tested asynchronously, so this was also cyclic.
Also I have placed a 20V AC transformer secondary in series with the 30 coils (30 slot stator), this also cyclically boosts output .
I would like to thank all the people here especially Pierre who gave us a motivation to continue questing in this field.
Jerdee i am impressed! ;)
L192
By placing the secondary in series with the coils isn't actually the same as modulating the dc rail? In fact this is what i had in mind to do for varying the strength of the magnetic filed. But with a diode in between transformer and coils, so to feed the whole arrangement with a varying dc power signal.
What did you chose for driving your coils? L298 boards as Luc?
Guys i have my fresh painted stator on bench and plenty of aug22 wire. I am thinking to go like Pierre's second generator so to be able to cover this method as the most of you have built his first prototype. I have a small objection in the number of turns (Pierre used 95 turns) as it will not permit frequencies higher than few tenths of Hz. Perhaps D3's middle tapping idea is what it needs for experimentation. Will see..!
-
I would like to thank all the people here especially Pierre who gave us a motivation to continue questing in this field.
Jerdee i am impressed! ;)
L192
By placing the secondary in series with the coils isn't actually the same as modulating the dc rail? In fact this is what i had in mind to do for varying the strength of the magnetic filed. But with a diode in between transformer and coils, so to feed the whole arrangement with a varying dc power signal.
What did you chose for driving your coils? L298 boards as Luc?
Guys i have my fresh painted stator on bench and plenty of aug22 wire. I am thinking to go like Pierre's second generator so to be able to cover this method as the most of you have built his first prototype. I have a small objection in the number of turns (Pierre used 95 turns) as it will not permit frequencies higher than few tenths of Hz. Perhaps D3's middle tapping idea is what it needs for experimentation. Will see..!
Hi Jeg,
I have given up on the L298N boards, as soon as you increase current much over 4A I had multiple failures.
I have a BTS7960 twin bridge board on order for evaluation, but I have decided to now go with the relay boards until I can get an understanding of exactly how the recovery diodes are working, connected as Pierre has them. It looks like the current path is from ground via the remaining series coils in the group, though the coil that's been turned off then up through the diode on that side.
I would be reluctant to remove the lower diodes on a half bridge.
I went with 1000V 10A fast diodes for recovery.
Regards
L192
-
I made the attached gif animation of how I believe the fields are switched.
Regards
Ole
-
Hi Jeg,
I have given up on the L298N boards, as soon as you increase current much over 4A I had multiple failures.
I have a BTS7960 twin bridge board on order for evaluation, but I have decided to now go with the relay boards until I can get an understanding of exactly how the recovery diodes are working, connected as Pierre has them. It looks like the current path is from ground via the remaining series coils in the group, though the coil that's been turned off then up through the diode on that side.
I would be reluctant to remove the lower diodes on a half bridge.
I went with 1000V 10A fast diodes for recovery.
Regards
L192
Thanks L192. Even it is wise to use the original Pierre's gear, i am still thinking the diy bridge solution. Especially now with this current limit report of yours.
-
bonjour à tous ,
Merci Pierre pour les dernières informations ,et bonne continuation pour ton nouveau prototype .
Variation du champ magnétique et intensité ?
que pensez vous de créer deux fois six pole magnétique ,en utilisant deux set de 18 bobines puis de faire tourner 6 pole dans le
sens horlogique et les 6 autres dans le sens anti-horlogique .ainsi le rotor verra le flux magnétique s'intensifier en un temps réduit
cordialement ,Mosha
EN/Hello everyone , Thank you Pierre for the latest information, and good luck for your new prototype.
Magnetic field variation and intensity?
what do you think of creating twice six magnetic pole, using two sets of 18 coils and then spin 6 pole in the clockwise sense and the other six in the anti-clockwise direction. thus the rotor will see the magnetic flux intensify in a reduced time
best regards, Mosha
-
I made the attached gif animation of how I believe the fields are switched.
Regards
Ole
You are on the right track!! If you don't flip the polarity, you don't have a stronger AC field. When we think of a normal AC generator with Pierre's normal known code. We can split the code in half to reverse the polarity of the coils. Pierre's uses 24 cycles in his code, LUC is using 20 cycles. This means for a 30 pole generator you'll have 10 cycles for the north in one polarity, and 10 cycles of the south in the other polarity. This is why you see his videos cycle every other relay! You have to switch the field's direction to generate real power! We've only been testing in one direction.
I've sent code to LUC that supports this plan..and set the sequence back to what was originally given with Pierre. His code is correct, just changed to the 20 cycles (30 poles) instead of 24 cycles(36 poles). I've kept the wait 1 and wait 2 for his PWM control. But you'll see the two highs at the top, and the two lows at the bottom of the code, same as the audio that I investigated earlier.
Basically, taking the second half of the code or half wave and flipping polarity. Very similar to the concept Luc tried with shorter delays in the second half of the cycle and got interesting results. I think this is our MAJOR clue to work with these switches.
JerDee
Fr. Tu es sur la bonne piste!! Si vous n'inversez pas la polarité, vous n'avez pas de champ AC plus fort. Quand on pense à un générateur AC normal avec le code connu de Pierre. Nous pouvons diviser le code en deux pour inverser la polarité des bobines. Pierre utilise 24 cycles dans son code, LUC utilise 20 cycles. Cela signifie que pour un générateur de 30 pôles, vous aurez 10 cycles pour le nord dans une polarité, et 10 cycles du sud dans l'autre polarité. C'est pourquoi vous voyez dans les vidéos de Pierre un cycle sur tous les autres relais! Vous devez changer la direction du champ pour générer de la puissance réelle! Nous avons seulement testé dans une direction.
J'ai envoyé un code à LUC qui soutient ce plan ... et j'ai ramené la séquence à ce qui avait été donné à l'origine de Pierre. Son code est correct, juste changé pour les 20 cycles (30 pôles) au lieu de 24 cycles (36 pôles). J'ai gardé l'attente 1 et attendre 2 pour son contrôle PWM. Mais vous verrez les deux hauts en haut, et les deux bas en bas du code, comme dans le son audio que j'ai étudié plus tôt.
Fondamentalement, en prenant la deuxième moitié du code ou demi-onde et inversion de polarité. Très similaire au concept que Luc a essayé avec des retards plus courts dans la seconde moitié du cycle et obtenu des résultats intéressants. Je pense que c'est notre indice MAJEUR pour travailler avec ces commutateurs.
JerDee
-
I made the attached gif animation of how I believe the fields are switched.
Regards
Ole
Hi Ole,
your animation doesn't run. You may have to zip it and post it.
Regards
L192
-
You are on the right track!! If you don't flip the polarity, you don't have a stronger AC field. When we think of a normal AC generator with Pierre's normal known code. We can split the code in half to reverse the polarity of the coils. Pierre's uses 24 cycles in his code, LUC is using 20 cycles. This means for a 30 pole generator you'll have 10 cycles for the north in one polarity, and 10 cycles of the south in the other polarity. This is why you see his videos cycle every other relay! You have to switch the field's direction to generate real power! We've only been testing in one direction.
I've sent code to LUC that supports this plan..and set the sequence back to what was originally given with Pierre. His code is correct, just changed to the 20 cycles (30 poles) instead of 24 cycles(36 poles). I've kept the wait 1 and wait 2 for his PWM control. But you'll see the two highs at the top, and the two lows at the bottom of the code, same as the audio that I investigated earlier.
Basically, taking the second half of the code or half wave and flipping polarity. Very similar to the concept Luc tried with shorter delays in the second half of the cycle and got interesting results. I think this is our MAJOR clue to work with these switches.
JerDee
Fr. Tu es sur la bonne piste!! Si vous n'inversez pas la polarité, vous n'avez pas de champ AC plus fort. Quand on pense à un générateur AC normal avec le code connu de Pierre. Nous pouvons diviser le code en deux pour inverser la polarité des bobines. Pierre utilise 24 cycles dans son code, LUC utilise 20 cycles. Cela signifie que pour un générateur de 30 pôles, vous aurez 10 cycles pour le nord dans une polarité, et 10 cycles du sud dans l'autre polarité. C'est pourquoi vous voyez dans les vidéos de Pierre un cycle sur tous les autres relais! Vous devez changer la direction du champ pour générer de la puissance réelle! Nous avons seulement testé dans une direction.
J'ai envoyé un code à LUC qui soutient ce plan ... et j'ai ramené la séquence à ce qui avait été donné à l'origine de Pierre. Son code est correct, juste changé pour les 20 cycles (30 pôles) au lieu de 24 cycles (36 pôles). J'ai gardé l'attente 1 et attendre 2 pour son contrôle PWM. Mais vous verrez les deux hauts en haut, et les deux bas en bas du code, comme dans le son audio que j'ai étudié plus tôt.
Fondamentalement, en prenant la deuxième moitié du code ou demi-onde et inversion de polarité. Très similaire au concept que Luc a essayé avec des retards plus courts dans la seconde moitié du cycle et obtenu des résultats intéressants. Je pense que c'est notre indice MAJEUR pour travailler avec ces commutateurs.
JerDee
So that would mean north south sine like wave in the rotor followed every 180 degrees by a square wave when you flip the poles then followed by a sine wave?
L192
-
Thanks L192. Even it is wise to use the original Pierre's gear, i am still thinking the diy bridge solution. Especially now with this current limit report of yours.
My rotor cover 9 poles, so I am thinking of cutting off 1.5 poles width either side both ends so only a 6 pole width presents to the stator. Ideally I would like 5 but I can't remove that much.
I believe I am losing a lot of MMF, as this rotor was designed to sweep a distributed alternator stator phase winding that had a greater pole pitch, which makes sense, as 9 x 3 =27 so the rotor spans a phase with a single pole gap between each of the three phases.
My waveform was not as good as Gotoluc's and although our coil pitches are one slot different that doesn't explain what look like stator pole reversals.
All of the coils have had in-situ checks with a flux probe, so no I don't have coils reversed.
L192
-
Have discovered something on my rotor, don't know why I did not see it straight away.
There are two ceramic magnets let into the rotor faces.
These set up an initial field to get the alternator generating output. They are detrimental to our operation, as our flux will be reversing poles.
I removed these and have seen an improvement in output and symmetry , as you would expect. It does leave a 13mm x 30mm x5mm deep slot, that will increase the overall reluctance of the rotor, which is unfortunate. It may be possible to plug the slot with a piece that I am planning to cut of the ends to shorten the face to 6 poles.
This may also explain the strange reversals in the pulse waveforms that I was getting. Unfortunately until my relays arrive, I cannot run a full set of switches.
Regards
L192
-
Yes, you have to remove those magnets when using a Generator rotors. Those magnets are to start up the magnetization of the stator in most AC generators.
There's a product called Devcon which is a 2 part Iron resin.
Devcon video demo: https://youtu.be/zQXxdtki-x8 (https://youtu.be/zQXxdtki-x8)
-
Yes, you have to remove those magnets when using a Generator rotors. Those magnets are to start up the magnetization of the stator in most AC generators.
There's a product called Devcon which is a 2 part Iron resin.
Devcon video demo: https://youtu.be/zQXxdtki-x8 (https://youtu.be/zQXxdtki-x8)
Hi Gotoluc,
Thanks for the video.
Regards
L192
-
Well people are free to experiment with other configurations i they wish but I intend to stick with Pierre's original scheme, on the basis that it was shown to work and an understanding of how it works is the easiest path to further development, as there are too many variables otherwise.
Regards
L192
I agree L192,
Pierre has laid the foundations and gave away what needs to be achieved: http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg520075/#msg520075 (http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg520075/#msg520075)
Since then, there's 2 pages added of discussions which are not related to what Pierre has just shared. Why?... Pierre must be in disbelief of what's going on with people here when he just gave it all away.... if you ask me, that's disrespectful and insulting.
I'm going to go through those 2 pages now and will delete anything that's not related to what Pierre has just shared. There's been more than enough discussion of all kinds of possibilities and enough is enough.
Regards
Luc
Fr. Je suis d'accord L192,
Pierre vient de donner les bases de ce qui doit être réalisé: http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg520075/#msg520075
Depuis, il y a 2 pages de discussions qui ne sont pas liées à ce que Pierre vient de partager. Pourquoi? ... Pierre doit être incrédule de ce qui se passe avec les gens ici quand il vient de tout donner ... si vous me demandez, c'est irrespectueux et insultant.
Je vais maintenant parcourir ces deux pages et je vais supprimer tout ce qui n'est pas lié à ce que Pierre vient de partager. Il y a eu plus que suffisamment de discussions sur toutes sortes de possibilités et assez c'est assez.
Cordialement
Luc
-
Hi All,
I have been watching this with great interest but a few basic things don’t make sense to me, there is probably a simple answer but I need to ask the questions.
1. If there is a 4 ohm resistor in series with the transformer which then charges the supercapacitors assuming 24V DC after the rectifier should give 6A on the DC, which would be approx 1.5A on the 100V line.
If there is 2.5A in the primary then I would assume that there is 10A in the secondary of the transformer and this then does not make sense with a 4 ohm resistor.
I am sure there is a reason for this, but it is bugging me.
I am working on assembling the parts and have come to the conclusion that if each coil is driven by an H Bridge then it is possible to cover all options of coil connections using the H Bridges, if the coils are connected in series then you would get different currents in them depending on how they are switched as you would end up with coils in series which would effectively alter the resistance and therefor the current.
Connecting H Bridges in place of the relays will cause issues due to the freewheel diodes.
Would the recovery system work much better if high frequencies were used.
-
Hi All,
I have been watching this with great interest but a few basic things don’t make sense to me, there is probably a simple answer but I need to ask the questions.
1. If there is a 4 ohm resistor in series with the transformer which then charges the supercapacitors assuming 24V DC after the rectifier should give 6A on the DC, which would be approx 1.5A on the 100V line.
If there is 2.5A in the primary then I would assume that there is 10A in the secondary of the transformer and this then does not make sense with a 4 ohm resistor.
I am sure there is a reason for this, but it is bugging me.
I am working on assembling the parts and have come to the conclusion that if each coil is driven by an H Bridge then it is possible to cover all options of coil connections using the H Bridges, if the coils are connected in series then you would get different currents in them depending on how they are switched as you would end up with coils in series which would effectively alter the resistance and therefor the current.
Connecting H Bridges in place of the relays will cause issues due to the freewheel diodes.
Would the recovery system work much better if high frequencies were used.
Welcome dhodge,
I just approved your first post. However, this topic is more for the builders. Probably what you're asking about has been covered in the first topic which is still viewable to the public. Please search there for possible answers to your questions: http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/#.Wtj8ftYpDM0 (http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/#.Wtj8ftYpDM0)
Once you're convinced and you decide you want to build a test device then please post a video of your progress and feel free to participate here.
I'm sure you understand we cannot stop our research every time someone asks questions that have probably been covered.
Kind regards
Luc
Fr. Bienvenue dhodge,
Je viens d'approuver votre premier post. Cependant, ce sujet est plus pour les constructeurs. Probablement ce que vous demandez a été couvert dans le premier sujet qui est encore visible au public. S'il vous plaît chercher là pour des réponses à vos questions: http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/#.Wtj8ftYpDM0 (http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/#.Wtj8ftYpDM0)
Une fois que vous êtes convaincu et que vous décidez que vous voulez construire un appareil de test alors s'il vous plaît poster une vidéo de vos progrès et n'hésitez pas à participer ici.
Je suis sûr que vous comprenez que nous ne pouvons pas arrêter notre recherche chaque fois que quelqu'un pose des questions qui ont probablement été couvertes.
Sincères amitiés
Luc
-
So that would mean north south sine like wave in the rotor followed every 180 degrees by a square wave when you flip the poles then followed by a sine wave?
L192
Nope, Each half the code is changing polarity in succession. 5 poles = 60 degrees or one half the code cycle, while Pierre's is 6 poles.
E.g.
HBridge 1-5 is North, next
HBridge 6-10 become South, then FULL off position to collect, this is the double off position, and is seen on Pierre's scope shot. This is the inductive kickback from the coils and load.
The other two 120 degrees are doing this at the same time.
You always maintain an opposite field at 180 degrees. You have to have this for an AC output!
The code is running in a repeat loop at 120 degrees with a small rest period before repeating back to the start.
Every 60 degrees the polarity is switching, again this is each half of the code.
The code is working only at 120 degrees repeating back to 0 degrees.
GotoLuc, is only doing one half of the correct switching, He is not getting a strong polarity of NS across the load! Swing the last half of the code...and I believe we have something special. A much stronger potential across the load.
What does a magnet do to the current flow when it shifts from N to S? Without current flow moving back and forth, you have a very weak AC generator output, right? Easy questions, just proving a point. :)
Jerdee
-
Hi Ole,
your animation doesn't run. You may have to zip it and post it.
Regards
L192
Hi L192,
I attach it again. But this time it is a video file (.mp4). I hope this will work as it looks like only the first frame of the animated gif went through. The .mp4 file size is only a fraction of the animated gif file size. Put on repeat mode in the video viewer to see it loop like the original gif-file.
Regards
Ole
-
Nope, Each half the code is changing polarity in succession. 5 poles = 60 degrees or one half the code cycle, while Pierre's is 6 poles.
E.g.
HBridge 1-5 is North, next
HBridge 6-10 become South, then FULL off position to collect, this is the double off position, and is seen on Pierre's scope shot. This is the inductive kickback from the coils and load.
The other two 120 degrees are doing this at the same time.
You always maintain an opposite field at 180 degrees. You have to have this for an AC output!
The code is running in a repeat loop at 120 degrees with a small rest period before repeating back to the start.
Every 60 degrees the polarity is switching, again this is each half of the code.
The code is working only at 120 degrees repeating back to 0 degrees.
GotoLuc, is only doing one half of the correct switching, He is not getting a strong polarity of NS across the load! Swing the last half of the code...and I believe we have something special. A much stronger potential across the load.
What does a magnet do to the current flow when it shifts from N to S? Without current flow moving back and forth, you have a very weak AC generator output, right? Easy questions, just proving a point. :)
Jerdee
Doesn't that make a discontinuity in the waveform?
Regards
L192
-
Since then, there's 2 pages added of discussions which are not related to what Pierre has just shared. Why?... Pierre must be in disbelief of what's going on with people here when he just gave it all away.... if you ask me, that's disrespectful and insulting.
I'm going to go through those 2 pages now and will delete anything that's not related to what Pierre has just shared. There's been more than enough discussion of all kinds of possibilities and enough is enough.
I think that was too harsh approach with deleting posts which also had useful information in regards to why you have almost no current on output coil,etc. Please move them to general discussion thread (which now is locked) instead next time...
-
Hi Ole
Thanks for that mp4 animation. This has had made more sense to me how the fields rotate than 37 pages of written explanation.
My question to everyone here (including Pierre)
Is this how it is done????? Like is shown in Ole's animation?
I would think the field also flipping polarities every other "segment" would create more power, and not just moving....but I don't know as is usual.
Luc
I agree with T 1000 that is way to harsh of response. Nobody is asking or making you stop research with weird comments or tangential ideas they may post about the DZ generator.
I think Pierre would be more than happy reading any offshoot ideas or related designs people will come up with, fed by their confusion and wonder in how his DZ generator works.
This is human progress in understanding stuff finally and human progress in creativity too, using another idea to create another idea....
Seems to me nobody understand fully the DZ generator and all those WHYS? attached to full understanding - not even Pierre, as he has mentioned too that he does not know exactly why it works so well, so I think you should let the ideas and comments flow how they will,
it is easy to skip over stuff you think is dumb or insulting....And let Pierre decide if he is insulted by non-understanding or offshoot ideas of his DZ generator.
-
The answer why almost no current in pickup coils is in the how winding are made in replication attempt. I will repeat myself one more time but each coil is cancelling EMF of previous coil and are not how Pierre did explain in his videos. Back to the basics of three phase motor. Simple as that.
P.S. deletion of my posts which are not trolling here shows disrespect towards forum participants...
-
Hi L192,
I attach it again. But this time it is a video file (.mp4). I hope this will work as it looks like only the first frame of the animated gif went through. The .mp4 file size is only a fraction of the animated gif file size. Put on repeat mode in the video viewer to see it loop like the original gif-file.
Regards
Ole
Hi Ole
Thanks for the gif file. It represents exactly what sketch is doing. My personal opinion is that two moving poles covering the whole circumference instead of six, might be better because there are more steps per pole which is what we should want here.
-
A complement pic to Oles animation.
AND I agree to open the closed thread so more "wild" ideas can come thru without disturbing "the builders".
-
Hi L192,
I attach it again. But this time it is a video file (.mp4). I hope this will work as it looks like only the first frame of the animated gif went through. The .mp4 file size is only a fraction of the animated gif file size. Put on repeat mode in the video viewer to see it loop like the original gif-file.
Regards
Ole
Hello Ole,
good animation. This is the theoretical rotation of magnetic fields as I thought them too. But since the last indications that Pierre has communicated to us, I am not so sure that this is the case. Even if the reels actually seem to be ordered to move the fields such as in the animation, I think we have to think about how he arranged the reels. Notice: the last 6 reels are placed on the top layer; when these six coils are powered simultaneously, I think this produces a field that covers 11 stator grooves, not 6 grooves. I indicate it on the two images below. If this is the case, then magnetic fields are much more unbalanced than the theoretical fields. What do you think ?
FR
Bonjour Ole,
bonne animation. Ceci est la rotation théorique des champs magnétiques tels que je les pensais moi aussi. Mais depuis les dernières indications que Pierre nous a communiquées, je ne suis pas aussi certain que cela se passe ainsi. Même si les bobines semblent effectivement être commandées pour déplacer les champs tels que dans l'animation, je pense qu'il faut réfléchir à la façon dont il a agencé les bobines. Remarquez : les 6 dernières bobines sont placées sur la couche supérieure ; lorsque ces six bobines sont alimentées simultanément, je pense que cela produit un champ qui couvre 11 rainures du stator, et non 6 rainures. Je l'indique sur les deux images ci-dessous. Si tel est le cas, alors on a des champs magnétiques beaucoup plus déséquilibrés qu'avec les champs théoriques. Qu'en pensez-vous ?
-
Please note about 5 coils in "11 slot" spot winding wire direction is CCW on top of the rest of coils wire direction which are CW. In that spot the EMF cancellation is in full effect.
Then compare to Luc and L192 replications winding. You will see instant difference.
Cheers!
-
Sorry MichelM, but your conclusion is incorrect. The coils are producing a field that is 5 coils wide, not 11. I have reattached your drawing. If you look at the wires on the right side of the coil, they are coming towards you or maybe going away from you. But the wires on the left side of the coils are going in the OPPOSITE direction. That means that if the wires on the right are producing a north field then the wires on the left are producing a south field. I have built motors using that same principle where I had a north magnet over one set of wires and the south magnet over the other set of wires and it ran just fine.
-
Sorry citfta, but your conclusion is incorrect. The coils are producing a field that is probably narrower than 5 coils wide. See my pic above. :D :D :D
-
Sorry citfta, but your conclusion is incorrect. The coils are producing a field that is probably narrower than 5 coils wide. See my pic above. :D :D :D
If all coils are same around stator as those 5 overlapping and the end of each coil ends on +5th position from begining then you have very narrow space between North and South poles when making 2 poles with 1 coil spacing from each to the next. And this still makes N/S vector in the direction of the ring and not to towards center. This is not what you want in Pierre's replication...
-
Sorry citfta, but your conclusion is incorrect. The coils are producing a field that is probably narrower than 5 coils wide. See my pic above. :D :D :D
Hi seaad,
I share your opinion. If only these narrow fields act (the rest must still act), the current configuration of the winding of Luc does not have dominant magnetic fields, since its coils cover 6 grooves and are grouped in series of 5 coils. In his case, the 2 windings of all the grooves have fields in opposition. This is perhaps why his rotor is so weakly magnetized.
What I explained above and that I show on this image again, comes in addition and must be taken into consideration. In the configuration of Pierre, any series of 6 coils covers 11 grooves, it's a fact, but what I want to share is the observation that I made: such as Pierre wound his stator, the last 6 coils that he has placed not only cover 11 grooves, but they, and only these last 6 coils, cover the coils already in place in the grooves. This must necessarily change the magnetism of these 6 coils. And when, during the rotation of the fields, when these 6 coils are connected in series, their magnetic field must necessarily be different from the others, since in their 11 grooves, the same magnetic field is directed towards the center of the stator. This concerns about 1/3 of the circumference and not 1/6.
FR
Salut seaad,
je partage votre avis. Si seuls ces champs étroits agissent (le reste doit quand même agir), la configuration actuelle du bobinage de Luc ne possède pas de champs magnétiques dominants, puisque ses bobines couvrent 6 rainures et sont regroupées en séries de 5 bobines. Dans son cas, les 2 bobinages de toutes les rainures présentent des champs en opposition. C'est peut-être pour cela que sont rotor est si faiblement magnétisé.
Ce que j'ai expliqué ci-dessus et que je montre sur cette image à nouveau, vient en complément et doit être pris en considération. Dans la configuration de Pierre, n'importe quelle série de 6 bobines couvre 11 rainures, c'est un fait, mais ce que je souhaite partager, c'est la constatation que j'ai faite : tel que Pierre a bobiné son stator, les 6 dernières bobines qu'il a placées, non seulement couvrent 11 rainures, mais elles, et uniquement ces 6 dernières bobines, recouvrent les bobines déjà en place dans les rainures. Cela doit forcément modifier la magnétisme de ces 6 bobines. Et lorsqu'au cours de la rotation des champs, lorsque ces 6 bobines se trouvent connectées en série, leur champ magnétique doit forcément être différent des autres, puisque dans leurs 11 rainures, le même champ magnétique est dirigé vers le centre du stator. Cela concerne environ 1/3 de la circonférence et non 1/6.
-
Hi seaad,
I share your opinion. If only these narrow fields act (the rest must still act), the current configuration of the winding of Luc does not have dominant magnetic fields, since its coils cover 6 grooves and are grouped in series of 5 coils. In his case, the 2 windings of all the grooves have fields in opposition. This is perhaps why his rotor is so weakly magnetized.
What I explained above and that I show on this image again, comes in addition and must be taken into consideration. In the configuration of Pierre, any series of 6 coils covers 11 grooves, it's a fact, but what I want to share is the observation that I made: such as Pierre wound his stator, the last 6 coils that he has placed not only cover 11 grooves, but they, and only these last 6 coils, cover the coils already in place in the grooves. This must necessarily change the magnetism of these 6 coils. And when, during the rotation of the fields, when these 6 coils are connected in series, their magnetic field must necessarily be different from the others, since in their 11 grooves, the same magnetic field is directed towards the center of the stator. This concerns about 1/3 of the circumference and not 1/6.
FR
Salut seaad,
je partage votre avis. Si seuls ces champs étroits agissent (le reste doit quand même agir), la configuration actuelle du bobinage de Luc ne possède pas de champs magnétiques dominants, puisque ses bobines couvrent 6 rainures et sont regroupées en séries de 5 bobines. Dans son cas, les 2 bobinages de toutes les rainures présentent des champs en opposition. C'est peut-être pour cela que sont rotor est si faiblement magnétisé.
Ce que j'ai expliqué ci-dessus et que je montre sur cette image à nouveau, vient en complément et doit être pris en considération. Dans la configuration de Pierre, n'importe quelle série de 6 bobines couvre 11 rainures, c'est un fait, mais ce que je souhaite partager, c'est la constatation que j'ai faite : tel que Pierre a bobiné son stator, les 6 dernières bobines qu'il a placées, non seulement couvrent 11 rainures, mais elles, et uniquement ces 6 dernières bobines, recouvrent les bobines déjà en place dans les rainures. Cela doit forcément modifier la magnétisme de ces 6 bobines. Et lorsqu'au cours de la rotation des champs, lorsque ces 6 bobines se trouvent connectées en série, leur champ magnétique doit forcément être différent des autres, puisque dans leurs 11 rainures, le même champ magnétique est dirigé vers le centre du stator. Cela concerne environ 1/3 de la circonférence et non 1/6.
As Pierre explained, he hand wound the coils thats why they appear as they do. All of the coils polarities are the same in the series connection. Only the current direction is changing the poles North or South.
Regards L192
-
As Pierre explained, he hand wound the coils thats why they appear as they do. All of the coils polarities are the same in the series connection. Only the current direction is changing the poles North or South.
Regards L192
Pierre explained it! listener192 confirms
-
@ T1000,
I think all of Pierre's coils are wound CW, see mine they are all CW but look a little messed up where I ended.
I'm putting my rotating field on the inside and just using stock windings for the generating coils.
artv
-
Doesn't that make a discontinuity in the waveform?
Regards
L192
I apologize, you are correct! I stand corrected.
We will have to do twice the amount of control on H-Bridges.
Each line of switching in the code is HIGH BUT, 1 pin is for three positive polarity, and another pin HIGH for three negative polarities. Just need to make sure we can trigger three H-bridges from one high pin and use extra pins to switch polarity on the H-bridges.
Please see attached PDF to help the understanding.
All thirty H-bridges are firing for each half of the code. Twice per code loop, each in opposite polarity.
By doing this, you have three North fields in parallel and three South's in parallel with the DC source at any one point in time.
BTW...this lines up with Ole's animation and Pierre's original code.
Hope this helps, and apologize for this confusion. Please let me know if this looks incorrect.
Jerdee
-
I apologize, you are correct! I stand corrected.
We will have to do twice the amount of control on H-Bridges.
Each line of switching in the code is HIGH BUT, 1 pin is for three positive polarity, and another pin HIGH for three negative polarities. Just need to make sure we can trigger three H-bridges from one high pin and use extra pins to switch polarity on the H-bridges.
Please see attached PDF to help the understanding.
All thirty H-bridges are firing for each half of the code. Twice per code loop, each in opposite polarity.
By doing this, you have three North fields in parallel and three South's in parallel with the DC source at any one point in time.
BTW...this lines up with Ole's animation and Pierre's original code.
Hope this helps, and apologize for this confusion. Please let me know if this looks incorrect.
Jerdee
Hi Jerdee,
Yes I understand what you are proposing however, as we have multiple "all coils off" periods, what happen to the overlap to sustain the flux? Pierre made a point of explaining the use of the overlap.
I understand that the Bridge diodes will recover coil energy.
In Pierre's 36 slot stator, how do the positive side connected diodes shown on his drawing, recover the coil energy, if there is no negative connection during the off period?
Regards
L192
-
Hi Jerdee,
Yes I understand what you are proposing however, as we have multiple "all coils off" periods, what happen to the overlap to sustain the flux? Pierre made a point of explaining the use of the overlap.
I understand that the Bridge diodes will recover coil energy.
In Pierre's 36 slot stator, how do the positive side connected diodes shown on his drawing, recover the coil energy, if there is no negative connection during the off period?
Regards
L192
Look at the PDF again, BOTH the H-bridge direction and HIGH are held in overlap. :)
The spin codes holds the pin high until told not too, which is the "x" in the PDF line of code. Hopefully this helps.
JerDee.
-
Look at the PDF again, BOTH the H-bridge direction and HIGH are held in overlap. :)
The spin codes holds the pin high until told not too, which is the "x" in the PDF line of code. Hopefully this helps.
JerDee.
OK, got it thanks.
L192
-
This is what I have so far for a loop in code in a 30 pole configuration with H-Bridges at each pole.
__________________________________________
repeat
pin.high(Set Direction for H-Bridges 1,11,21 to be positive)
pin.high(Set Direction for H-Bridges 6,16,26 to be negative)
pin.high(turn H-Bridges 1,11,21,6,16,26 ON and hold)
Delay Value
pin.high(Set Direction for H-Bridges 2,12,22 to be positive)
pin.high(Set Direction for H-Bridges 7,17,27 to be negative)
pin.high(turn H-Bridges 2,12,22,7,17,27 ON and hold)
Delay Value
pin.low(Turn H-Bridges 1,11,21,6,16,26 OFF)
Delay Value
pin.high(Set Direction for H-Bridges 3,13,23 to be positive)
pin.high(Set Direction for H-Bridges 7,17,27 to be negative)
pin.high(turn H-Bridges 3,13,23,7,17,27 ON and hold)
Delay Value
pin.low(turn H-Bridges 2,12,22 OFF)
Delay Value
pin.high(Set Direction for H-Bridges 4,14,24 to be positive)
pin.high(Set Direction for H-Bridges 8,18,28 to be negative)
pin.high(turn H-Bridges 4,14,24,8,18,28 ON and hold)
Delay Value
pin.low(Turn H-Bridges 3,13,23 off)
Delay Value
pin.high(Set Direction for H-Bridges 5,15,25 to be positive)
pin.high(Set Direction for H-Bridges 10,20,30 to be negative)
pin.high(turn H-Bridges 5,15,25,10,20,30 ON and hold)
Delay Value
pin.low(Turn H-Bridges 4,14,24 OFF)
Delay Value
pin.high(Set Direction for H-Bridges 1,11,21 to be negative)
pin.high(Set Direction for H-Bridges 6,16,26 to be positive)
pin.high(turn H-Bridges 1,11,21,6,16,26 ON and hold)
Delay Value
pin.low(Turn H-Bridges 5,15,25 OFF)
Delay Value
pin.high(Set Direction for H-Bridges 2,12,22 to be negative)
pin.high(Set Direction for H-Bridges 7,17,27 to be positive)
pin.high(turn H-Bridges 2,12,22,7,17,27 ON and hold)
Delay Value
pin.low(Turn H-Bridges 6,16,26 OFF)
Delay Value
pin.high(Set Direction for H-Bridges 3,13,23 to be negative)
pin.high(Set Direction for H-Bridges 8,18,28 to be positive)
pin.high(turn H-Bridges 3,13,23,8,18,28 ON and hold)
Delay Value
pin.low(Turn H-Bridges 7,17,27 OFF)
Delay Value
pin.high(Set Direction for H-Bridges 4,14,24 to be negative)
pin.high(Set Direction for H-Bridges 9,19,29 to be positive)
pin.high(turn H-Bridges 4,14,24,9,19,29 ON and hold)
Delay Value
pin.low(Turn H-Bridges 8,18,28 OFF)
Delay Value
pin.high(Set Direction for H-Bridges 5,15,25 to be negative)
pin.high(Set Direction for H-Bridges 10,20,30 to be positive)
pin.high(turn H-Bridges 5,15,25,10,20,30 ON and hold)
Delay Value
pin.low(Turn H-Bridges 9,19,29,4,14,24 OFF)
Delay Value
pin.low(Turn H-Bridges 10,20,30,5,15,25 OFF)
Delay Value
__________________________________________
Hopefully this helps,
Jerdee
-
Hi Jerdee,
Yes I understand what you are proposing however, as we have multiple "all coils off" periods, what happen to the overlap to sustain the flux? Pierre made a point of explaining the use of the overlap.
I understand that the Bridge diodes will recover coil energy.
In Pierre's 36 slot stator, how do the positive side connected diodes shown on his drawing, recover the coil energy, if there is no negative connection during the off period?
Regards
L192
There is never an 'all coils off' ....
-
There is never an 'all coils off' ....
According to Jerdee's chart, step 24 on the 36 slot scheme and step 20 on the 30 slot scheme are all coils off.
So my question still stands regarding the 36 slot scheme using relays, how would you recover coil energy through high side diodes only, without any negative connection to allow current to flow?
Regards
L192
-
According to Jerdee's chart, step 24 on the 36 slot scheme and step 20 on the 30 slot scheme are all coils off.
So my question still stands regarding the 36 slot scheme using relays, how would you recover coil energy through high side diodes only, without any negative connection to allow current to flow?
Regards
L192
There is always a connection to ground through one of the closed bottom relays. The BEMF voltage on a coil can be higher than the capacitor voltage, so current can still flow into capacitor.
PmgR
-
According to Jerdee's chart, step 24 on the 36 slot scheme and step 20 on the 30 slot scheme are all coils off.
So my question still stands regarding the 36 slot scheme using relays, how would you recover coil energy through high side diodes only, without any negative connection to allow current to flow?
Regards
L192
I looked back through the last few pages, I see no chart like that.
http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/dlattach/attach/167603/image// translated from
https://youtu.be/vii6o20_Vv8?t=25s
There is never a time when 0 LEDs are on except step 0.
The first step, 2, 26, 14 are on.
step 24 (25) wraps back to the start...
https://youtu.be/vii6o20_Vv8?t=38s
that LED pattern and what's in original videos matches.
There is either an LED that's out, or a transistor that is blown so the LED doesn't have much voltage backing? or there's wires crossing in front of it that cause a shadow, but there is never a time when all LEDs are off.
( from here http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg520053/#msg520053 )
-
So...
If there are 6 poles, energizing the south opposite any particular north... then the field is north through the center, but doesn't the magnetic path then prefer to go to the near sides, and only a vary small portion actually all the way across?
Could this be run as a bedini with all coill north instead?
But from the rotation, and the code evalutaitons; what makes this different from any other 3-pair of n/s poles around ? (Like morin Gerald's motor) and many other stepper motors in fans and stuff...
For experimentation I'd think you'd get a higher initial activity by activating only 1 pair at a time, and aligning the center pickup coil ... well I guess if it is cycling all the way around (which the iniital iron filings demo didn't really show to me) doesn't really matter..
But then there is a difference in the voltage from luc's setup to the original demonstration
also having the coils in series divides their current by 2 (double the resistance, double the inductance) rather than activating them in parallel...
-
I made a time gap (all transistors Off ) in my SIMulation with recovery diodes. The amperage is recovered for a short while. See pic.
Quote;
"....you managed to rotate the magnetic field....
....but there is something crucial that is missing which I see none of you have thought of yet since you are too concentrated on a replication....
....I can see that no one has ever ask the real question
of how to make current and what is happening by breaking down the cycle of a generator.
If you really understand this then you will be able...."
-
There is always a connection to ground through one of the closed bottom relays. The BEMF voltage on a coil can be higher than the capacitor voltage, so current can still flow into capacitor.
PmgR
Yes, I just simulated that using relays (one section) and I got surprising recovery results, much better than semiconductor half bridges.
But that's only Falstad, (attached) really needs someone to confirm with Pspice.
Regards
L192
-
I looked back through the last few pages, I see no chart like that.
http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/dlattach/attach/167603/image// (http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/dlattach/attach/167603/image//) translated from
https://youtu.be/vii6o20_Vv8?t=25s (https://youtu.be/vii6o20_Vv8?t=25s)
There is never a time when 0 LEDs are on except step 0.
The first step, 2, 26, 14 are on.
step 24 (25) wraps back to the start...
https://youtu.be/vii6o20_Vv8?t=38s (https://youtu.be/vii6o20_Vv8?t=38s)
that LED pattern and what's in original videos matches.
There is either an LED that's out, or a transistor that is blown so the LED doesn't have much voltage backing? or there's wires crossing in front of it that cause a shadow, but there is never a time when all LEDs are off.
( from here http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg520053/#msg520053 (http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg520053/#msg520053) )
Both you and mcharbonnl are NOT referencing the original code that was sent from Pierre. mcharbonnl’s vid shows the correct order of LED’s blinking from Pierre’s videos, however, when you take into account the audio from the video at 10% speed, you hear the double one and double off in the code. You have to listen to the audio as well, not just look at the lights in the video! Go back to my earlier forum post and listen to the MP3 I attached. Also, download the video, slow it down to 10% and listen/look at the original code and compare. You’ll see.
When you review my PDF, you'll see that each "x" position is the recovery diodes as well! 72 recovery diodes for 36 poles, and 60 recovery diodes for 30 poles. Everything lines up here. The audio, video, the code, number of relays, number of recovery diodes. The only difference is 36 pole vs. 30 poles. Hope this helps.
Jerdee
-
This one with the original coding: 2 HIGH and 2 LOW steps
https://youtu.be/GigDdTppB10 (https://youtu.be/GigDdTppB10)
x = 10 (pot to min)
x =200 (pot to max)
Not easy to see the all off step when x=10
-
Hi Webby1,
Not only are metal contacts bi-directional they also allow for simultaneous events to pass through them, and they can offer almost no resistance.
Power MOSFETs are also bidirectional when in conduction mode. Because of the parasitic diode formed by the np semiconductor it is always conducting in the forward direction of the parasitic diode. This is in the opposite direction of the normal biased MOSFET. For a blocking bidirectional MOSFET switch use two MOSFETs with their sources connected together as well as their gates connected together. The drains are then the two poles of the switch. The saturation voltage is less than the forward conduction voltage drop of the intrinsic body diode.
Scroll down to just blow the center here for a schematic:
https://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/blog/controlling-an-ac-load-with-a-mosfet.518/ (https://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/blog/controlling-an-ac-load-with-a-mosfet.518/)
Regards
Ole
-
Can somebody solve this riddle?
Pierre; "the resistor is really hot"
1] Check in first film at 2min. 40sec. Start the charging of the supercaps (4.6 Volt). About 0.5 Ampere from the 'wall' goes to the transformer.
2] Check in film at 3min. 40sec. The supercaps 25.1Volt with 0 to 0.1 Amp in to the transformer.
3] Check in film at 5min. 06sec. Arduino have just Start the program, The supercaps <25Volt while 1.5--2 Amps is Now feeding the transformer!!
-
Not only are metal contacts bi-directional they also allow for simultaneous events to pass through them, and they can offer almost no resistance.
If you use a MOSFET as the low side switch, and set the RDS the same as the relay contact resistance (which you can do in the latest version of Falstad),
you get a quiet a different recovery current waveform, through the two diodes on the end of the switched series of coils.
Not sure if the simulator assumes a body diode in the MOSFET.
Regards
L192
-
Thanks Cheors,
I've attached the loading sequence video to review for you as well. Play in loop. This is what I'm seeing and hearing before his loop sequence begins with the two high steps which is the beginning of his loop code.
pin.high(20,21) '' RELAY (39, 52) AND (41 AND 54)
short delay
pin.high(01) '' RELAY 01 AND 14 ON
short delay
pin.high(14) '' RELAY 25 AND 38 ON
long delay
pin.low(14) '' RELAY 25 AND 38 OFF
long delay
pin.high(14) '' RELAY 25 AND 38 ON
long delay
pin.low(14) '' RELAY 25 AND 38 OFF
regular delay
Then....we get the loop sequence with the double high.
_____________________________________________________
I believe he is priming the coils, this has to be important. Pin 14 is turned on/off twice while Pins 1,20, and 21 are held. WHY TWICE?
LOOK AT THE PATTERN.
52-39 =13
14-01 =13
54-41 =13
38-25 =13
We can confirm that each PIN runs two switches 13 apart.
Jerdee
The naming convention appears to take the clockwise slot...
junction 36-1 =1
junction 6-7 =7
junction 12-13 =13
Same polarities spaced 13 apart, ties up with the original scheme shown.
L192
-
Okay so there is a skip then between the first and last coils... (in original code)
This is what I thought at first glance... and that the single north went from (right to left) when the cycle restarted...
so - wouldn't 6 poles have short fields? except maybe where the pickup coil core is?
(1 cycle, 1 coil (and it's mating coil) )
Edit : (Added 'Overlap Tangle" )
And I think maybe, the pitch on 36 should be 5, or on 30, should be 4, so that you don't overlap driving coils... otherwise you get a small tangle that doesn't do anything except add impedance....
If you had a 4 skip, then 2 coils on is 5, and will never directly overlap a south that'[size=78%]s also on... (not illustrated)[/size]
-
Hi seaad,
5A through the resistor makes it dissipate (5A)2 x 4ohm = 100W as heat with 4ohm x 5A = 20V across it. 8A through the resistor dissipates (8A)2 x 4ohm = 256W as heat with 8A x 4ohm = 20V across it.
Assuming that the first column of numbers is the voltage across the left capacitor and the second column is the voltage across the right capacitor making the third column in the box the voltage across the resistor. The last column then can't be the current through the resistor! Are you sure that this isn't the current on the other side of one of the capacitors?
Next assumption is that the capacitors are super capacitors. Super capacitors mustn't be charged to above their breakdown voltage (as all other capacitors). Thus super capacitors in series have a charge balancing circuit to protect each cell in them and this probably also protects for over voltage of the total series of cells. If the voltages and currents are without any load the input power is dissipated in the resistor but also in the protection circuit of the capacitors. If a load is connected it also becomes a source in the second row where the current changes direction to a negative value. Here the energy comes from the right hand side. As the bridge rectifier prevents the current from going into the transformer the current must be dissipated in the left hand side capacitor as well as in the right hand side.
If the voltages in the third column are the voltage across the resistor the current through the resistor isn't as shown. The current (I) is given as I = U / 4ohm where U is the voltage. The fourth column then becomes:
@ 5V: 1.25A
@ -7V: -1.75A
@ 12V: 3A
@ 0V: 0A
@ 25V: 6.25A
@ 13V: 3.25A
The power dissipation P in the resistor is P = U2 / 4ohm where U is the voltage across the resistor. The power dissipation with the above values becomes:
@ 5V: 6.25W
@ -7V: 12.3W
@ 12V: 36W
@ 0V: 0W
@ 25V: 156W
@ 13V: 42.3W
Perhaps the current is measured before or after the capacitors and thus also includes the current into the protection network of the capacitors. Just make sure to check how much power the protection network can dissipate before activating it.
Regards
Ole
-
Hi Ole, I have revised my pic in my previous post. I hope this below is less baffling.
We know that the transformer "takes" 2 Amp when Pierres apparatus is running (from the wall) and we know that the voltage across the supercaps (feeding his unit directly??) is about 20 Volt.
The transformer has to deliver 8 Amps with its voltage ratio if it is a normal transformer with normal losses.
The 4 Ohm series resistor consumes 32 Volt at 8A.
The transformer after the diode bridge and filter capacitor (left) delivers some 25 to 36 Volts which enables ONLY a deliverance of 5 to 12 Volt accross the series resistor.
Which consumes as mentioned above = 32Volt !!
???
-
Can somebody solve this riddle?
Pierre; "the resistor is really hot"
1] Check in first film at 2min. 40sec. Start the charging of the supercaps (4.6 Volt). About 0.5 Ampere from the 'wall' goes to the transformer.
2] Check in film at 3min. 40sec. The supercaps 25.1Volt with 0 to 0.1 Amp in to the transformer.
3] Check in film at 5min. 06sec. Arduino have just Start the program, The supercaps <25Volt while 1.5--2 Amps is Now feeding the transformer!!
Hi seaad,
1) This is indeed a bit strange, if the supercaps are low in voltage, I would expect a large inrush current, but maybe the supercap boards have some current limiting.
2) This would mean this 25.1V is the max voltage that the transformer can put out after rectification and the caps are charged up to that so current draw goes to zero. This would be the peak voltage of the secondary.
3) I believe Pierre states in his first video that the transformer is home made. Mains is 170Vpp, secondary is 25Vpp, so winding ratio is 6.8, or 1.5A at primary becomes 10A at secondary which would cause 40V voltage drop over resistor... so indeed this doesn't make any sense... ??? Only thing I can think of is that the primary current meter is not reading correctly.
PmgR
-
Hi seaad,
1) This is indeed a bit strange, if the supercaps are low in voltage, I would expect a large inrush current, but maybe the supercap boards have some current limiting.
2) This would mean this 25.1V is the max voltage that the transformer can put out after rectification and the caps are charged up to that so current draw goes to zero. This would be the peak voltage of the secondary.
3) I believe Pierre states in his first video that the transformer is home made. Mains is 170Vpp, secondary is 25Vpp, so winding ratio is 6.8, or 1.5A at primary becomes 10A at secondary which would cause 40V voltage drop over resistor... so indeed this doesn't make any sense... ??? Only thing I can think of is that the primary current meter is not reading correctly.
PmgR
From first film: 26 Volt only not p-p? , 30 A
That current limiting seems to not work when arduino up and running! 2Amps in to the transformer then.
Regards Arne
-
Hi seaad,
The numbers on the figure doesn't add up.
3] Check in film at 5min. 06sec. Arduino have just Start the program, The supercaps <25Volt while 1.5--2 Amps is Now feeding the transformer!!
I agree with PmgR that the meters aren't correct calibrated for the waveform. The output of the device isn't a pure sine wave and it is of low frequency. Cheap meters usually measure mean value and thus are calibrated to show the correct RMS value for a sine wave. As the form factor of the wave isn't the same as that for a sine wave such meters will show the wrong value. Even RMS meters and true RMS meters may not be correct calibrated. See the following articles about the problem: https://meettechniek.info/opinion/true-rms-or-a-true-lie.html (https://meettechniek.info/opinion/true-rms-or-a-true-lie.html) and https://meettechniek.info/multimeter-avo/measurement-deviation.html (https://meettechniek.info/multimeter-avo/measurement-deviation.html).
An oscilloscope would be preferable for the measurements or the current could be measured through the resistor which is put between the two filter capacitors. At this point the waveform must be close to DC.
Regards
Ole
-
The naming convention appears to take the clockwise slot...
junction 36-1 =1
junction 6-7 =7
junction 12-13 =13
Same polarities spaced 13 apart, ties up with the original scheme shown.
L192
Funny that the image shows that he wants to solve the problem with 4 poles instead of 6. In order for him to do this he would have to replace each coil to a 9 pole bridge instead of his 6. Always look at the pattern. For a 4 pole to work correctly, you would need to trigger 9 coils in series with a bridge gap of 9. Do you see his pattern? This means we might have problems doing our setup with the same bridged poles as the 36 pole. It should be 5 to match his same configuration. [size=78%]I beginning to realize why the overlap in coil windings will be a problem. I can see how his new configuration will work better!
I also believe we could do this method of pulsing on a toriod completely solid state.
I was also able to place the priming sequence of coils to visualize the arrangement. My original post had a wrong pin number, 14 should have been 13. The reason for this PIN change is because all odd relays are on the outside and even relays are on the inside. See image. I still don't understand why he is priming the entire stator prior to sequence. Maybe this image will help others.
Jerdee
-
Rotate 6 coils = 6 poles
https://youtu.be/EtuZJFKu3uQ
-
Hi seaad,
1) This is indeed a bit strange, if the supercaps are low in voltage, I would expect a large inrush current, but maybe the supercap boards have some current limiting.
2) This would mean this 25.1V is the max voltage that the transformer can put out after rectification and the caps are charged up to that so current draw goes to zero. This would be the peak voltage of the secondary.
3) I believe Pierre states in his first video that the transformer is home made. Mains is 170Vpp, secondary is 25Vpp, so winding ratio is 6.8, or 1.5A at primary becomes 10A at secondary which would cause 40V voltage drop over resistor... so indeed this doesn't make any sense... ??? Only thing I can think of is that the primary current meter is not reading correctly.
PmgR
(Videos are gone from Pierre)
(You couldn't have > 6A ... E=IR (I=E/R) not I > E/R )
so 25V input across 4 Ohms (count 0 Ohms for capacitors?) is max 6.25A
140V:25V = 1.1A : 6.25A. that is input has to be at least 1.1A doesn't mean it couldn't be more...
suppose it's a lossy transformer? ...
-
Hi seaad,
1) The numbers on the figure doesn't add up.
2) I agree with PmgR that the meters aren't correct calibrated for the waveform. The output of the device isn't a pure sine wave and it is of low frequency. Cheap meters usually measure mean value and thus are calibrated to show the correct RMS value for a sine wave. As the form factor of the wave isn't the same as that for a sine wave such meters will show the wrong value.
3) An oscilloscope would be preferable for the measurements or the current could be measured through the resistor which is put between the two filter capacitors. At this point the waveform must be close to DC.
Regards
Ole
1) The numbers on the figure doesn't add up. Correct. That was the purpouse of my post. I. e. An eye opener.
2) I agree with YOU and PmgR that the meters (maybe) aren't reliable. At this time in the film as I'm refferring to Pierre is still using the 60Hz wall outlet with a good sine wave. Both when charging the super caps and running his unit.
3) Fully Agree.
@d3x0r Quote: (Videos are gone from Pierre) Strange?
(You couldn't have > 6A ... Certainly. Pierres transformer: 26V (30 A) Peak value 35.7 Volt maximum rectified level.
Regards Arne
-
Funny that the image shows that he wants to solve the problem with 4 poles instead of 6. In order for him to do this he would have to replace each coil to a 9 pole bridge instead of his 6. Always look at the pattern. For a 4 pole to work correctly, you would need to trigger 9 coils in series with a bridge gap of 9. Do you see his pattern? This means we might have problems doing our setup with the same bridged poles as the 36 pole. It should be 5 to match his same configuration. [size=78%]I beginning to realize why the overlap in coil windings will be a problem. I can see how his new configuration will work better!
I also believe we could do this method of pulsing on a toriod completely solid state.
I was also able to place the priming sequence of coils to visualize the arrangement. My original post had a wrong pin number, 14 should have been 13. The reason for this PIN change is because all odd relays are on the outside and even relays are on the inside. See image. I still don't understand why he is priming the entire stator prior to sequence. Maybe this image will help others.
Jerdee
Yes, a larger stator with more slots, so you can reduce the polarity overlap would improve efficiency, still his scheme produces OU irrespective of its faults.
The priming issue is reminiscent of the permanent magnets in an alternator rotor, which are there to provide some output from the stator coils, which in turn energize the rotor with DC, starting the whole current generation process.
Regards
L192
-
This was the FWBR used by Pierre.
Crydom EFG13C 125A continuous, 2500V
Somewhat overkill due to the 4ohm current limit resistor.
L192
-
Falstad Sim (http://www.falstad.com/circuit/circuitjs.html?cct=$+1+0.000005+10.20027730826997+50+5+50%0Al+304+112+240+112+0+1+-0.49040412711800674%0Al+240+160+304+160+0+1+0.49040412711800674%0Aw+304+160+304+144+0%0Aw+304+112+304+144+0%0Aw+304+144+352+144+0%0Al+240+224+320+224+0+1+0.24520206355900298%0Al+320+224+400+224+0+1+0.24520206355900298%0Av+80+160+80+224+0+0+40+5+0+0+0.5%0As+128+224+192+224+0+0+false%0As+128+144+192+144+0+0+false%0Aw+128+224+80+224+0%0Aw+128+144+128+224+0%0Aw+80+160+80+64+0%0Aw+80+64+496+64+0%0As+432+144+352+144+0+0+false%0As+480+224+480+176+0+0+false%0Aw+480+176+480+144+0%0Aw+432+144+480+144+0%0Aw+480+144+480+80+0%0Aw+480+80+496+64+0%0Ar+192+224+240+224+0+10%0Ar+192+144+240+112+0+10%0Ar+240+160+192+144+0+10%0Ar+400+224+448+224+0+10%0Aw+448+224+480+224+0%0Ao+1+64+0+4097+0.0000762939453125+0.8+0+2+1+3%0Ao+5+64+0+4097+0.0000762939453125+0.4+1+2+5+3%0A)
current through 2 coils in series (with simulated 10 ohm resistor) is 2x the current per coil (4x total, since both get doubled)
It's also 4x the power disappated across each coil (8x total)
Magnetic field is L * I * coilParams; so for L being the same, being able to increase current(I) will increase the field.
-
Hi seaad,
1) This is indeed a bit strange, if the supercaps are low in voltage, I would expect a large inrush current, but maybe the supercap boards have some current limiting.
Well, I see that the videos are once again removed so I can't refer to the first video when Pierre shows the charging of the supercaps from 4.64v to 10.4v over a ~32 second period. It could be seen that the current drawn on the primary during this time was ~.5a rms if the meter used can be trusted. From this one can compute the overall total impedance and resistance in the charging path including the 4 ohm resistor. The primary to secondary leakage inductance, diode drops, and the pri and sec dcrs must be included in these calcs. With best guesses on the transformer parameters, this should be capable of being simulated.
2) This would mean this 25.1V is the max voltage that the transformer can put out after rectification and the caps are charged up to that so current draw goes to zero. This would be the peak voltage of the secondary.
Yes this is correct! This should give us the ability to arrive at the approximate open circuit turns ratio of the transformer assuming there will be some esr in the suppercaps.
3) I believe Pierre states in his first video that the transformer is home made. Mains is 170Vpp, secondary is 25Vpp, so winding ratio is 6.8, or 1.5A at primary becomes 10A at secondary which would cause 40V voltage drop over resistor... so indeed this doesn't make any sense... ??? Only thing I can think of is that the primary current meter is not reading correctly.
The transformer is not home made but is more than likely modified. The transformer is made by Signal and is model HPI-27-1072. The label could be seen in the first video. This series is available thru Digi-Key in the US and sells for ~$525 each! With the core laminations being tig welded, the core was not disassembled so any mods would only be able to be done to the secondary.
The data sheet for this series from Signal does not include the inductance of the primaries nor the magnetization current of the primaries under no load however, the idle current shown by the meter used by Pierre toggles between 0.00 and 0.10 amps which would/should be the magnetization current. Having designed many such power transformers for commercial and industrial use, this magnetization current is unusually low IMO. In my LtSpice sims of this transformer, a single primary at 114v rms with 1 henry inductance has an idle current of ~0.30 amps rms. So, Pierre must be using the two primaries in series to achieve the low idle or magnetization current.
At this point in time, I've not been successful in simulating Pierre's power transformer circuitry supplying the supercaps under all the conditions such as open circuit charging of the SC's, output no-load idle voltage of ~25vdc, and loaded (stator running with no rotor) output voltage of ~20.5vdc with an input of 113v rms at 2.0a rms!
Regards,
Pm
PmgR
-
Hi Ole and everyone
That all about circuits you put up about using mosfets to switch (or block specifically I think in that link)
There should also be a diode (very fast good amps good voltage) from the source to the drain....otherwise it only will switch "one mosfet at a time"
Look att this diagram for bidirectional mosfets
https://sites.google.com/site/alternativeworldenergy/shorting-coils-circuits
-
Well, I see that the videos are once again removed so I can't refer to the first video when Pierre shows the charging of the supercaps from 4.64v to 10.4v over a ~32 second period. It could be seen that the current drawn on the primary during this time was ~.5a rms if the meter used can be trusted. From this one can compute the overall total impedance and resistance in the charging path including the 4 ohm resistor. The primary to secondary leakage inductance, diode drops, and the pri and sec dcrs must be included in these calcs. With best guesses on the transformer parameters, this should be capable of being simulated.
Yes this is correct! This should give us the ability to arrive at the approximate open circuit turns ratio of the transformer assuming there will be some esr in the suppercaps.
The transformer is not home made but is more than likely modified. The transformer is made by Signal and is model HPI-27-1072. The label could be seen in the first video. This series is available thru Digi-Key in the US and sells for ~$525 each! With the core laminations being tig welded, the core was not disassembled so any mods would only be able to be done to the secondary.
The data sheet for this series from Signal does not include the inductance of the primaries nor the magnetization current of the primaries under no load however, the idle current shown by the meter used by Pierre toggles between 0.00 and 0.10 amps which would/should be the magnetization current. Having designed many such power transformers for commercial and industrial use, this magnetization current is unusually low IMO. In my LtSpice sims of this transformer, a single primary at 114v rms with 1 henry inductance has an idle current of ~0.30 amps rms. So, Pierre must be using the two primaries in series to achieve the low idle or magnetization current.
At this point in time, I've not been successful in simulating Pierre's power transformer circuitry supplying the supercaps under all the conditions such as open circuit charging of the SC's, output no-load idle voltage of ~25vdc, and loaded (stator running with no rotor) output voltage of ~20.5vdc with an input of 113v rms at 2.0a rms!
Regards,
Pm
Partzman, I see only two suitable ways to use this transformer in his setup (without cutting into the windings):
1. Use two primaries in series and use two secondaries in parallel: primary voltage 230V, secondary voltage 115V, so 2:1 turn ratio. Then input 115V on primary, that would give 55V rms on secondary with 24A rating.
2. Use two primaries and one secondary in series: input voltage would be 345V, output voltage 115V, so 3:1 turn ratio. Then input 115V on primary, that would give 38V on secondary, which is close to what Pierre states as "36V home made transformer".
Let's consider case 2. above: Having 1.5A on primary would then translate to 4.5A on secondary and the voltage drop over the resistor would be 18V drop, or about 20V left for the capacitor.
This looks like it is in the ball-park.
Would this configuration make sense for the magnetization current? What resistances and inductance values are you assuming for the windings?
PmgR
-
Hi pmgr, all
26 V, 30 A
Maybe someone can answer where to that thin red wire goes , starting from first filter cap?
AND this question: Check in film at 5min. 06sec. Arduino have just Start the program, The supercaps holds just below 25Volt and decreasing its voltage slowly down to about 20 V, while (1.5) -- 2 Amps is Now feeding the transformer!! Why 2 Amps when the charging of the super caps only took 0.5 Amps??
If there is a built in current limiter for charging?
-
Partzman, I see only two suitable ways to use this transformer in his setup (without cutting into the windings):
1. Use two primaries in series and use two secondaries in parallel: primary voltage 230V, secondary voltage 115V, so 2:1 turn ratio. Then input 115V on primary, that would give 55V rms on secondary with 24A rating.
With this turns ratio, the ideal OCV at the SC output would be ~76v dc assuming a relatively high esr of the SC's.
2. Use two primaries and one secondary in series: input voltage would be 345V, output voltage 115V, so 3:1 turn ratio. Then input 115V on primary, that would give 38V on secondary, which is close to what Pierre states as "36V home made transformer".
With this configuration, the ideal OCV would be ~52vdc. Both configs produce too high an OCV as compared to Pierre's tests.
Let's consider case 2. above: Having 1.5A on primary would then translate to 4.5A on secondary and the voltage drop over the resistor would be 18V drop, or about 20V left for the capacitor.
This looks like it is in the ball-park.
Would this configuration make sense for the magnetization current? What resistances and inductance values are you assuming for the windings?
To meet Pierre's apparent idle current of ~ .100A rms would require a primary inductance of ~3H which could be possible with 1 primary on the core size of the Signal transformer. This would depend on the core permeability and turns of course. In my simulation I used a 1H primary and 27mH on the secondary with 3 ohm and 1 ohm dcr respectively and a coupling K = .95. The primary dcr is maybe too low and should probably be in the 5-10 ohm range but the outcome of the loaded tests were so far off that I didn't change that parameter.
My reason for analyzing the power transformer and SC output was to determine with reasonable accuracy the load presented to the SC pack by the running stator without the rotor in place. IOW, if the electromagnetic fields in the stator windings are held relatively constant, this means the winding currents would be nearly constant and generally limited by the sum total of the stator winding's dcrs. This is where my sim analysis really fails! To reproduce Pierre's results with the stator load, the sim needs ~10-20 ohms to even get close to his dc output voltage and current levels but, the input current draw is too low at ~500ma! IMO, Pierre's stator should represent a 0.5-1 ohm load if connected as he has revealed and if these values are used, the SC voltage drops far below the ~19.5v dc level. Perhaps I'm missing something here so I'm certainly open for correction as this is a huge difference.
Regards,
Pm
PmgR
-
Hi pmgr, all
26 V, 30 A
Maybe someone can answer where to that thin red wire goes , starting from first filter cap?
AND this question: Check in film at 5min. 06sec. Arduino have just Start the program, The supercaps holds just below 25Volt and decreasing its voltage slowly down to about 20 V, while (1.5) -- 2 Amps is Now feeding the transformer!! Why 2 Amps when the charging of the super caps only took 0.5 Amps??
If there is a built in current limiter for charging?
Seaad, when did you download your video? Is this the very first video that Pierre uploaded or did you download it when he uploaded it a second time?
Unless my memory is failing me, I remember that the VERY FIRST video Pierre uploaded said 36V and it stated no amperage as far as I recollect (but again I might be wrong, I am getting old :-\ ). I do recall that the font did not look the same yellow either as your image (see my image below with red font). Has anyone downloaded copies of each video after Pierre uploaded them the first time and the second time? Maybe they are different? The second version of the first video is 14:14min long total. How long is yours?
And regarding the small red wire, I believe that wire goes to the voltmeter for the supercaps? Maybe that explains everything! The measured voltage for the supercaps is not measured after the resistor but before the resistor (voltage of the small capacitor).
Correction: that small red wire does not appear to go to the voltmeter. It goes into the wire bundle that comes from the relays.
PmgR
-
pmgr
Q: ""when did you download your video? Is this the very first video that Pierre uploaded ""= First vid 2018-02-28
The 2nd near identical but with more colorful labels and some cuts in mid of the film as I remember. I don't have that one. /Arne
-
It appears that most of you don't know anything about welding. Pierre says in the video that it is a home-made transformer. If you look at the welds on the laminations they certainly look like home-made welds. They do not look like welds made by machine which is the way almost everything is welded now days. I believe he took a stock transformer and cut the welds with a grinder and then took it apart and then with his own designed coils reassembled the transformer and rewelded the laminations. They certainly look like hand welded spots.
-
Don't the welding spots make shortcuts in the lamination with increased losses? In my experimentation I always avoids "naked" ends (not primed) of the laminated sheets come together. / Arne
-
It appears that most of you don't know anything about welding. Pierre says in the video that it is a home-made transformer. If you look at the welds on the laminations they certainly look like home-made welds. They do not look like welds made by machine which is the way almost everything is welded now days. I believe he took a stock transformer and cut the welds with a grinder and then took it apart and then with his own designed coils reassembled the transformer and rewelded the laminations. They certainly look like hand welded spots.
Yes you are correct! I had not noticed this previously but I have done considerable welding and those welds are definitely crude. Welding is done in cores that are not held by frames or bolts in order to keep lamination noise down in low frequency power transformers and yes, the welds do create larger eddy current losses in the laminations.
So, the question is, did he rewind the entire transformer or just the secondary? My guess would be just the secondary.
Regards,
Pm
-
Diode connections.
72 diodes one diode each side of each coil, to accommodate the flow of current in either direction from an active high side or low side switch.
There are only 36 wires (approx) from the stator to the main wiring board, so how are these connections made if only the coil junctions are brought out on wires from the stator?
L192
-
@ listener192
Page32 Reply #477, Page33 Reply #482
One connection point: coil relay 2xdiodes
-
Hi All,
As I also bought Arduino Mega 2560 and now looking again through original Pierre's code and there is interesting moment about coils LOW state:
1) digitalWrite(1,HIGH), digitalWrite(13,HIGH), digitalWrite(25,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
2) digitalWrite(2,HIGH), digitalWrite(14,HIGH), digitalWrite(26,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
3) digitalWrite(1,LOW), digitalWrite(13,LOW), digitalWrite(25,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
4) digitalWrite(3,HIGH), digitalWrite(15,HIGH), digitalWrite(27,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
5) digitalWrite(2,LOW), digitalWrite(14,LOW), digitalWrite(26,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
6) digitalWrite(4,HIGH), digitalWrite(16,HIGH), digitalWrite(28,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
When it is set to LOW from Arduino that mean the relay switch is also active and have coil connected to the negative terminal?
If that is the case 36 out of 72 relays are activated and connecting to the negative then as soon coil X activates. The coil X-1 have opposite direction when its state is LOW.
Which mean opposite magnetic field polarity previous to coil X. Which is resulting cancelation of magnetic polarity in pickup core. Then coil X+1 activates and we get more stronger magnetic field on positive and positive magnetic polarity and resulting more positive field.
Please correct me if that is not true.
Cheers!
-
Hi All,
As I also bought Arduino Mega 2560 and now looking again through original Pierre's code and there is interesting moment about coils LOW state:
When it is set to LOW from Arduino that mean the relay switch is also active and have coil connected to the negative terminal?
If that is the case 36 out of 72 relays are activated and connecting to the negative then as soon coil X activates. The coil X-1 have opposite direction when its state is LOW.
Which mean opposite magnetic field polarity previous to coil X. Which is resulting cancelation of magnetic polarity in pickup core. Then coil X+1 activates and we get more stronger magnetic field on positive and positive magnetic polarity and resulting more positive field.
Please correct me if that is not true.
Cheers!
The relays would be active when the LED is on and no other time.
2 relays are enabled for each single output; one driving the N side and the opposite S side.
at '2' on (N). '18' will also be on (S); but when '18' is on 'N', it's paired with 2 'S'.
----
and just a minor note
falstad sim (http://www.falstad.com/circuit/circuitjs.html?cct=$+1+0.000005+6.450009306485578+45+5+50%0AT+400+160+416+224+0+4+1+2.4999999968234485+-2.4999999968234485+0.999%0As+336+224+272+224+0+0+false%0Aw+416+224+480+224+0%0Aw+416+160+480+160+0%0Av+272+224+272+160+0+0+40+5+0+0+0.5%0Aw+272+160+400+160+0%0Aw+384+224+400+224+0%0Aw+384+224+480+160+0%0Aw+480+224+272+160+0%0Ar+336+224+384+224+0+1%0Aw+384+320+400+320+0%0Aw+272+256+400+256+0%0Av+272+320+272+256+0+0+40+5+0+0+0.5%0Aw+416+256+480+256+0%0Aw+416+320+480+320+0%0As+336+320+272+320+0+0+false%0AT+400+256+416+320+0+4+1+4.9701478885241395+-4.970147888524139+0.999%0Aw+384+320+384+352+0%0Aw+384+352+480+320+0%0Aw+480+256+512+320+0%0Aw+512+320+400+400+0%0Ar+400+400+336+400+0+1%0Aw+336+320+336+400+0%0Ao+21+64+0+4099+5+6.4+0+2+21+3%0Ao+9+64+0+4099+5+6.4+1+2+9+3%0A) was playing with having 2 coils coupled as a transformer, and wiring it in series/parallel. It achieves maximum current in 1/6 the time in parallel.
-
Hi,
Firstly I would kindly appreciate if someone has time to analyze
and secondly if had any luck to copy deleted YouTube video:
1.Can anyone help determinate polarity of the “spinning” permanent magnets from published video
(170W in -1600W out) in slow motion, referring to timeline from 02:25 - 02:39 and 05:31 - 05:51?
2. Does anybody can help providing download link of the previously published video,
where is “how to” assembly, step by step, two small “DC” motors, (one with extra opposing magnets),
100% free energy “building tutorial”, running each other by rubber band, pulleys and capacitor.
Download Link : ??
(That it may have some benefits later)
Thanks,
d.
-
Dole and everyone,
There is a reason Pierre has removed his videos from the public. Please respect his wishes as they are HIS videos.
If you made a copy for your own research that is fine. However, you have no right to repost them to the general public without his permission.
If you lost your chance to download them (for your personal use) the second time Pierre made them available then it's your tough luck.
Please respect Pierre's wishes and in time he may share more. Disrespect him and you'll get nothing more. That I can promise you.
Regards
Luc
Fr. Dole et tout le monde,
Il y a une raison pour laquelle Pierre a retiré ses vidéos du public. S'il vous plaît respecter ses souhaits car ce sont ses vidéos.
Si vous avez fait une copie pour votre propre recherche, c'est bien. Cependant, vous n'avez pas le droit de les rediffuser au grand public sans sa permission.
Si vous avez perdu votre chance de les télécharger (pour votre usage personnel) la deuxième fois que Pierre les a rendus disponibles, alors c'est dommage.
S'il vous plaît, respectez les souhaits de Pierre et avec le temps, il pourra en partager plus. Manque de respect et ne pense pas à obtenir quelque chose de plus, je le garantis.
Cordialement
Luc
-
Dole and everyone,
There is a reason Pierre has removed his videos from the public. Please respect his wishes as they are HIS videos.
If you made a copy for your own research that is fine. However, you have no right to repost them to the general public without his permission.
If you lost your chance to download them (for your personal use) the second time Pierre made them available then it's your tough luck.
Please respect Pierre's wishes and in time he may share more. Disrespect him and you'll get nothing more. That I can promise you.
Regards
Luc
Fr. Dole et tout le monde,
Il y a une raison pour laquelle Pierre a retiré ses vidéos du public. S'il vous plaît respecter ses souhaits car ce sont ses vidéos.
Si vous avez fait une copie pour votre propre recherche, c'est bien. Cependant, vous n'avez pas le droit de les rediffuser au grand public sans sa permission.
Si vous avez perdu votre chance de les télécharger (pour votre usage personnel) la deuxième fois que Pierre les a rendus disponibles, alors c'est dommage.
S'il vous plaît, respectez les souhaits de Pierre et avec le temps, il pourra en partager plus. Manque de respect et ne pense pas à obtenir quelque chose de plus, je le garantis.
Cordialement
Luc
Agreed....Pierre's wishes should be respected, as he has given us this much : ]
He's also trying to make us "Think" which makes us better for it....
-
Thanks stargate22 for your supportive voice towards my moderation.
Regards
Luc
-
Hi,
Firstly I would kindly appreciate if someone has time to analyze
and secondly if had any luck to copy deleted YouTube video:
1.Can anyone help determinate polarity of the “spinning” permanent magnets from published video
(170W in -1600W out) in slow motion, referring to timeline from 02:25 - 02:39 and 05:31 - 05:51?
-deleted link-
2. Does anybody can help providing download link of the previously published video,
where is “how to” assembly, step by step, two small “DC” motors, (one with extra opposing magnets),
100% free energy “building tutorial”, running each other by rubber band, pulleys and capacitor.
Download Link : ??
(That it may have some benefits later)
Thanks,
d.
polarity of the test aparatus magnets doesn't really matter... at 5:45, he's putting a magnet back on. he first matches it to the other magnet (they breifly attach) so he puts the magnets back on with opposing poles. ( S-N ... N-S ) on the other side. I guess that's why he has such a problem putting it back on... in the 2:30 range, as soon as he takes it off, the rotating part tries to rotate, trying to bring the south to meet the N that's off now...
That video does have the wipe; someone said 'charges to 25V in 30 seconds' but there's no knowing because between 10-25.1V is cut. ( at 3:28)(yes, charaging starts at 2:58 so... 30 seconds of film time; but it only goes up to (4.5-10.4) (6V in 30 seconds, so would be another 3 minutes (more because the rate slows) )
----
The LEDs never show a skip....
I guess at 1RPS (60RPM) it's really 1000/36 or 27ms per click ... every 250ms seems to be a lull; but 250 isn't really a harmonic... so I'm not sure why there's a lull...
-
Hi,
Absolutely, we all learn fast, my apologies, this mistake will never repeat again.
(As fare as respect refers to reality, it is not certain, and as fare as it becomes certain, it does not refer to reality no more)
Thanks,
d.
-
polarity of the test aparatus magnets doesn't really matter... at 5:45, he's putting a magnet back on. he first matches it to the other magnet (they breifly attach) so he puts the magnets back on with opposing poles. ( S-N ... N-S ) on the other side. I guess that's why he has such a problem putting it back on... in the 2:30 range, as soon as he takes it off, the rotating part tries to rotate, trying to bring the south to meet the N that's off now...
That video does have the wipe; someone said 'charges to 25V in 30 seconds' but there's no knowing because between 10-25.1V is cut. ( at 3:28)(yes, charaging starts at 2:58 so... 30 seconds of film time; but it only goes up to (4.5-10.4) (6V in 30 seconds, so would be another 3 minutes (more because the rate slows) )
----
The LEDs never show a skip....
I guess at 1RPS (60RPM) it's really 1000/36 or 27ms per click ... every 250ms seems to be a lull; but 250 isn't really a harmonic... so I'm not sure why there's a lull...
Yet look at Pierre's original Arduino sketch, and count the number of "delay()" statements between turning a pin HIGH and turning that same pin LOW, for each pin.
I think this is the point T-1000 is making in his post above where he lists some of the lines from the sketch. Count the delay(x) statements between turning a pin HIGH and then turning it LOW. The pins do not all get the same total "delay" or ON time.
-
http://overunity.com/login/
polarity of the test aparatus magnets doesn't really matter... at 5:45, he's putting a magnet back on. he first matches it to the other magnet (they breifly attach) so he puts the magnets back on with opposing poles. ( S-N ... N-S ) on the other side. I guess that's why he has such a problem putting it back on... in the 2:30 range, as soon as he takes it off, the rotating part tries to rotate, trying to bring the south to meet the N that's off now...
That video does have the wipe; someone said 'charges to 25V in 30 seconds' but there's no knowing because between 10-25.1V is cut. ( at 3:28)(yes, charaging starts at 2:58 so... 30 seconds of film time; but it only goes up to (4.5-10.4) (6V in 30 seconds, so would be another 3 minutes (more because the rate slows) )
Actually, what I said was quote-
"Well, I see that the videos are once again removed so I can't refer to the first video when Pierre shows the charging of the supercaps from 4.64v to 10.4v over a ~32 second period."
Regards,
Pm
----
The LEDs never show a skip....
I guess at 1RPS (60RPM) it's really 1000/36 or 27ms per click ... every 250ms seems to be a lull; but 250 isn't really a harmonic... so I'm not sure why there's a lull...
-
Yet look at Pierre's original Arduino sketch, and count the number of "delay()" statements between turning a pin HIGH and turning that same pin LOW, for each pin.
I think this is the point T-1000 is making in his post above where he lists some of the lines from the sketch. Count the delay(x) statements between turning a pin HIGH and then turning it LOW. The pins do not all get the same total "delay" or ON time.
Ya; ... 30fps is 33.33ms(or less, is it 24fps video) ... and cycle delay is something like 27... so
Audio channel does actually have better data...
I'm kinda rusty on isolating clicks (there's lots of pop and click removers, not many amplifiers... which I guess is remove them, then subtract the result from the input... kinda like work.
Spectra analysis doesn't give good time resolution; but would think a pop would be a wide-spread high FFT.
(turned sideways to not overflow message width)
but 'low' is off. it's not reverse.
'high' is on. and the opposite coil also (in reverse)
so his coils are running in parallel.
Edit: Replaced image with just 1 second, so more than 1 pixel per millisecond... 250 millisecond spans.
I noticed in the other video with the cycle counter that the pitch had changed... I wonder if this is running to 50Hz instead of 60?
-
Nicely done! You can clearly see the long interval followed by a short interval, happening every 12 "clicks".
So is this deliberately done, or is it an easily made mistake in the original Arduino sketch (which was clearly written
by someone with very little Arduino or c++ experience)?
If it is deliberate, what is the rationale behind this "stutter" in the smooth sequential "rotation" of the superimposing fields?
If it's a mistake, I think several "corrected" versions of the Arduino code have already been posted.
But is LUC now using the Propeller board, which I think uses a version of BASIC? Does Luc's program also have this little stutter?
-
Funny that the image shows that he wants to solve the problem with 4 poles instead of 6. In order for him to do this he would have to replace each coil to a 9 pole bridge instead of his 6. Always look at the pattern. For a 4 pole to work correctly, you would need to trigger 9 coils in series with a bridge gap of 9. Do you see his pattern? This means we might have problems doing our setup with the same bridged poles as the 36 pole. It should be 5 to match his same configuration. [size=78%]I beginning to realize why the overlap in coil windings will be a problem. I can see how his new configuration will work better!
I also believe we could do this method of pulsing on a toriod completely solid state.
I was also able to place the priming sequence of coils to visualize the arrangement. My original post had a wrong pin number, 14 should have been 13. The reason for this PIN change is because all odd relays are on the outside and even relays are on the inside. See image. I still don't understand why he is priming the entire stator prior to sequence. Maybe this image will help others.
Jerdee
Jerdee,
Regarding the hold sequence, I don't believe there is one (at least not on purpose). It is not part of the original sketch Pierre provided. The facts that some pins are high initially, is most likely because the Arduino enters the bootloader first which will probably have some pins set to high to communicate with outside world or on board peripherals.
Pin 1 is a TX0 output pin (serial port).
Pin 13 is a PWM pin
Pin 20 and 21 are SCA and SCL pins which are I2C pins
PmgR
-
Ya; ... 30fps is 33.33ms(or less, is it 24fps video) ... and cycle delay is something like 27... so
Audio channel does actually have better data...
I'm kinda rusty on isolating clicks (there's lots of pop and click removers, not many amplifiers... which I guess is remove them, then subtract the result from the input... kinda like work.
Spectra analysis doesn't give good time resolution; but would think a pop would be a wide-spread high FFT.
(turned sideways to not overflow message width)
but 'low' is off. it's not reverse.
'high' is on. and the opposite coil also (in reverse)
so his coils are running in parallel.
Edit: Replaced image with just 1 second, so more than 1 pixel per millisecond... 250 millisecond spans.
I noticed in the other video with the cycle counter that the pitch had changed... I wonder if this is running to 50Hz instead of 60?
Pierre's code has 24 times delay(x) in it. Your total scan is about 250ms for this, so his x value is about 10ms. This means his relays stay on four 3*delay(x)=30ms, then off for 210ms. Frequency is around 4Hz (250ms).
PmgR
-
Pierre's code has 24 times delay(x) in it. Your total scan is about 250ms for this, so his x value is about 10ms. This means his relays stay on four 3*delay(x)=30ms, then off for 210ms.
PmgR
total scan is 1second - or 4 250ms sections. Previously it was like 3 seconds (before edit)
yes; but that only results in 12 on events. (and 12 off)
There is a short spike between most peeks which is probably the release.
There is a bit of chatter too... it's not a sharp snap...(but that's what relays do)
but the engage is typically louder than the release.
(that is the same as(it didn't change during that video) frequency used to run the microwave and drill; although it was only shortly after turning on, there was a lull in the background )music.)
---
I do think the long space before blue lines(250ms) (image was rotated clockwise, from time left to right to time top to bottom) Uhmm ya the space is 2 Off's followed by 2 quick On's.In the Working live demonstration; I do not think that is a bug, but that there is a time of no lights on that the video does not show. (but original code and audio do)
Having the ability to instantanously remove the magnet from a generator is unique to this scheme.
I also think it could be optimized to just cycle the poles over the collecting coil (that in 6 poles the sides don't actually play that much role). (less power for coils that don't do much)
like only use (1-10) and (16-25) 1-12 and (16-27 or 18-29) and ignore the other 2 ....
(plus a span of 5 covers 1-17/ or a span of 4 on 30 coil cover up to 14 ... a full half cycle walking through 12 coils (24 delays))
--------
This is more on the theory of this though; A magnet approaching a coil increases current in the coil... I guess a drive coil 'approaches' by having its current increase... nevermind.
-
So... 4 poles... One would imagine N-S-N-S going around? that makes opposite coils opposing polarity... and if it's N-S-S-N then it's really only 2 poles....
(N-S-N-S) but the mating flux is going to be from bottom to side and side to top; not trough the pickup coil...
Although there was that generator (probably years ago now) that was replaced rotor with permanent magents wound in coils? that was 4 pole....
And flux-gate generators can be 4 pole... but the pickup coil is on the edge between magnets, not in the center.
-
Jerdee,
Regarding the hold sequence, I don't believe there is one (at least not on purpose). It is not part of the original sketch Pierre provided. The facts that some pins are high initially, is most likely because the Arduino enters the bootloader first which will probably have some pins set to high to communicate with outside world or on board peripherals.
Pin 1 is a TX0 output pin (serial port).
Pin 13 is a PWM pin
Pin 20 and 21 are SCA and SCL pins which are I2C pins
PmgR
The sketch from Pierre certainly doesn't include any deliberate "hold sequence" on startup. But I also don't think that it is coming from the Mega's pin states at startup. My testing here hasn't shown any pin activations other than what is specifically called for in the sketch. As I posted previously I have occasionally had problems using pins 0 and 1 (the serial rx and tx pins) but this simple sketch didn't show problems when I tested it.
Also, on the Mega all pins from 2 to 13 are PWM capable using analogWrite() statements but the sketch is exclusively using digitalWrite() and again I haven't seen any spurious pin activations on startup here either.
Pin 13 does have an internal LED connected to it on Mega, Uno and other Arduino boards though. Here's something I found on an Arduino forum:
Due to the changes made on Rev3 Uno and mega boards the on board pin13 LED is not longer directly driven by the AVR output pin but rather 'buffered' via a spare op-amp stage. This results in a floating input pin condition for the op-amp which can result in the led being on when it shouldn't be, but it's a rather random thing as the offset input value of the op-amp plays a role. The only way to be absolutly sure that the pin 13 led remains off is to do both a pinMode(13,OUTPUT) and a digitalWrite(13,LOW), best placed in your setup function
My own Mega isn't a Rev3 version though.
-
Rotating field:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IKX8MeVQio
-
Maybe Pierre can comment here ??
moving forward ??
respectfully
Chet K
-
My own Mega isn't a Rev3 version though.
The board I got is Rev3 and it activates pins 13 (internal LED) and temporary 2 (internal TX LED) on boot after quick test.
In regards to end of cycle there are 2 LOW signals sent in Pierre's sketch.
And the question still to me is if 2 coil relays are activated at once on HIGH signal, is that 4 coils distance (as like in Pierre's series coil connection explanation video) or just same coil getting connected to negative terminal.
Cheers!
-
Rotating field:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IKX8MeVQio
Thanks r2fpl
Nice work. By the background noise looks like you use relays instead of solid state switches.
Seaad
On the thin red wire.
I wonder if the voltage across the blue cap is a completely smoothed dc or it has any kind of ripple at 120Hz when the device is working. If the latter is true then it can be used for sync. Perhaps the unknown 37pin of Pierre opens and closes according the peaks of this signal. A switched ground point perhaps? Or a sync method for bringing the output peaks in time accordance with the input wave? Only Pierre knows.
-
Thanks r2fpl
Nice work. By the background noise looks like you use relays instead of solid state switches.
Yes, relays. I try with L298n but not stability for 2 channels output and too hot. Relays works very well.
-
Seaad
On the thin red wire.
I wonder if the voltage across the blue cap is a completely smoothed dc or it has any kind of ripple at 120Hz when the device is working. If the latter is true then it can be used for sync. Perhaps the unknown 37pin of Pierre opens and closes according the peaks of this signal. A switched ground point perhaps? Or a sync method for bringing the output peaks in time accordance with the input wave? Only Pierre knows.
Jeg, " at 120Hz can be used for sync" . Agree. This is an odd connection with thin wire. Just a signal current? About the freq. just leave that :D :D
Has it to do with the current consumption to his big transformer during charge and under operation?
My pics showing Volt and Amp with the Microwave Oven OFF and ON.
Does anybody know "APME" the label on the Micro Oven? A company??
-
Seaad
On the thin red wire.
I wonder if the voltage across the blue cap is a completely smoothed dc or it has any kind of ripple at 120Hz when the device is working. If the latter is true then it can be used for sync. Perhaps the unknown 37pin of Pierre opens and closes according the peaks of this signal. A switched ground point perhaps? Or a sync method for bringing the output peaks in time accordance with the input wave? Only Pierre knows.
[/quote]
Interesting: it could explain why he needs this 4 ohms resistor:
To power the coils/switches with some ripple (variable current) and recover from the diodes on the other side.
-
Seaad
On the thin red wire.
I wonder if the voltage across the blue cap is a completely smoothed dc or it has any kind of ripple at 120Hz when the device is working. If the latter is true then it can be used for sync. Perhaps the unknown 37pin of Pierre opens and closes according the peaks of this signal. A switched ground point perhaps? Or a sync method for bringing the output peaks in time accordance with the input wave? Only Pierre knows.
Interesting: it could explain why he needs this 4 ohms resistor:
To power the coils/switches with some ripple (variable current) and recover from the diodes on the other side.
cheors I think you are close! If true, goes to relays 71, 72 (first anyhow) !! See pic
"I wonder if the voltage across the blue cap is a completely smoothed dc " Anyhow a much higher level!
The only BUT here is that the wires goes slightly backwards when they comes up behind the bottom relay assembly.
cheors On your CurrentVariation pic : I'm Not convinced that Pierres diodes goes to both plus an minus ? See an earlier post of mine. Reply #477 on: April 16, 2018, Page 32,
Regards Arne
-
Seaad
On the thin red wire.
I wonder if the voltage across the blue cap is a completely smoothed dc or it has any kind of ripple at 120Hz when the device is working. If the latter is true then it can be used for sync. Perhaps the unknown 37pin of Pierre opens and closes according the peaks of this signal. A switched ground point perhaps? Or a sync method for bringing the output peaks in time accordance with the input wave? Only Pierre knows.
Interesting: it could explain why he needs this 4 ohms resistor:
To power the coils/switches with some ripple (variable current) and recover from the diodes on the other side.
On a raw linear power supply, the current draw when charging super caps is very high. I charge my 500F bank by a 30V 30A switch mode supply, which is current limited at 30A and the full 30A is drawn during charging. It would draw a lot more if there were no current limit. The 4 ohm resistor is just a basic way to limit the current so he doesn't burn out the transformer. The FWBR is rated at 125A.
Regards
L192
-
Seaad
On the thin red wire.
I wonder if the voltage across the blue cap is a completely smoothed dc or it has any kind of ripple at 120Hz when the device is working. If the latter is true then it can be used for sync. Perhaps the unknown 37pin of Pierre opens and closes according the peaks of this signal. A switched ground point perhaps? Or a sync method for bringing the output peaks in time accordance with the input wave? Only Pierre knows.
Interesting: it could explain why he needs this 4 ohms resistor:
To power the coils/switches with some ripple (variable current) and recover from the diodes on the other side.
Its a very thin wire, it cannot be carrying much current.
Regards
L192
-
cheors I think you are close! If true, goes to relays 71, 72 (first anyhow) !! See pic
"I wonder if the voltage across the blue cap is a completely smoothed dc " Anyhow a much higher level!
The only BUT here is that the wires goes slightly backwards when they comes up behind the bottom relay assembly.
cheors On your CurrentVariation pic : I'm Not convinced that Pierres diodes goes to both plus an minus ? See an earlier post of mine. Reply #477 on: April 16, 2018, Page 32,
Regards Arne
The diodes are wired 2 in parallel which is a strange way to get the current rating doubled however, maybe its just cheaper doing it that way. The way its drawn ,the diodes look like they are either side of the switch each one joined a potentially different current flow. Anyway they just are not connected that way.
L192
-
The diodes are wired 2 in parallel which is a strange way to get the current rating doubled however, maybe its just cheaper doing it that way. The way its drawn ,the diodes look like they are either side of the switch each one joined a potentially different current flow. Anyway they just are not connected that way.
L192
There are two factors which make sense wiring transistors and diodes in paralel: lowering resistance and eliminating generated heat.
Instead of wasting energy as heat I am also doing paralel diode connections in experiments when frequency and internal capacitance do not interfere.
Cheers!
-
L192
Still the transformer needs 0.5 Amp when charging supercaps (via 4 Ohm) and 1.5--> 2.5 Amps to the same primary when running the system. I can't believe that the thin wire I pointed at, feeding some or more relays can handle 4-8 Amp at the secondary side while only a slight current goes thru and warms up, that super HOT 4 Ohm resistor. Look at the size of the wires to and from that resistor. We need a better explanation
Arne
-
L192
Still the transformer needs 0.5 Amp when charging supercaps (via 4 Ohm) and 1.5--> 2.5 Amps to the same primary when running the system. I can't believe that the thin wire I pointed at, feeding some or more relays can handle 4-8 Amp at the secondary side while only a slight current goes thru and wrms up, that super HOT 4 Ohm resistor. Look at te size of the wiresto and from that resistor. We need a better explanation
Arne
the red wire is probably the common power for driving the relay coils. Most relays require 15-20mA; and since only 3 or 6 relays are engaged at a time, only requires 45-60 or 90-120mA respectively.
-
the red wire is probably the common power for driving the relay coils. Most relays require 15-20mA; and since only 3 or 6 relays are engaged at a time, only requires 45-60 or 90-120mA respectively.
?????
-
??? ??
hmm i see
-
Can someone(everyone?) share some specs about their coils? What is the resistance of a drive coil? how long is it? how many turns? what is the measured inductance (without the pickup core)? what gauge wire?
how many strands can fit in one of those slots? (Yes, more for higher gauge) so...
-
You can find it here: gotoluc, listener192, r2fpl, ariovaldo and my posts.
Re: 170 watts in - 1600 watts out - looped - Very impressive build and video
« Reply #402 on: March 21, 2018, 10:55:04 PM »
Re: 170 watts in - 1600 watts out - looped - Very impressive build and video
« Reply #403 on: March 22, 2018, 12:32:11 AM »
Or here:
Re: 170 watts in - 1600 watts out - looped - Very impressive build and video
Re: Pierre's 170W in 1600W out Looped Very impressive Build continued & moderated
-
You can find it here: gotoluc, listener192, r2fpl, ariovaldo and my posts.
Re: 170 watts in - 1600 watts out - looped - Very impressive build and video (http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/msg518625/#msg518625)
« Reply #402 on: March 21, 2018, 10:55:04 PM »
Re: 170 watts in - 1600 watts out - looped - Very impressive build and video (http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/msg518628/#msg518628)
« Reply #403 on: March 22, 2018, 12:32:11 AM »
Or here:
Re: 170 watts in - 1600 watts out - looped - Very impressive build and video
Re: Pierre's 170W in 1600W out Looped Very impressive Build continued & moderated
??? (where?)
Thanks. You can right click on the link-title just above the 'reply#' and copy the link.
[ url=<paste>]short text [ /url] (without the leading space)
----
Edit:
according to...
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Tables/wirega.html
500 feet of gauge 10 wire would be 0.5Ohm.
Is that 0.526K Ohm? Hmm no; because you'd need 20,000 feet of 24ga wire...
-
cheors On your CurrentVariation pic : I'm Not convinced that Pierres diodes goes to both plus an minus ? See an earlier post of mine. Reply #477 on: April 16, 2018, Page 32,
Regards Arne
Yes, impossible because the diodes are wired the same direction, anode with anode. I did not pay attention !
Were to connect the 2 cathodes ?
Not at the same point. They would be in parallel and the only justification would be a problem of power.
But it would be better then to choose more powerful diodes or to add heatsinks.
The only possibility is to find 2 different positives points.
Like this: what do you think?
-
Jeg, " at 120Hz can be used for sync" . Agree. This is an odd connection with thin wire. Just a signal current? About the freq. just leave that :D :D
Has it to do with the current consumption to his big transformer during charge and under operation?
My pics showing Volt and Amp with the Microwave Oven OFF and ON.
Does anybody know "APME" the label on the Micro Oven? A company??
Thats just an inventory label. Its a GE MO.
This is the model.
http://www.geappliances.ca/en/products/cooking/microwaves/applproducts/JES1138SNC#tab-Details
@41lbs This has a 60Hz line transformer.
The power 1500W @13A.
Regards
L192
-
Hi listener192
It's good you found the exact model of MO and that it really consumes 1500 Watt. After all Pierre seems to have produced 60 Hz despite that low 4Hz -->12-15Hz repettion frequency. But We can't figure that out.
How??
But my question was about that sticker at top rigt hand side. "APME-MICR-029".
See Reply #622 on: April 23, 2018
Regards Arne
-
Hi listener192
It's good you found the exact model of MO and that it really consumes 1500 Watt. After all Pierre seems to have produced 60 Hz despite that low 4Hz -->12-15Hz repettion frequency. But We can't figure that out.
How??
But my question was about that sticker at top rigt hand side. "APME-MICR-029".
Regards Arne
Why are you concerned about a sticker that has been applied, that is obviously not a GE applied item?
L192
-
Yes, impossible because the diodes are wired the same direction, anode with anode. I did not pay attention !
Were to connect the 2 cathodes ?
Not at the same point. They would be in parallel and the only justification would be a problem of power.
But it would be better then to choose more powerful diodes or to add heatsinks.
The only possibility is to find 2 different positives points.
Like this: what do you think?
Maybe his first intention was as in your first drawing when he made the diode board. To + and - . But changed the concept later to parallel diodes.
Regards Arne
-
Why are you concerned about a sticker that has been applied, that is obviously not a GE applied item?
L192
I was just curious about Pierre and Pierres possible connection to a company.
Arne
-
I was just curious about Pierre and Pierres possible connection to a company.
Arne
I think it maybe counter productive to try and probe into Pierre's private life.
L192
-
Just interested of his background and from where he got his skills
Arne
-
There are two factors which make sense wiring transistors and diodes in paralel: lowering resistance and eliminating generated heat.
Instead of wasting energy as heat I am also doing paralel diode connections in experiments when frequency and internal capacitance do not interfere.
Cheers!
Hi Arunas
I don't think this is the case here. Pierre uses diodes of a high breakdown voltage and of enough current max rating for this job. My opinion is that Pierre made just a simple mistake here presenting both diodes of the same direction while it is of the opposite.
Regards
-
reading in the past 'magic numbers' (http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/msg518071/#msg518071)
the pairing is more like in this image as opposed to opposed...
there was also an early magnet simulation by pmgr (http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/msg517968/#msg517968) would like to see that with a wider pitch on the poles... (n/s of fields separated by 60 degrees Nevermind found here (http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/msg518086/#msg518086), and here (http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/msg518491/#msg518491)) . There was a later supposed animated gif, but I couldn't get it to animate even in VLC.
And Re the diodes... 72 diodes. 72 relays, 1 feed from diode board to + . No - (negative is on the other side of the coil/relay) - -> relay -> (fork to diode) -> coil -> positive. (electron current from - to +, when the relay opens, it wants to keep pulling - from the diode/relay side, which will pull eventually against the positive voltage).
But I don't really know how actually 2 relays + 1 coil = reversable coil... this scheme works, if either one or the other relay is activated, power causes a magnetic current. But, when both are open, there is just a free-wheeling current in the coil and the diode does nothing... Other ways I tried to hook it up, the diode ended up in parallel with the coil, which again ends up in a lossy short-circuit loop in the coil...
So I suppose each coil is charged...
I haven't finished going through the middle pages (20-40 and 1-20)
---
I saw that 'pairing' diagram a few time... and while it's true that 1 and 6 are pared, and then 6 and 11 are paired, this does not mean that 1 and 11 are paired.
I colored paired coils (in a span, it's incorrect, span should have been 5, but this drew better) ... so when 2 is on because it's paired with 33, it's the opposite polarity from when 2 is on and 7 is it's pair.....
I highlighted under each with blue and red indicating the poles of the pairing. The blue is always to the left of the red.
Doing the stepping better would have shown the rotation better....
(other 'fixed') but should be parallel not series... (http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/msg518296/#msg518296)
----
Image with pitch of 5 marked. (http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/msg519863/#msg519863) (for 36 coils). pitch = ( ( coils / 6 ) - 1 ) ; although you can re-sequence it and use just 2 poles...
(too bad it was so late after Reply #395 on: March 21, 2018, 05:43:39 PM » (http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/msg518614/#msg518614) "In Pierre's 36 slot he obviously has 6 coils or slots per pole and you can clearly see in the picture below his center core is exactly 6 slot wide." ... yes, but that's because 2 coils are on at a time so it's (coil-slots + 1) = 6 (the width of the core)
-
Hi Arunas
I don't think this is the case here. Pierre uses diodes of a high breakdown voltage and of enough current max rating for this job. My opinion is that Pierre made just a simple mistake here presenting both diodes of the same direction while it is of the opposite.
Regards
No, there is only a positive return to the super caps.
There is no negative wire going to the diode board.
The current path for recovery is through the low side switch then through the chain of coils and through the diodes to the + rail.
Regards
L192
-
No, there is only a positive return to the super caps.
Yes you are right. Hadn't notice that. ;)
-
System wiring.
V1 goes to the + supercaps set
V2 could go to the + Bridge output.
-
System wiring.
V1 goes to the + supercaps set
V2 could go to the + Bridge output.
*OMG I hate paste on this; it always adds like font and size into url that breaks it*
falstad sim (http://www.falstad.com/circuit/circuitjs.html?cct=$+1+0.000005+0.37936678946831776+50+5+50%0Av+64+160+64+224+0+0+40+5+0+0+0.5%0Al+80+320+160+320+0+1+5.7145093273539635e-8%0Al+192+320+288+320+0+1+-0.014437500001749341%0Al+320+320+384+320+0+1+0.003687500000036082%0Al+416+320+480+320+0+1+-0.014437499998287246%0Al+512+320+576+320+0+1+0%0As+160+368+160+320+0+1+false%0As+160+240+160+304+0+0+false%0As+288+240+288+304+0+1+false%0As+288+336+288+400+0+0+false%0As+384+240+384+304+0+0+false%0As+384+352+384+400+0+1+false%0As+496+240+496+320+0+1+false%0As+496+320+512+384+0+0+false%0Ad+80+320+80+240+1+0.805904783%0Ad+192+320+192+272+1+0.805904783%0Ad+320+320+320+240+1+0.805904783%0Ad+416+320+416+240+1+0.805904783%0Ad+512+320+512+240+1+0.805904783%0Ad+80+400+80+320+1+0.805904783%0Ad+192+368+192+320+1+0.805904783%0Ad+320+384+320+320+1+0.805904783%0Ad+416+384+416+320+1+0.805904783%0Ad+480+384+480+320+1+0.805904783%0Aw+480+320+496+320+0%0Aw+512+320+496+320+0%0Aw+416+320+384+320+0%0Aw+384+304+384+320+0%0Aw+384+352+384+320+0%0Aw+320+320+288+320+0%0Aw+288+304+288+320+0%0Aw+288+336+288+320+0%0Aw+192+320+160+320+0%0Aw+160+304+160+320+0%0Aw+160+368+160+400+0%0Aw+192+368+192+416+0%0Ac+16+256+32+368+0+0.00001+6.252355962068837%0Aw+80+400+32+368+0%0Aw+16+256+80+240+0%0Aw+80+240+320+240+0%0Aw+160+240+160+208+0%0Aw+288+208+288+240+0%0Aw+384+208+384+240+0%0Aw+320+240+416+240+0%0Aw+416+240+512+240+0%0Aw+496+208+496+240+0%0Aw+272+208+160+208+0%0Aw+288+208+272+208+0%0Aw+384+208+288+208+0%0Aw+496+208+384+208+0%0Aw+160+208+64+160+0%0Aw+64+224+48+416+0%0Aw+160+400+48+416+0%0Aw+192+416+320+416+0%0Aw+416+384+416+416+0%0Aw+480+384+480+416+0%0Aw+480+416+416+416+0%0Aw+416+416+320+416+0%0Aw+320+384+320+416+0%0Aw+192+416+80+400+0%0Aw+512+384+512+432+0%0Aw+512+432+368+432+0%0Aw+384+400+368+432+0%0Aw+288+400+288+432+0%0Aw+160+400+160+432+0%0Aw+160+432+288+432+0%0Aw+288+432+368+432+0%0A)
According to your simulator, when 1 is on, R1 and R14 activate. which is also activating coils 3 and 4 which overlap 6 and 7 with a canceling field.
Each relay should activate 1 coil in 1 polarity....
I dunno maybe that is how it works; I think that's entirely wrong, and if that's the scheme replicated it's no wonder there's no power.
Edit: Oops, left the bottom, middle switch on; was testing what would happen if the previous coil was also activated, but your input signals aren't equal to coil number....
-
System wiring.
V1 goes to the + supercaps set
V2 could go to the + Bridge output.
Sorry cheors I can't believe in your wiring diagram. Too many unknown wires in Pierres wire bundle. Especially when it comes to V2! See pic Reply #646
only ONE red return wire!
I can see that V2 goes to relay (67), 69, 71.
Even if I had P;s contraption physically in front of me it should be a heavy task following all wires.
You have to turn ALL diods to +V2!
/Arne
-
When looking again to Pierre's original videos with relays:
digitalWrite(1,HIGH), digitalWrite(13,HIGH), digitalWrite(25,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(2,HIGH), digitalWrite(14,HIGH), digitalWrite(26,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(1,LOW), digitalWrite(13,LOW), digitalWrite(25,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
Which mean on 1st activation you will end up pin 1 "+" and pin 5 "-". So 4 coils in series are positive. But because all coils are connected in series each after another - when making pin 25 "+" pin 30 "-" this will also create path: pin 1 "+" and pin 30 "-"(and 2 other in middle around circle). Which will be negative 7 coils in series path. The current will be stronger in 4 coils in series path but there is also negative component in other direction over 7 coils. On the second step the positive path is getting across 3 coils and negative path is getting across 6 coils in series and that create stronger magentic fields on both ways. On the third step it is 7 coils apart again.
So at this point partially bucking fields are in place and it is interesting to see what is going to happen in own setup. When keeping in mind on the same position we have coil X towards center and coil X-5 on same axis towards outer shell it is creating interesting scenario.
In regards to diodes - unless you have power supply with center tap and fully isolate positive and negative sides of the coil from shorting (please see my sketch attached again for this) the solution is to have only 1 side of the coil creating BEMF part towards positive terminal.
Cheers!
-
@T1000
A little rewiring required on the coil recovery line I have marked them in red
Hope it helps
jj
-
Falstad Sim (http://www.falstad.com/circuit/circuitjs.html?cct=$+1+0.000005+1.2182493960703473+92+5+50%0Al+880+496+880+592+0+1+-2.279498630490374e-12%0Aw+880+592+688+592+0%0Aw+848+496+880+496+0%0Ad+848+496+848+432+1+0.805904783%0Ad+848+560+848+496+1+0.805904783%0Aw+848+496+784+496+0%0Aw+848+432+784+432+0%0Aw+848+560+784+560+0%0As+784+560+784+496+0+1+false%0As+784+432+784+496+0+1+false%0As+688+592+688+496+0+0+false%0Aw+688+496+656+496+0%0Aw+784+560+624+560+0%0Aw+784+432+576+432+0%0Aw+784+656+576+656+0%0Aw+784+784+624+784+0%0Aw+688+720+656+720+0%0As+688+816+688+720+0+0+false%0As+784+656+784+720+0+0+false%0As+784+784+784+720+0+1+false%0Aw+848+784+784+784+0%0Aw+848+656+784+656+0%0Aw+848+720+784+720+0%0Ad+848+784+848+720+1+0.805904783%0Ad+848+720+848+656+1+0.805904783%0Aw+848+720+880+720+0%0Aw+880+816+688+816+0%0Al+880+720+880+816+0+1+0.15183344890671774%0Aw+784+864+576+864+0%0Aw+784+992+624+992+0%0Aw+688+928+656+928+0%0As+688+1024+688+928+0+0+false%0As+784+864+784+928+0+1+false%0As+784+992+784+928+0+0+false%0Aw+848+992+784+992+0%0Aw+848+864+784+864+0%0Aw+848+928+784+928+0%0Ad+848+992+848+928+1+0.805904783%0Ad+848+928+848+864+1+0.805904783%0Aw+848+928+880+928+0%0Aw+880+1024+688+1024+0%0Al+880+928+880+1024+0+1+-0.15183362033682885%0Aw+784+240+576+240+0%0Aw+784+368+624+368+0%0Aw+688+304+656+304+0%0As+688+400+688+304+0+0+false%0As+784+240+784+304+0+1+false%0As+784+368+784+304+0+1+false%0Aw+848+368+784+368+0%0Aw+848+240+784+240+0%0Aw+848+304+784+304+0%0Ad+848+368+848+304+1+0.805904783%0Ad+848+304+848+240+1+0.805904783%0Aw+848+304+880+304+0%0Aw+880+400+688+400+0%0Al+880+304+880+400+0+1+-2.2794986304241995e-12%0Aw+624+368+624+560+0%0Aw+624+560+624+784+0%0Aw+624+784+624+992+0%0Aw+576+864+576+656+0%0Aw+576+656+576+432+0%0Aw+576+432+576+240+0%0Aw+656+304+656+496+0%0Aw+656+496+656+720+0%0Aw+656+720+656+928+0%0Ac+384+928+384+1024+0+0.00001+4.9984816594384345%0Aw+384+1024+448+1008+0%0Aw+448+928+384+928+0%0Av+304+1024+304+928+0+0+40+5+0+0+0.5%0Aw+304+1024+384+1024+0%0As+384+928+352+928+0+0+false%0Ar+304+928+352+928+0+0.01%0Aw+656+928+656+1072+0%0Ad+656+1072+592+1072+1+0.805904783%0Aw+592+1072+576+1072+0%0Aw+448+928+576+928+0%0Aw+576+864+576+928+0%0Aw+448+1008+624+992+0%0Aw+576+928+576+1072+0%0Ao+42+64+0+4099+10+0.00009765625+0+2+42+3%0Ao+43+64+0+4099+0.0000762939453125+0.00009765625+1+2+43+3%0Ao+55+64+0+4099+0.3125+0.00009765625+2+2+55+3%0A)
I don't understand why the current is running backwards through the diodes though... with switches all open there shouldn't be current flow... I guess because it's floating it drifts to one side, gets charge, which equates the volaage to the other side which lets it conduct that side ...
This requires the common to the coil to have a voltage lower than max and higher than min.... so when driving one side or the other it won't get as much current because not as much voltage differential.
-
Hi,
I hope this will not make more confusion, I would suggest little bit different approach.
I will list just few as “statements” and apologize for not giving explanation and showing any proof.
- There are only 3 poles “rotating” sliding back and forth with delay,
- 3 strong south poles, equally spaced so weak north will be generated naturally in-between.(choosing N or S, it myth depending on where you live)
- All diodes are only connected to +
- Timing is critical for each coil as S pole and new moved S pole mast be tuned in fashion long-short (depending on rotation/field speed and N pull, one will be stronger)
- This way it will be strong and as equally as possible magnetic movement.
- When this is done there will be almost no consumption or minimal energy requirement and strong moving/sliding magnetic field.
- Magnetic field will not change direction, just placement; therefore output coil must be double wind in cw, ccw fashion.
(BTW “rotating” magnet test (SN-NS or NS-SN) is important, try it with your core)
Now all this looks like very, very crazy and complete nonsense, so please just ignore it.
Thanks, very respectfully
d.
-
https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/textbook/direct-current/chpt-15/series-and-parallel-inductors/ (https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/textbook/direct-current/chpt-15/series-and-parallel-inductors/)
Lt = 1 / ( 1 / L1) + 1/L2 )
if I use xH has the L1 and L2, then Lt = 1/(2/x) = x/2 ?
How is that possible when it's generating 2x the magnetic field? (1 from the one coil, plus 1 from the other inductor) each having the same current... And if they were on the same core? Mutual induction can further decrease the inductive reactance... giving a higher rate of flux change.
the same current is going through them as a single (actually 2x total)
---------------
An alternator is the same thing. energized windings on the outside, and a rotating inner part; the force of rotating the alternator is greater the more charge is required...
So if the alternator is instead rewired with many coils, and those coils progressively drag a mangetic field across the stator; how does the physical drag of rotation manifest?
The coils most engaged with the core have a higher inductance; which is a longer time to have to apply current ... though I wonder; for the area under the curve, a longer time at a lower current is also lower power for a longer time... so it's not exactly like the drag of an alternator's cogging.
H parallel (http://www.falstad.com/circuit/circuitjs.html?cct=$+1+5.0000000000000004e-8+23.47059216675035+35+5+50%0A169+256+160+320+160+0+0.5+0.3+-0.6375975270996957+-1.7143719000669937e-7+4.282343796205681+0.99%0As+160+224+224+224+0+0+false%0Aw+256+224+224+224+0%0Aw+160+224+112+224+0%0Ar+192+160+128+160+0+1%0Aw+256+224+256+256+0%0Aw+320+224+336+224+0%0Aw+336+224+336+128+0%0Aw+256+160+256+128+0%0Ac+416+160+416+192+0+1e-10+1.2035728301285884%0Av+80+160+80+224+0+0+40+5+0+0+0.5%0Aw+80+224+112+224+0%0Aw+128+160+80+160+0%0Aw+320+160+416+160+0%0Aw+256+256+256+288+0%0As+256+288+320+288+0+0+false%0Aw+336+288+320+288+0%0Aw+352+192+352+96+0%0As+352+96+272+96+0+0+false%0Aw+256+128+256+96+0%0Aw+256+96+272+96+0%0Ad+416+240+416+192+1+0.805904783%0Aw+416+240+464+240+0%0Aw+464+240+464+48+0%0Aw+464+48+128+48+0%0Aw+128+48+128+160+0%0Aw+192+160+224+160+0%0As+224+160+256+160+0+0+false%0Aw+272+128+192+128+0%0Aw+336+128+320+128+0%0As+272+128+320+128+0+1+false%0Aw+192+128+192+160+0%0Ac+256+64+256+96+0+0.00001+0.0009999999999983607%0Ag+256+64+224+64+0%0Aw+336+224+352+224+0%0Aw+352+192+352+224+0%0Aw+336+288+320+192+0%0Ao+3+64+0+12291+4.998263296805952+4.99972969197471+0+2+3+3%0Ao+13+64+0+4099+10+0.00009765625+1+2+13+3%0Ao+34+64+0+4099+0.0048828125+6.4+2+2+34+3%0A) series (http://www.falstad.com/circuit/circuitjs.html?cct=$+1+0.000049999999999999996+23.47059216675035+53+5+50%0A169+256+160+320+160+0+0.5+0.3+-4.920174768702548+-3.061277858810996e-11+4.920174768671934+0.99%0As+160+224+224+224+0+0+false%0Aw+256+224+224+224+0%0Aw+160+224+112+224+0%0Ar+192+160+128+160+0+1%0Aw+256+224+256+256+0%0Aw+320+192+352+192+0%0Aw+320+224+336+224+0%0Aw+336+224+336+128+0%0Aw+256+160+256+128+0%0Ac+416+160+416+192+0+1e-10+4.892414034984266%0Av+80+160+80+224+0+0+40+5+0+0+0.5%0Aw+80+224+112+224+0%0Aw+128+160+80+160+0%0Aw+352+256+352+192+0%0Aw+320+160+416+160+0%0Aw+256+256+256+288+0%0As+256+288+320+288+0+1+false%0Aw+336+224+336+288+0%0Aw+336+288+320+288+0%0Aw+352+192+352+96+0%0As+352+96+272+96+0+0+false%0Aw+256+128+256+96+0%0Aw+256+96+272+96+0%0As+256+256+320+256+0+1+false%0Aw+320+256+352+256+0%0Ad+416+240+416+192+1+0.805904783%0Aw+416+240+464+240+0%0Aw+464+240+464+48+0%0Aw+464+48+128+48+0%0Aw+128+48+128+160+0%0Aw+192+160+224+160+0%0As+224+160+256+160+0+1+false%0Aw+272+128+192+128+0%0Aw+336+128+320+128+0%0As+272+128+320+128+0+0+false%0Aw+192+128+192+160+0%0Ac+256+64+256+96+0+0.00001+0.0009999999568732533%0Ag+256+64+224+64+0%0Ao+3+64+0+12291+5.866831996226645+4.994138538075198+0+2+3+3%0Ao+15+64+0+4099+2.5+0.00009765625+1+2+15+3%0A) (shared core)
16 15.63ms 33s
1 1ms 2.08s
0.5 487us 1s
all seem to be 2000x different. was (hoping) that a higher mutual inductance would charge relatively faster in parallel than series too; but seems linear time vs inductance.
Inductance relates to the reactance? not that size/strength of the field generated?
----
Edit:
I was pacing; and figured out I could grab a yoke and wind 3 windings on it; and test series/parallel-ness myself...
I realized Opposite poles are actually the same current direction; so mutual induction does not help....
but I wound quad-filar 32 turns each coil; and put all filaments in series.
so for output vs input; I have 2x coils on the input and 1 on the out; as a transformer this should be a step-down function. But, with my signal generator +/-3V; (and coils in parallel) can get +/-5V output. putting the coils in series I do get a step down...
so I suppose the parallel inductance does make it 1/2 ... so it's a step-up transformer then.
-
Hi d3x0r,
How is that possible when it's generating 2x the magnetic field?
It isn't. The formulas for series and parallel coils are for coils not sharing their magnetic fields. When sharing the fields the resultant field is either reinforced or weakened. When reinforced the field becomes coherent which makes the inductance increase by the square to the number of turns. The stored energy at the same current is likewise increased by the square. E.g. doubling the number of turns quadruples the inductance and the stored energy at the same current.
According to the principle of inversion (given by Wilbert B. Smith in 'The New Science') this is a way to take energy out of the cosmic background. This is done by harvesting the difference in energy levels from two fields before and after becoming coherent.
Citing from chapter 10 in Smiths book (https://www.wanttoknow.info/energy/wilbur_smith_new_science (https://www.wanttoknow.info/energy/wilbur_smith_new_science)):
...There is a very interesting factor which enters the picture at this point called the Principle of Inversion.
If a region is selected in which there are two fields of the same kind, same magnitude and same direction, such that very nearly half the Reality of each is within the region, then the two fields are just on the edge of becoming coherent. If the fields are not coherent the total energy in the region is the sum of the energies of the two fields, i.e., twice the square of the field intensity of each integrated over the region. If, however, the fields are coherent, the total energy is the square of twice the field intensity integrated over the region, or twice the energy of the two fields incoherent! This relationship is most significant as it represents the "packing energy" of the bits and pieces in atomic nuclei, and also points the way to the precipitation of energy out of the cosmic background.
The difference in energy between the fields from being separate to sharing the same space is how to liberate free energy.
Regards
Ole
-
I was pacing; and figured out I could grab a yoke and wind 3 windings on it; and test series/parallel-ness myself...
I realized Opposite poles are actually the same current direction; so mutual induction does not help....
pose the parallel inductance does make it 1/2 ... so it's a step-up transformer then.
In theory it also can be done with ferrite cores but the arrangement need to be kept like in original Pierre's design to have approximation of magnetic field behavior in the center. And there is limitation about size because smaller it gets more meshed magnetic fields become between themselves on the core.
And as parts are slowly arriving to my place I am still also looking for ways how I could get one of 20-30cm diameter motor stator cores with winding fittings towards center and to the outside. So I can make windings in same fashion Pierre had. Any suggestions which ones are available to buy?
Cheers!
-
In theory it also can be done with ferrite cores but the arrangement need to be kept like in original Pierre's design to have approximation of magnetic field behavior in the center. And there is limitation about size because smaller it gets more meshed magnetic fields become between themselves on the core.
And as parts are slowly arriving to my place I am still also looking for ways how I could get one of 20-30cm diameter motor stator cores with winding fittings towards center and to the outside. So I can make windings in same fashion Pierre had. Any suggestions which ones are available to buy?
Cheers!
Interesting, might I ask where the parts are available from ?
-
Interesting, might I ask where the parts are available from ?
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B06XKHN62M/
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01EYW5R5M/
https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B076BB33RC/
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01EV70C78/
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0739XRX8F/
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B073ZHVKC1/
https://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/mosfet-power-drivers/8312764/
https://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/mosfet-transistors/1596516/
-
In theory it also can be done with ferrite cores but the arrangement need to be kept like in original Pierre's design to have approximation of magnetic field behavior in the center. And there is limitation about size because smaller it gets more meshed magnetic fields become between themselves on the core.
And as parts are slowly arriving to my place I am still also looking for ways how I could get one of 20-30cm diameter motor stator cores with winding fittings towards center and to the outside. So I can make windings in same fashion Pierre had. Any suggestions which ones are available to buy?
Cheers!
Hi Arunas.
With regard to your question in the last paragraph, would the Armature from a large universal motor serve as your " inside out " design?
Cheers Graham.
-
Hi Arunas.
With regard to your question in the last paragraph, would the Armature from a large universal motor serve as your " inside out " design?
Cheers Graham.
Hi Graham,
Would you able to link picture and model of it? We are after 36 dual side pins stator.
Cheers!
-
In theory it also can be done with ferrite cores but the arrangement need to be kept like in original Pierre's design to have approximation of magnetic field behavior in the center. And there is limitation about size because smaller it gets more meshed magnetic fields become between themselves on the core.
Cheers!
Right; was just a curiosity/experiment; not suggesting alternative designs... If there is 'flux twisting' or that flux has a rope-like character that could be advantageous..
----
Redid the pairing/winding picture... I started to just label sets of 6 poles (original black 1-31, and blue 2-32); then starting marking paired poles with matching colors; especially over the top where it overlaps from 31-1 which has nothing to do with 1-7 pairing.
Although I was considering an alternative construction method; same design though; could wind 36 coils, stack them around a form, wind a 37th coil for the center pickup; put in spacers to fill between the center core and the sides; and fill with ferrite-epoxy/resin... (the air gap on sides is important to get flux channeled through pickup coil. (yellow fill; not ferite) )
-----
Added coil-color pairing (hue shifted like 90 degrees). (it was way wrong; fixed it)
-----
Edit3: Hmm...
1-6 ... which is 2 coils with no gap... turning on the next phase 2-7 overlaps ... 1
(1-11) slots on.. (2-12)
1,13,25
-----
Edit4 : WIth the poles so near, and a skip of 2 between... the winding is actually like a figure 8 (kinda)....
And then it turns out 1 full rotation is 6 cycles output...
Did some research on characteristics of figure 8 coils... FOund these :) (OFF TOPIC)
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/bem.21886 (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/bem.21886)
Abstract
Previously we proposed an eccentric figure‐eight coil that can cause threshold stimulation in the brain at lower driving currents. In this study, we performed numerical simulations and magnetic stimulations to healthy subjects for evaluating the advantages of the eccentric coil. The simulations were performed using a simplified spherical brain model and a realistic human brain model. We found that the eccentric coil required a driving current intensity of approximately 18% less than that required by the concentric coil to cause comparable eddy current densities within the brain. The eddy current localization of the eccentric coil was slightly higher than that of the concentric coil. A prototype eccentric coil was designed and fabricated. Instead of winding a wire around a bobbin, we cut eccentric‐spiral slits on the insulator cases, and a wire was woven through the slits. The coils were used to deliver magnetic stimulation to healthy subjects; among our results, we found that the current slew rate corresponding to motor threshold values for the concentric and eccentric coils were 86 and 78 A/µs, respectively. The results indicate that the eccentric coil consistently requires a lower driving current to reach the motor threshold than the concentric coil. Future development of compact magnetic stimulators will enable the treatment of some intractable neurological diseases at home. Bioelectromagnetics. 35:55–65, 2015. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
(and entirely disrelated)
http://www.reelex.com/REELEX/ (http://www.reelex.com/REELEX/) = they wind spools of (cable) in figure 8's so it balances the twists and feeds the cable straight...
-
right now there's these RFID antenna that are widely produced and can be like 10 cents each...
RFID antenna; 125kHz; 50x50x3mm; 790uH (https://www.tme.eu/en/details/cp-790uh-50-50-3/rf-antennas/sr-passives/?brutto=1&gclid=Cj0KCQjw8YXXBRDXARIsAMzsQuXgJ5s6g_PUVC58pG_fDR2ABUnuMylYGnQJjUW5ZxG255G2flzPj0caArtcEALw_wcB)
or like in 20 pcs sets from ebay for 8.92... (https://www.ebay.com/i/291691661292?chn=ps)
-
@gotoluc
30 pole, 5 pitch, suggested pairing...
would run you know like a Harley... stochastic engine something :)
Or maybe just 2 pairs...
-
We can probably remove 36 transistors and drive relays directly with Arduino outputs:
https://www.ebay.fr/itm/8-Canaux-5V-Relais-Module-High-Low-Level-Trigger-avec-Isolation-Optocoupleur/253428066457?hash=item3b017d6899:g:K38AAOSwhilaaYup (https://www.ebay.fr/itm/8-Canaux-5V-Relais-Module-High-Low-Level-Trigger-avec-Isolation-Optocoupleur/253428066457?hash=item3b017d6899:g:K38AAOSwhilaaYup)
-
We can probably remove 36 transistors and drive relays directly with Arduino outputs:
https://www.ebay.fr/itm/8-Canaux-5V-Relais-Module-High-Low-Level-Trigger-avec-Isolation-Optocoupleur/253428066457?hash=item3b017d6899:g:K38AAOSwhilaaYup (https://www.ebay.fr/itm/8-Canaux-5V-Relais-Module-High-Low-Level-Trigger-avec-Isolation-Optocoupleur/253428066457?hash=item3b017d6899:g:K38AAOSwhilaaYup)
Yes there's lots of those; even at newegg, amazon, ... I found one relay module was 16 in a plexiglass box for like $24.
can even get solid-state-relay versions...(err nevermind SSR; too leaky; too high voltage requirement)
-
@gotoluc
30 pole, 5 pitch, suggested pairing...
would run you know like a Harley... stochastic engine something :)
Or maybe just 2 pairs...
Interesting d3x0r
Thanks for sharing
Luc
BTW, today I took all my stator coils out and reinstalled them to a 5 slot space (pitch) instead of 6 and when I was done, now the windings look exactly like Pierre's stator.
I must of also had an error in the winding sequence since it is a drastic difference. I'm hopping this solves the low output issue.
I have no idea how I had the coil sequence before but now I feel confident it's done right seeing it looks like Pierre's.
Pictures below is, first, my Stator windings before, then Pierre's Stator windings, then my rewound Stator. Notice how the windings now curl.
-
Interesting d3x0r
Thanks for sharing
Luc
BTW, today I took all my stator coils out and reinstalled them to a 5 slot space (pitch) instead of 6 and when I was done, now the windings look exactly like Pierre's stator.
I must of also had an error in the winding sequence since it is a drastic difference. I'm hopping this solves the low output issue.
I have no idea how I had the coil sequence before but now I feel confident it's done right seeing it looks like Pierre's.
Pictures below is, first, my Stator windings before, then Pierre's Stator windings, then my rewound Stator. Notice how the windings now curl.
Nice :)
The first 25-ish windings, they are winding from on top of another coil, to an empty slot. (acutlaly the first 5 were empty slot to empty-slot... ) When you get to the one that ends in the first slot, then you're then winding on top of a coil and on top of a coil - shouldn't cause any notable difference. If you could have had them all preassembled you could have stacked them such that the last 4/5 are behind the first coils...
Although I doubt it results in any meaningful effect on the magnetic field produced :)
-
(added 30-4 sketch in previous)
-
Interesting d3x0r
Thanks for sharing
Luc
BTW, today I took all my stator coils out and reinstalled them to a 5 slot space (pitch) instead of 6 and when I was done, now the windings look exactly like Pierre's stator.
I must of also had an error in the winding sequence since it is a drastic difference. I'm hopping this solves the low output issue.
I have no idea how I had the coil sequence before but now I feel confident it's done right seeing it looks like Pierre's.
Pictures below is, first, my Stator windings before, then Pierre's Stator windings, then my rewound Stator. Notice how the windings now curl.
Hi Luc, good to see you are still working on the setup! Been busy but hope to get in touch over the weekend.
While you have the stator out, make sure to measure each winding and check its resistance to make sure the coils are not shorted anywhere.
Also, if you have time, take another measurement of the inductance with the rotor in so we can see if it is different from the old measurement you took.
Lastly, verify that you have the start of the winding and end of the winding labeled as such so you won't make a mistake when you hook them up.
PmgR
-
There's low RPM generators with neodymium magnets....
Anyone wanna do some math?
https://www.quora.com/Are-electromagnets-stronger-than-the-same-volume-of-N52-neodymium-magnets
Permanent magnets can develop no more than 1.2T in a highly permeable magnetic circuit.
Electromagnets routinely can produce 1.5 to 2T in the same circuit, and are capable of more if driven harder and with ample cooling.
Another similar question... (https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/47821/can-i-replace-neodymium-magnets-with-similar-size-electromagnets)
B=μ0 * core permeability * N * I/ (slot height),
N=(16?20?) turns
I = ? What is the resistance of these coils?
to get an order of magnitude for the field. Our real field is going to be smaller.
I get ~10-3 T or 10 Gauss. So it's pretty much hopeless.. Permanent magnets are way too strong.
I think he discounted the core permeability though... and was calculating for a very small magnet, whereas these are very large coils.
----------
Having problems finding pre-compared electromagets vs neodymium magnet strength...
Although from the rough information I think probably the field strengths are approximately the same as or greater than equivalent magnets rotating instead.
-
Interesting d3x0r
Thanks for sharing
Luc
BTW, today I took all my stator coils out and reinstalled them to a 5 slot space (pitch) instead of 6 and when I was done, now the windings look exactly like Pierre's stator.
Nice remake!
As a side note due 30 pole stator you will need workarounds due the way Pierre was driving his coils.
In his setup he had 36 coils with 5 coils spacing and 3 pole (120 degrees) switching with a group space of 6+6 coils for each pole. And 4 coils in series for single polarity.
In your case 30 / 6 = 5+5 coils per group which leave 3 coils in series for single polarity. And the 5 coils spacing need reducing to 4 coils spacing. This will result weaker poles but same arrangement.
Cheers!
-
And 4 coils in series for single polarity.
Cheers!
Please provide link to information confirming that suggestion...? I saw nothing other than the translation error 'coils driven in series' which is more like 'coils driven in a sequence' or 'coils driven serially' even which is kinda like 'series' but entirely not.
-
Please provide link to information confirming that suggestion...? I saw nothing other than the translation error 'coils driven in series' which is more like 'coils driven in a sequence' or 'coils driven serially' even which is kinda like 'series' but entirely not.
In Piere's video number 5 with drawing he was explaining how he was making poles of each coil group. Not clear enough explanation for everyone but it did make sense when he was attempting to explain space between 2 opposite poles. and that was 4 coils in series instead of 6 to solve his problem.
-
In Piere's video number 5 with drawing he was explaining how he was making poles of each coil group. Not clear enough explanation for everyone but it did make sense when he was attempting to explain space between 2 opposite poles. and that was 4 coils in series instead of 6 to solve his problem.
Jeg posted a pic here (http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg519362/#msg519362)
is that from the video?
or slightly earlier (http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg519281/#msg519281) 'to solve the problem I will isolate each magnetic field by making 4 pole instead of 6' which doesn't imply....
And he could be infering that the lines inside the inductor indications are the span of that coil's field... not that all the coils in all those are on...
-
should step 2 relays on at a time - total 20 relays.
left 1 right 2
left 2 right 3 etc...
top and bottom shoudl be shorted too..
Nope; that won't work... it'll short dead across when 2+3 are on for instance...
(Image deleted; no bueno)
-
Maybe 2 pole, with series, maintaining some separation? 3 or 4 in series prevents dead-shorts...
-
Jeg posted a pic here (http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg519362/#msg519362)
is that from the video?
It is. And 4 coils are streching under each pole marker and leaving 1 free coil to each side. You can also trace that back from the first video where he had spinning magnets fixed in the center. It tell a lot about operation with 1-2-1 coil activation sequence.
EDIT: From pieces of Pierre video/explanations I did collect there are X+4 positive and X-7 (mathematically deducted from series of coils backwards) negative current flow. And I am planning to test this arrangement when will have all parts.
-
Hi Luc, good to see you are still working on the setup! Been busy but hope to get in touch over the weekend.
While you have the stator out, make sure to measure each winding and check its resistance to make sure the coils are not shorted anywhere.
Also, if you have time, take another measurement of the inductance with the rotor in so we can see if it is different from the old measurement you took.
Lastly, verify that you have the start of the winding and end of the winding labeled as such so you won't make a mistake when you hook them up.
PmgR
Hi PmgR,
I'm away from the lab till Tuesday next week. I'll resume my new stator coil repositioning tests then to see if my output is greater then I previously had. I think it will.
As for coil resistance, it should be identical as it's the same coils, just repositioned with a 5 slot space and as per Pierre's last instructions. I also doubt the inductance would change much but can re-check. However, all the coils are now reconnected and soldered in series, so I don't know how much that will affect a single coil test result?... and yes, I was very careful, each coil wire lead was labeled prior to connecting all the coils in series.
Regards
Luc
-
As for coil resistance, it should be identical as it's the same coils,
Regards
Luc
There's no way your coils can be 0.5 Ohms....
-
There's no way your coils can be 0.5 Ohms....
Why not?... each coil is 35 turns using 11 inches of 22AWG wire per turn = 385 inches / 12 = 32 feet of wire per coil
32 feet of 22AWG = 0.516 Ohms according to this wire resistance calculator: https://www.cirris.com/learning-center/calculators/133-wire-resistance-calculator-table (https://www.cirris.com/learning-center/calculators/133-wire-resistance-calculator-table)
My winding video demo shows a 3.5 inch diameter form I used which = to 11 inches of circumference: https://youtu.be/7vN0wpY2lok (https://youtu.be/7vN0wpY2lok)
-
Why not?... each coil is 35 turns using 11 inches of 22AWG wire per turn = 385 inches / 12 = 32 feet of wire per coil
32 feet of 22AWG = 0.516 Ohms according to this wire resistance calculator: https://www.cirris.com/learning-center/calculators/133-wire-resistance-calculator-table (https://www.cirris.com/learning-center/calculators/133-wire-resistance-calculator-table)
My winding video demo shows a 3.5 inch diameter form I used which = to 11 inches of circumference: https://youtu.be/7vN0wpY2lok (https://youtu.be/7vN0wpY2lok)
Ok thanks :) I expected more length requirement...
-
.... but it did make sense when he was attempting to explain space between 2 opposite poles.
This implies a separate driving for each coil. As long as the coils are connected in series between each other, then gap can not be created between poles. I assume that Pierre's new stator coils (90T per coil) are for to be driven separately. And that is a good explanation of why he moved from 30T to 90T.
Regards
-
This implies a separate driving for each coil. As long as the coils are connected in series between each other, then gap can not be created between poles. I assume that Pierre's new stator coils (90T per coil) are for to be driven separately. And that is a good explanation of why he moved from 30T to 90T.
Regards
About Pierre's second prototype. Yesterday he informed me that it won't do what he had hopped for and decided to abandon that idea.
Hopefully no one started winding. I'm letting you know just in case anyone was considering it.
Regards
Luc
Fr. A propos du deuxième prototype de Pierre. Hier, il m'a informé que sa ne ferait pas ce qu'il avait espéré et a décidé d'abandonner cette idée.
J'espère que personne n'a commencé à enrouler. Je vous préviens juste au cas où quelqu'un le considérerait.
Cordialement
Luc
-
About Pierre's second prototype. Yesterday he informed me that it won't do what he had hopped for and decided to abandon that idea.
Hopefully no one started winding. I'm letting you know just in case anyone was considering it.
Regards
No worries mate. The purpose is to experiment. I will treat it like a normal torroid transformer. 75T per coil.
-
No worries mate. The purpose is to experiment. I will treat it like a normal torroid transformer. 75T per coil.
Hello Jeg,
I know, it's off topic for this thread, but it's related to your winding.
I think you can experiment with what is explained in this video, applying it to your project:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ma-TTC4Ft1Y&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ma-TTC4Ft1Y&feature=youtu.be)
If you do, connect one out of two for the first group, and also one out of two for the second group.
The power supply is AC. Bear in mind that the coils must be in opposition.
Curious to know the result.
Cordially
Michel
FR
Bonjour Jeg,
je sais, c'est hors sujet pour ce fil, mais c'est en rapport avec votre bobinage.
Je pense que vous pouvez expériementer ce qui est expliqué dans cette vidéo, en l'appliquant à votre projet :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ma-TTC4Ft1Y&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ma-TTC4Ft1Y&feature=youtu.be)
Si vous le faites, connectez une dobine sur deux pour le premier groupe, et également une sur deux pour le deuxième groupe.
L'alimentation se fait en courant alternatif. Tenir compte que les bobines doivent être en opposition.
Curieux de connaître le résultat.
Cordialement
Michel
-
Hi MichelM
Thanks for showing this video. It is just that it is something completely different from what we are trying to achieve right now, and everything needs time for consideration. So i prefer to stick with what we started here instead of wasting time to something doubtful.
Regards
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ma-TTC4Ft1Y&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ma-TTC4Ft1Y&feature=youtu.be)
Cordialement
Michel
Not to drag on the off-topic. But if his circuit is really as the schematic indicates, the 'high current meter' isn't across the load, but rather is just a very low voltage load across the secondary coil itself; and the current through that meter doesn't exist except the meter and the coil, and is not representive of the current through the bulb; which is fine to have amps different in seperate parts... and the meter itself is certainly neglegable power drop. If you disagree, start a new thread, and pm me a link.
Now back to your regularly scheduled program.
-
This implies a separate driving for each coil. As long as the coils are connected in series between each other, then gap can not be created between poles. I assume that Pierre's new stator coils (90T per coil) are for to be driven separately. And that is a good explanation of why he moved from 30T to 90T.
Regards
Pierre did not show his circuit and how he connects positive and negative switching so I created my version of module - https://i.imgur.com/muSF3CN.png (https://i.imgur.com/muSF3CN.png)
This module allow full control with MOSFETs of positive and negative switching for 4 coils in series. And for Pierre's case it would require 9 of these modules in series with control circuit. Which would allow powering 4 coils in series for single polarity.
In addition it have logic protection against short circuit between HIGH and LOW state on same position.
Hopefully this circuit will be useful for experiments.
Cheers!
-
Hi T1000
I was thinking the same. I mean the usage of a full bridge per coil but separately driving with no connection between the coils. What is the type of the driver in your schematic?
Regards
-
Hi T1000
I was thinking the same. I mean the usage of a full bridge per coil but separately driving with no connection between the coils. What is the type of the driver in your schematic?
Regards
The driver is L298N - https://www.sparkfun.com/datasheets/Robotics/L298_H_Bridge.pdf (https://www.sparkfun.com/datasheets/Robotics/L298_H_Bridge.pdf)
It alows separate control of 4 H-Bridges.
When powering coils with more than 12V the 12V voltage stabilizer will be required for the VS pin.
Initially I wanted to drive with H-Bridge drivers but quickly realized it is painful and costly way when we need separate control of HIGH and LOW state on each coil pin.
P.S> In the circuit I shared the R sense pins 1&15 are connected to negative when no feedback is required. I left it open originally.
-
Thank you Arunas ;)
-
Hi T-1000,
Pierre did not show his circuit and how he connects positive and negative switching so I created my version of module - https://i.imgur.com/muSF3CN.png (https://i.imgur.com/muSF3CN.png)
This module allow full control with MOSFETs of positive and negative switching for 4 coils in series.
The top MOSFETs should be bootstrapped as else they will work in the linear region instead of working as switches. When the gate voltage of a top MOSFET is at its drain voltage its source voltage will be the drain voltage minus its gate-source voltage. This leaves a voltage between the drain and source which generates heat if a current is passed at the same time.
For generating least amount of heat the MOSFETs must be fully turned on (saturated) or fully turned off (open). This leaves the heat generated to switching transitions and some on state loss.
Regards
Ole
-
Hi T-1000,
The top MOSFETs should be bootstrapped as else they will work in the linear region instead of working as switches. When the gate voltage of a top MOSFET is at its drain voltage its source voltage will be the drain voltage minus its gate-source voltage. This leaves a voltage between the drain and source which generates heat if a current is passed at the same time.
For generating least amount of heat the MOSFETs must be fully turned on (saturated) or fully turned off (open). This leaves the heat generated to switching transitions and some on state loss.
Regards
Ole
Alternatively, you can use a P-type MOSFET at the positive supply side (although it will have a bit more resisitance than an N-FET).
For more info on bootstrapping, see this Wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bootstrapping_(electronics) under "Driving MOS transistors". Easiest solution is to use P-FET.
PmgR
-
https://vimeo.com/178144785
-
https://vimeo.com/178144785
The coils arrangement are pretty much in similar fashion due series connection for all coils. Unless there is opposite polarity starting on each 1/6th from the 36 coils the weak opposite polarity is going all way around ring from coil X-7 due 3rd set setting negative polarity on X(3rd)+4.
-
Alternatively, you can use a P-type MOSFET at the positive supply side (although it will have a bit more resisitance than an N-FET).
For more info on bootstrapping, see this Wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bootstrapping_(electronics) under "Driving MOS transistors". Easiest solution is to use P-FET.
PmgR
Yes, the positive side N-Channel MOSFET may be unstable when its voltage is higher than VS side of the driver. However, according to datasheed the voltage difference will be enough to turn MOSFET ON due coil side going to negative and voltage drop. And IRFP460 can handle up to +/-20V on the gate. I will look on possible replacement with P channel MOSFET in mean time but that mean additional logic inversion in signal just to drive it.
Cheers!
-
Just there are differences:
1) We have field moving by 6 coils groups from which we make one single magnet from 2 coils by winding one's begining on other's end. So Figuera style. Not just 120 degrees 3 phase AC changing polarity on 3 coils.
2) There is single signifant magnetic pole across 4 coils in series
3) We have weak bucking polarity going opposite way as well due all coils connection in series
Hopefully this will clear up some confusion.
What style of Figuera are you talking about?
-
-deleted-
-
What style of Figuera are you talking about?
https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/patents/patent-44267-year-1908/ (https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/patents/patent-44267-year-1908/) and https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patent-clemente-figuera-30378.pdf (https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patent-clemente-figuera-30378.pdf)
P.S> I see a lot of similarities from those patents with what Pierre was doing.
-
https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/patents/patent-44267-year-1908/ (https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/patents/patent-44267-year-1908/) and https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patent-clemente-figuera-30378.pdf (https://figueragenerator.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/patent-clemente-figuera-30378.pdf)
P.S> I see a lot of similarities from those patents with what Pierre was doing.
Yes, this is very similar ! Thank You !
See my video: every second coils turn on. When field work is normal, magnet spin itself speed. When push back, magnet spin "2 times fast back more".
Little step forward ...?
https://youtu.be/Rpyoiv1gRts
-
Regarding my Reply #695 can somebody make a test? http://overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg520726/#msg520726 / Arne
-
Yes, this is very similar ! Thank You !
See my video: every second coils turn on. When field work is normal, magnet spin itself speed. When push back, magnet spin "2 times fast back more".
Little step forward ...?
https://youtu.be/Rpyoiv1gRts (https://youtu.be/Rpyoiv1gRts)
Very good build and demonstration r2fpl
Thanks for sharing
Luc
-
Yes, this is very similar ! Thank You !
See my video: every second coils turn on. When field work is normal, magnet spin itself speed. When push back, magnet spin "2 times fast back more".
Little step forward ...?
https://youtu.be/Rpyoiv1gRts (https://youtu.be/Rpyoiv1gRts)
Can you describe or show a schematic of how and what coils you are turning on and how many are on at the same time and how the Arduino is spinning your field? Schematic would be nice.
PmgR
-
https://youtu.be/1Kl4e5LkCfs
ex.: digitalWrite(1,on), digitalWrite(13,on), digitalWrite(25,on);
coil 1,13,25
...
...
stator: cw-cw-cw-cw-cw.....cw all(+...-)
connection = Pierre schematic diagram
-
https://youtu.be/1Kl4e5LkCfs (https://youtu.be/1Kl4e5LkCfs)
ex.: digitalWrite(1,on), digitalWrite(13,on), digitalWrite(25,on);
coil 1,13,25
...
...
stator: cw-cw-cw-cw-cw.....cw all(+...-)
connection = Pierre schematic diagram
Seems you are just switching coils off before going next on state. When comparing to physically rotating magnetic pole it would be just on-forcibly-stop then on again. Which is not what we are trying to achieve. Can you try to drive in same way Pierre did? coil 1 on,wait,coil 2 on,wait, coil 1 off, wait, coil 3 on, wait.. and so on with 1-2-1 pattern.
Cheers!
-
Seems you are just switching coils off before going next on state. When comparing to physically rotating magnetic pole it would be just on-forcibly-stop then on again. Which is not what we are trying to achieve. Can you try to drive in same way Pierre did? coil 1 on,wait,coil 2 on,wait, coil 1 off, wait, coil 3 on, wait.. and so on with 1-2-1 pattern.
Cheers!
This is the modified version as a curiosity. Normally it is just like Pierre, and nothing happens after the move. The field is spinning but there is no tension on LOAD.
As in the movie: https://youtu.be/0IKX8MeVQio (= original programm Pierre 1on-2on-1off ...)
Probably the coils must be cw-ccw-cw-ccw .... or else.
-
Hi all
Here is attachments is what Gary Porter (Skipperbythesea) has built so far.
He ordered a big PCB board to mount mosfets and arduino stuff too (cost 500USD)
He is serious builder, fully understands the power you get from the backemf/recoil as well, and knows how to harness and store it.
His stationary-rotor is going to be square shaped, made from a HV transformer core he as got already....
Note his bifilar coils in his stators - idea is to flip polarity very simple, pulse one bifilar half one way, other half the other way. Now also un-used half gets some tight induced power into them as well.
-
I thought i would do a search 'magnetic flux rope'
to get an idea of what the world might think what I'm saying means...
https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/182659/what-is-a-magnetic-flux-rope-and-how-does-it-differ-from-magnetic-flux-tubes
More rope-like images (https://www.google.com/search?q=sunspots+magnetic+rope&tbm=isch&tbs=rimg:CX-5Vdznmb5qIjhF0vvx2sCnuz-QSfPM_1eg7kL0xh8HLUnU2bWyh0IGhhF_1-pkNQWw0eHtAh33QGvAm76Hs6gt4zcCoSCUXS-_1HawKe7EZ2lyXltYKRPKhIJP5BJ88z96DsRMwdyt0qfM60qEgmQvTGHwctSdRGLOBEJj_1D3EioSCTZtbKHQgaGEEaUrsF9NmE24KhIJX_16mQ1BbDR4Rmkn-IGBbHgwqEgke0CHfdAa8CRHxBDWWzNoHYyoSCbvoezqC3jNwEdauGFd7d_1YK&tbo=u&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjux4Tp4uLaAhVEnuAKHdaVBfAQ9C96BAgBEBs&biw=1219&bih=706&dpr=1.25) Seem only be able to capture them from the side, while top-down on a sun-spot just shows blackness... And only when charged with plasma.
my attempt to get more knowledge about knowledge of magnetic flux ropes (https://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=17058) (they are no help; probably should find a better thread to interject on)
Separate poles are not going to work very well...
------------
r2fpl I don't know how hard it is for you to reconfigure...
But if you started with the simplest case... north on one side and south on the entirely opposite side. (A total of 2 or 4 coils energized), and swept them through 180 degrees... and position the pickup at the 90 degree mark should get something resembling tension on the pickup?
-
d3x0r;
I see you are a troll and a shill. why do you insist on interrupting threads with your total bull that has nothing to do with the thread. people like you should be barred for life and your IP address blocked.
you should be a shamed of your self for having no class, decency or respect for others.
respect these peoples thread and drop your BS or better yet GO AWAY !. you will be reported as a troll and a shill.
Marathonman
-
d3x0r;
I see you are a troll and a shill. why do you insist on interupting threads with your and bull that has nothing to do with the thread. people like you should be barred for life and your IP address blocked.
you should be a shamed of your self for having no class, decency or respect for others.
respect these peoples thread and drop your BS or better yet GO AWAY !. you will be reported as a troll and a shill.
Marathonman
Says fake news...
I hesitated to respond, on topic, in the topic related to the post that was also duplicated by saad. I knew I would draw your eye with disagreement; so I said, respectfully, I disagree. And dropped it.
This, however, is on topic here, and relavent to the MO.
But; as always, can lead a cat to food but can't make them eat.
-
This is the modified version as a curiosity. Normally it is just like Pierre, and nothing happens after the move. The field is spinning but there is no tension on LOAD.
Possibly the ending of previous coil are too tight with beginning of new coil on each pin? If that is a case it is getting cancellation. It have to be at least few centimeters distance between coils. And it is main reason why I am still looking for hard-to-get stator which would allow fill space with core between those ends.
As in the movie: https://youtu.be/0IKX8MeVQio (= original programm Pierre 1on-2on-1off ...)
Probably the coils must be cw-ccw-cw-ccw .... or else.
In that video each pin around a ring have individual formed magnet with opposite to the next pin I guess?
Also all coils need to be in same direction. But the current flow need to be opposite on every 6 coils from 36 around stator.
P.S> We need to generate moving field to be same as we would turn rotor with 3 phase magnets inside of stator. Not just rotating magnetic field around coil axis.
-
Possibly the ending of previous coil are too tight with beginning of new coil on each pin? If that is a case it is getting cancellation. It have to be at least few centimeters distance between coils. And it is main reason why I am still looking for hard-to-get stator which would allow fill space with core between those ends.
In that video each pin around a ring have individual formed magnet with opposite to the next pin I guess?
Also all coils need to be in same direction. But the current flow need to be opposite on every 6 coils from 36 around stator.
P.S> We need to generate moving field to be same as we would turn rotor with 3 phase magnets inside of stator. Not just rotating magnetic field around coil axis.
The original pairing given by Pierre was 1-6. That's a skip of 5 for a paired winding. the first coils on are 1 and 13, which puts a skip of 2 between the second and third windings, but then its pair had a skip of 0.
http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/msg518071/#msg518071 (that image is terrible because it pairs pairs badly...
http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/dlattach/attach/167735/image// (paired coils are in the same numbers, which you can compare with the original; 1, 13, 31 are also in a set... that's lines puple, orange, green; the offset on the bottom left is kinda worse than I expected, and the orange overlaps the inner black more than I would have liked.
I added black dashes later to separate the N and S (or S and N ) paired coils... which then puts 3 sets of close poles with gaps
as illustrated here
http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/dlattach/attach/167740/image//
But because of the series driving piere's coils can't actually be driven like that so you need a span of a couple on .... which then you lose the sparation; and although Pierre never showed 4 poles, one might extrapolate that you'd have a pair close, a skip, and another pair close.
http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/dlattach/attach/167768/image// (the 3 in series number are in the same color.... with 3 in series; a 2 minimum in series is required); but that's also 30 poles... could find my 36 template and make a similar highlight.
-
Those images do not reflect actual required magnetic polarities. When position 1,13,24 are +HIGH with the position 5,17,29 are +LOW. And position 7,19,30 -LOW with position 11,23,34 -HIGH ('-' = inverted current direction representation). That assumes all coils are on same direction and in series. Then we have same polarity over 4 coils towards center and opposite polarity outside of stator.
P.S> To test polarities set delay for 30 seconds and to limit current have bulb attached in series to coils.
-
The capacitors were the expensive part found these
2.7V 500F on a CDSWELL charge balancer
https://amzn.to/2FzaEXb (https://amzn.to/2FzaEXb)
apparently pierre's capacitors are only 1/2 charged since he has 3 of these in series. They're also sold as car voltage boosters; they come with a 50W resistor because a DC battery can dump so much current probably.
Arduino mega is cheap of course; and relays...
opto isolated
https://amzn.to/2Ibf8bZ (https://amzn.to/2Ibf8bZ)
there was only one of these
https://amzn.to/2KvS2ej
but it's also optoisolated and claims 5mA operation... thought the other was the same but I guess no.
And after a little research; even though these are also low-enable, writing output to a high before setting it as an output will first-enable with the pin high; https://www.selloutsoon.com/albums/documents/20-018-102/8+Relay+Module.rar (https://www.selloutsoon.com/albums/documents/20-018-102/8+Relay+Module.rar) has a internal schematic. Without a logic input enabled to pull it down, the relays won't enable on initial power up.
-
http://tinyurl.com/y79xsbjp (http://tinyurl.com/y79xsbjp)
hmmm...
-
http://tinyurl.com/y79xsbjp (http://tinyurl.com/y79xsbjp)
hmmm...
You have a bad connect on the lower left switch.
Also, you have 4 relays between the coils on the end (two to the left of the first, and two to the right of last) not 100% why that's causing the oscillation, since it should be just the same as having the first closed; which it already is...
-----
@any
Any advice where to source AC motor/generator cores? Was considering getting a alternator from the junk yard, but they don't have very much metal on the outside for the outer flux path.
-
You have a bad connect on the lower left switch.
Also, you have 4 relays between the coils on the end (two to the left of the first, and two to the right of last) not 100% why that's causing the oscillation, since it should be just the same as having the first closed; which it already is...
-----
@any
Any advice where to source AC motor/generator cores? Was considering getting a alternator from the junk yard, but they don't have very much metal on the outside for the outer flux path.
Here are a few links to places to look for surplus motors:
https://www.surpluscenter.com/
https://www.blowerwheel.com/electric-motors
http://www.skycraftsurplus.com/dcmotors.aspx
-
You have a bad connect on the lower left switch.
Also, you have 4 relays between the coils on the end (two to the left of the first, and two to the right of last) not 100% why that's causing the oscillation, since it should be just the same as having the first closed; which it already is...
-----
@any
Any advice where to source AC motor/generator cores? Was considering getting a alternator from the junk yard, but they don't have very much metal on the outside for the outer flux path.
Who said it could not be different? Pierre did not say everything. Most important thing is joining the stator. There are many options.
-
Another version:
http://tinyurl.com/y7uml9dt (http://tinyurl.com/y7uml9dt)
-
Another version:
http://tinyurl.com/y7uml9dt
The correct switching positions would be:
step1) http://tinyurl.com/y7vsxqdq then delay()
step2) http://tinyurl.com/y77hkk2q then delay()
step3) http://tinyurl.com/ycarhljp then delay()
Cheers!
-
Here are a few links to places to look for surplus motors:
https://www.surpluscenter.com/
https://www.blowerwheel.com/electric-motors
http://www.skycraftsurplus.com/dcmotors.aspx
There's a Granger down the road... https://www.grainger.com/content/general-catalog but kinda silly to get a new motor...
I also thought maybe AC (air cond) repair places? (like the blower fan motor but tthat's < 1HP)
Who said it could not be different? Pierre did not say everything. Most important thing is joining the stator. There are many options.
Ya; but when attempting at replication I prefer to try to match paramters as close as possible; since I don't have anything else immediately available that's viable...
I have a bunch of E cores, which I can sort-of use; but they are very small; so using 24ga wire it's really low inductance; and 32 ga wire is much better inductance; but with 12V doesn't really generate a good field (too much resistance); so I don't those will be viable... plus too many wedge-shaped gaps inbetween...
also considering the null results vs what I have seen of other replicators; that might be a factor;
also I don't know if the slots are important; such that a ferrite filled coil set should also have the fingers?
-
The correct switching positions would be:
step1) http://tinyurl.com/y7vsxqdq then delay()
step2) http://tinyurl.com/y77hkk2q then delay()
step3) http://tinyurl.com/ycarhljp then delay()
Cheers!
T-1000,
Three do not work on how many enabled? can you draw ranges as you see it?
-
There's a Granger down the road... https://www.grainger.com/content/general-catalog but kinda silly to get a new motor...
I also thought maybe AC (air cond) repair places? (like the blower fan motor but tthat's < 1HP)
Ya; but when attempting at replication I prefer to try to match paramters as close as possible; since I don't have anything else immediately available that's viable...
I have a bunch of E cores, which I can sort-of use; but they are very small; so using 24ga wire it's really low inductance; and 32 ga wire is much better inductance; but with 12V doesn't really generate a good field (too much resistance); so I don't those will be viable... plus too many wedge-shaped gaps inbetween...
also considering the null results vs what I have seen of other replicators; that might be a factor;
also I don't know if the slots are important; such that a ferrite filled coil set should also have the fingers?
It's all about the right field motion, frequency, intensity and the right moment of reception. It is also important to break between the fields and the number of these fields. The LOAD coil is one magnet!
-
T-1000,
Three do not work on how many enabled? can you draw ranges as you see it?
Try in different browser? It works even on my mobile.
There are 4 coils in series for single polarity. 2 coils not active between opposite current flows. The positioning activation sequence is 1-2-1.
-
It's all about the right field motion, frequency, intensity and the right moment of reception. It is also important to break between the fields and the number of these fields. The LOAD coil is one magnet!
The alternator works by dragging magnetic flux lines of electromagnet across pickup. It is 3D movement+rotation of magnetic field. In comparison to transformers it have one more axis on change.
And the load is alternating magnet with opposing magnetic field to change.
-
The alternator works by dragging magnetic flux lines of electromagnet across pickup. It is 3D movement+rotation of magnetic field. In comparison to transformers it have one more axis on change.
And the load is alternating magnet with opposing magnetic field to change.
So according to Figuera ?
-
So according to Figuera ?
As you mentioned, he did same as Pierre with making magnetic field move without moving electromagnet by kinetic force. But while keeping magnetic field always active, switching coil sets to make magnetic poles peaks/ neutral/ reverse move across pickup.
-
I have a bunch of E cores, which I can sort-of use; but they are very small
also considering the null results vs what I have seen of other replicators; that might be a factor;
also I don't know if the slots are important; such that a ferrite filled coil set should also have the fingers?
Here is the principle of my new small test bed. A double straight line, the Figuera way. Ferrite E-cores (small) in rows after each other and side by side on top of two bigger Ferrite U-cores. The output is on a single or a double I-cores. See my princip pic.
Regards Arne
-
It seems that the meter itself gets voltage at the moment of the sequence.
https://youtu.be/xrxhqFsXNSE
-
It seems that the meter itself gets voltage at the moment of the sequence.
https://youtu.be/xrxhqFsXNSE
Yes.
Reply #480 on: April 16, 2018: http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg519967/#msg519967
" It is strange that Pierres digital voltmeter COMES ON and lits BEFORE the main 5 Hz Arduino sequence starts ???
3:rd film 10.0 min. "
Maybe that meter only needs a few Volts to work/ lit?
Regards Arne
-
Yes.
Reply #480 on: April 16, 2018: http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg519967/#msg519967
" It is strange that Pierres digital voltmeter COMES ON and lits BEFORE the main 5 Hz Arduino sequence starts ???
3:rd film 10.0 min. "
Maybe that meter only needs a few Volts to work/ lit?
Regards Arne
I did not remember you wrote it, sorry.
Yes, a few volts but is very important for answer how this work.
I think this is a magnetic field spin in opposition. This is my version for today :)
How make this effect after this start sequential. I must make this work.
-
Yes.
Reply #480 on: April 16, 2018: http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg519967/#msg519967 (http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg519967/#msg519967)
" It is strange that Pierres digital voltmeter COMES ON and lits BEFORE the main 5 Hz Arduino sequence starts ???
3:rd film 10.0 min. "
Maybe that meter only needs a few Volts to work/ lit?
Regards Arne
Hmm.
In the first video; 8:28 when he first activates the system; the core shifts slightly...to the lower left, then when the next change happens, it shifts to the upper right; at the same time the coil goes on. The first few cycles cause the pickup to shift and settle in a little... the plug jiggles a little with the core...
Speaking of which - where does one get such a good fitting core? The motor I ended up with a solid reluctance core; cut it?
-
Motor move from LOAD coil
https://youtu.be/23s_ivbY88Y
-
Hmm.
In the first video; 8:28 when he first activates the system; the core shifts slightly...to the lower left, then when the next change happens, it shifts to the upper right; at the same time the coil goes on. The first few cycles cause the pickup to shift and settle in a little... the plug jiggles a little with the core...
Speaking of which - where does one get such a good fitting core? The motor I ended up with a solid reluctance core; cut it?
Right! Yes it shakes during the first "field flash sequence". / Arne
-
So this stator Dial Steel/Copper/Zinc Evaportative Cooler Motor (https://www.lowes.com/pd/Dial-Steel-Copper-Zinc-Evaportative-Cooler-Motor/1016109)
... (I should have taken video/pics disassembling...) Has some shallow slots, and some deep slots in the corners. The copper windings were much thicker (more shared coils) in the corner slots. And there was actually some varnished iron(I should have read 'zinc') wire around 4 edges (shallow slots).
3/4 HP (550 watts); Pierre's I *think* is 2-3HP... 1500-2150 watts?
Which If the amount of flux generated is important; than the amount of core to hold that is relevant... An alternator for 100 amps is only 1200W?...
3D Model - technology's cool :)
https://skfb.ly/6yKHQ (https://skfb.ly/6yKHQ)
-
I would guess that with that strange core, you would want to wind each coil the same as you can fit in the short slots. He was using equal winds in all of his slots on the original.
Now that said, I am very curious on something. I one was to use an armature with brushes and a speed controlled motor to switch the coils. Would this setup be considered a lentz law defeat. The reverse magnetic field would have nothing to act on so would be mute. It is still going to be there so will it have an effect on the output coil?
I am looking into setting up a test to see if that kind of switching will in fact defeat that nasty effect. At the moment I have no way to test it but am looking into a motor shop for a core and have lots of wire to play with. Will not put out 1600W for sure but will test the question. Sadly my time is in another field and so will do it on the side. Time will tell.
Pierre, stick with it mate, you are on to the truth. The bug has you so flow with it.
thay
-
Ya, figured that using the smaller slots should be the good plan. I nearly overflowed though; I measured, computed, and then ended up padding 15% more windings (approx).
Sooo tedious....
I though that planning ahead a bit wouldn't be so bad.. and I could make pretty winding stack at the beginning/end.... I should have just done it the simple way. Was so very hard to get the last few coils slotted.
Now just have to sort out the rats nest, and am attaching lead wires to the coils; which then will go to some connectors...
-
think I got the polarity all -correct... did make a compass of sorts so I can test the connections...
had an ancient crochet needle from high school ...could use that to pull thread through the coil loops... can't really see; but did secure the first layer with thread; then decided to just comb them all in a single direction
...
falstad circuit (http://www.falstad.com/circuit/circuitjs.html?cct=$+1+0.000005+10.20027730826997+46+5+50%0Av+144+240+144+160+0+0+40+5+0+0+0.5%0Aw+144+160+144+96+0%0Aw+144+96+224+96+0%0Aw+224+96+272+96+0%0Aw+224+96+224+256+0%0Aw+144+240+144+288+0%0Aw+256+288+256+64+0%0AS+384+80+304+80+0+0+false+0+2%0AS+400+272+320+272+0+1+false+0+2%0Aw+320+256+288+256+0%0Aw+288+256+224+256+0%0Aw+272+96+304+96+0%0Aw+256+64+304+64+0%0Aw+256+288+320+288+0%0Ad+416+224+368+224+1+0.805904783%0Ad+416+144+352+144+1+0.805904783%0Aw+304+96+304+144+0%0Aw+304+144+352+144+0%0Aw+288+256+288+224+0%0Aw+288+224+368+224+0%0Aw+400+272+416+272+0%0Aw+416+224+416+272+0%0Aw+416+144+416+80+0%0Aw+384+80+416+80+0%0Aw+416+80+464+80+0%0Aw+464+80+464+128+0%0Al+464+128+464+208+0+1+0.2986305911224403%0Aw+416+272+464+272+0%0Aw+464+272+464+208+0%0Ar+144+288+208+288+0+1%0Aw+208+288+256+288+0%0Al+512+208+512+128+0+1+-0.2986305911224403%0Aw+512+128+512+80+0%0Aw+512+80+464+80+0%0Aw+512+208+512+272+0%0Aw+512+272+464+272+0%0Aw+512+512+464+512+0%0Aw+512+448+512+512+0%0Aw+512+320+464+320+0%0Aw+512+368+512+320+0%0Al+512+448+512+368+0+1+0.23547478163537397%0Aw+208+528+256+528+0%0Ar+144+528+208+528+0+1%0Aw+464+512+464+448+0%0Aw+416+512+464+512+0%0Al+464+368+464+448+0+1+-0.23547478163537397%0Aw+464+320+464+368+0%0Aw+416+320+464+320+0%0Aw+384+320+416+320+0%0Aw+416+384+416+320+0%0Aw+416+464+416+512+0%0Aw+400+512+416+512+0%0Aw+288+464+368+464+0%0Aw+288+496+288+464+0%0Aw+304+384+352+384+0%0Aw+304+336+304+384+0%0Ad+416+384+352+384+1+0.805904783%0Ad+416+464+368+464+1+0.805904783%0Aw+256+528+320+528+0%0Aw+256+304+304+304+0%0Aw+272+336+304+336+0%0Aw+288+496+224+496+0%0Aw+320+496+288+496+0%0AS+400+512+320+512+0+0+false+0+2%0AS+384+320+304+320+0+1+false+0+2%0Aw+256+528+256+304+0%0Aw+144+480+144+528+0%0Aw+224+336+224+496+0%0Aw+224+336+272+336+0%0Aw+144+336+224+336+0%0Aw+144+400+144+336+0%0Aw+144+400+64+400+0%0Aw+64+400+64+160+0%0Aw+64+160+144+160+0%0Aw+144+240+96+240+0%0Aw+96+240+96+480+0%0Aw+96+480+144+480+0%0Aw+896+272+848+272+0%0Aw+896+208+896+272+0%0Aw+896+80+848+80+0%0Aw+896+128+896+80+0%0Al+896+208+896+128+0+1+0.01448995613347208%0Aw+592+288+640+288+0%0Ar+528+288+592+288+0+1%0Aw+848+272+848+208+0%0Aw+800+272+848+272+0%0Al+848+128+848+208+0+1+-0.01448995613347208%0Aw+848+80+848+128+0%0Aw+800+80+848+80+0%0Aw+768+80+800+80+0%0Aw+800+144+800+80+0%0Aw+800+224+800+272+0%0Aw+784+272+800+272+0%0Aw+672+224+752+224+0%0Aw+672+256+672+224+0%0Aw+688+144+736+144+0%0Aw+688+96+688+144+0%0Ad+800+144+736+144+1+0.805904783%0Ad+800+224+752+224+1+0.805904783%0Aw+640+288+704+288+0%0Aw+640+64+688+64+0%0Aw+656+96+688+96+0%0Aw+672+256+608+256+0%0Aw+704+256+672+256+0%0AS+784+272+704+272+0+1+false+0+2%0AS+768+80+688+80+0+0+false+0+2%0Aw+640+288+640+64+0%0Aw+528+240+528+288+0%0Aw+608+96+608+256+0%0Aw+608+96+656+96+0%0Aw+528+96+608+96+0%0Aw+528+160+528+96+0%0Av+528+240+528+160+0+0+40+5+0+0+0.5%0Al+-112+160+-112+240+0+1+1.7141983666677515e-7%0AS+-208+240+-144+240+0+0+false+0+2%0AS+-208+304+-144+304+0+0+false+0+2%0Aw+-144+320+-112+320+0%0Aw+-112+320+-112+256+0%0Aw+-112+256+-112+240+0%0Aw+-144+256+-112+256+0%0Av+-272+304+-272+240+0+0+40+5+0+0+0.5%0Ar+-208+304+-272+304+0+1%0Aw+-272+240+-208+240+0%0AS+-208+144+-144+144+0+0+false+0+2%0Aw+-144+160+-112+160+0%0AS+-208+80+-144+80+0+0+false+0+2%0Aw+-144+96+-112+96+0%0Aw+-112+96+-112+160+0%0Aw+-272+144+-272+240+0%0Aw+-208+304+-208+80+0%0Aw+-144+192+-240+192+0%0Aw+-272+144+-240+144+0%0Aw+-240+144+-208+144+0%0Aw+-240+192+-240+144+0%0Ad+-144+160+-144+192+1+0.805904783%0Ad+-208+368+-160+368+1+0.805904783%0Aw+-144+368+-160+368+0%0Aw+-208+368+-272+368+0%0Aw+-272+368+-272+304+0%0Aw+-112+256+-80+256+0%0Aw+-80+256+-80+368+0%0Aw+-80+368+-144+368+0%0Ao+56+64+0+12289+0.0001+0.0001+0+2+56+3%0Ao+57+64+0+12289+0.0001+0.0001+1+2+57+3%0A)
can just reduce the input voltage to compensate for lack of serialization...
can either connect 2 relays per coil , or 2 per 2 coils; paring opposing coils so there's 18 pairs driven 2 directions for 36 relays that way (in parallel)...
though there doesn't seem to be much point in the diodes...
-
think I got the polarity all -correct... did make a compass of sorts so I can test the connections...
Hi d3xor,
Do you get N/S looking towards center and outside? And in regards to windings, do the outer layer have enough of distance to inner? What happends if winding ending on outer place is activated together with winding starting from inner place on same pin? Do you still get proper magnetic polarity?
I am still looking for stator like in the sketch attached. It is really hard one to find for windings to take place like in there. Any ideas?
-
Hi d3xor,
Do you get N/S looking towards center and outside?
Yes :) I get etiher by activating one relay or the other (or will; right now I just used a battery to activate a coil... )
And in regards to windings, do the outer layer have enough of distance to inner? What happends if winding ending on outer place is activated together with winding starting from inner place on same pin? Do you still get proper magnetic polarity?
I am still looking for stator like in the sketch attached. It is really hard one to find for windings to take place like in there. Any ideas?
all layers are both outer (one side in a empty slot) and inner (one side over another coil)....
each coil will be attached to 2 relays. Activating one relay or the other connects + to the coil on one side or the other. Normal-closed position the coil is connected with - rail... so activating any coil vs any other coil has no effect... in the schematic above, each coil (or pair of coils if paired with diametrically opposed winidng (1-18, 2-19, etc) ).. pairing the near N/S coils as pierre (1-6, etc), then when 6 is active, it would end up activating 1, which when 6 is the one to be active, 1 should be off, with a gap until 35 which would be the prior coil to be on with 6... (none of that makes any sense does it? :) ) But while drawing lots of diagrams; I noticed there was always an opposite pole exactly opposite on the stator.. well that is until opposites where squiashed together and a gap was left...
to go back to the coils; if both coils in a slot are active they will be opposite polarity, but they are on the boundary, and the pole actually shows up within the coil... so the ridge to one side will be north and the other side will be south... there should be enough coupling between to be any sort of issue...
Re your picture though; why do you have a dark cicle? It's kinda confusing what is the solid and what is space in that image... :) it's kinda Escher-esque.
Looks like I'll have to add an extra arduino this way... learned they have interrupts though so should be easy enough to chain them
-
Hi d3xor,
Do you get N/S looking towards center and outside? And in regards to windings, do the outer layer have enough of distance to inner? What happends if winding ending on outer place is activated together with winding starting from inner place on same pin? Do you still get proper magnetic polarity?
I am still looking for stator like in the sketch attached. It is really hard one to find for windings to take place like in there. Any ideas?
T-1000,
Looking for a stator for 26 slots ?
-
Re your picture though; why do you have a dark cicle? It's kinda confusing what is the solid and what is space in that image... :) it's kinda Escher-esque.
The circle under coils? The dark color shows core. The outer circle is just a casing.
T-1000,
Looking for a stator for 26 slots ?
Looking for any to buy which could fit 6x3 coils x N slots. In the market I am unable to find motor/alternator core having coil slots on both sides.
-
I was also thinking a lot about alternative layout doing same thing like in Pierre's case.
Consider this: instead of having everything on stator frame we could just make as single line arrangement with U cores.
Then apply same driving windings pattern and 1-2-1 activation sequence like in original Pierre's Arduino program also could be applied...
Red color winding - driving
Green color winding - taking out generated electricity.
-
I was also thinking a lot about alternative layout doing same thing like in Pierre's case.
Consider this: instead of having everything on stator frame we could just make as single line arrangement with U cores.
Then apply same driving windings pattern and 1-2-1 activation sequence like in original Pierre's Arduino program also could be applied...
Red color winding - driving
Green color winding - taking out generated electricity.
maybe a pitch of one more so the pole is centered through core?
-
maybe a pitch of one more so the pole is centered through core?
There are a lot of options but few things need to be kept.
1) We have to produce driving coils which would allow as gradually increase and decrease magnetic field strength towards center with parallel winding and move magnetic field in 3D space like with moving magnet;
2) We need slots with inactive coils so the magnetic field drops to zero;
3) We also need space between opposite poles in the single strip line.
Cheers!
-
There are a lot of options but few things need to be kept.
1) We have to produce driving coils which would allow as gradually increase and decrease magnetic field strength towards center with parallel winding and move magnetic field in 3D space like with moving magnet;
2) We need slots with inactive coils so the magnetic field drops to zero;
3) We also need space between opposite poles in the single strip line.
Cheers!
I concur :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6fe6yiUTRY near earth magnetic reconnections...
-
Bon enfin ! Une personne qui pense par lui même bravo.
En. Finally! a person who thinks for himself
Bravo
-
I stumbled on the idea of using ribbon cable to attach relay boards to the arduino; although power/ground requires hacks... I ended up buying all the 20 pin female connectors from the store; and broken one :( They have 16's which will probably suffice since I wanted to run power and ground separate from the signals anyway...
While driving to see what else I could use; I considered a more complex stepping scheme...
-
Hi Everyone
Whats happened?
Pierre's videos down again from youtube...has he gone underground??
Did he get threats (like what always happens with loopers)
Is Gotoluc no longer posting?
Whats going on?
Has anyone replicated Pierre's DZ generator with half decent results yet??
-
While driving to see what else I could use; I considered a more complex stepping scheme...
Hi d3x0r
In my post a month ago I made a similar suggestion but whitout that "gap" between "Red and Blue".
http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/msg519716/#msg519716
I think it's of great importance that we imitates the squared magnetic factor when our virtual magnetic rotor aligns up (in line, is passing by) with the fixt output core ALSO. Think in terms of a mechanical generator and the magnetic forces between rotor and stator in each small "rotational increments". So the peak flux when passing by has to be much much higer at that time point.
Regards Arne
-
konehead
Bon enfin ! Une personne qui pense par lui même bravo.
En. Finally! a person who thinks for himself
Bravo
« Last Edit: May 10, 2018, 06:43:54 PM by gotoluc »
pedro1 = Pierre C
-
Hi Everyone
Whats happened?
Pierre's videos down again from youtube...has he gone underground??
Did he get threats (like what always happens with loopers)
Is Gotoluc no longer posting?
Whats going on?
Has anyone replicated Pierre's DZ generator with half decent results yet??
I am still building.
I have all the switching running with relays, just need to complete power wiring and diode board hookup.
Also got a 36 slot stator, (no rotor for this yet). This one was vacuum varnished and the laminations held by the casing which was a mazac casting.
The whole thing needed to be heated in an oven to release old windings and slot liners. I made frames out of the old bearing end caps to hold the whole stack together.
Regards
L192
-
I am still building.
I have all the switching running with relays, just need to complete power wiring and diode board hookup.
Also got a 36 slot stator, (no rotor for this yet). This one was vacuum varnished and the laminations held by the casing which was a mazac casting.
The whole thing needed to be heated in an oven to release old windings and slot liners. I made frames out of the old bearing end caps to hold the whole stack together.
Regards
L192
Thanks for the update L192... I was wondering if you were still at it.Not much new to report on my side other then when I re-positioned all my stator coils to 5 slot space I forgot to also reposition all my H-Bridges, so they were still at 6 slot spaces. So you can imagine that did not do well and have since found 9 of the H-Bridges that are fried. So I can no longer test.
I have someone that will buy 30 of these for me to continue: https://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?ff3=4&toolid=11800&pub=5574900467&campid=5338252492&mpre=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.com%2Fitm%2F200950936475%3FrmvSB%3Dtrue (https://www.ebay.com/itm/200950936475)
It will be a week or more before I receive them.
So without a doubt this confirms the L298N are not going to be able handle the current no matter if you have one or even two per coil.
Regards
Luc
Fr. Merci pour la mise à jour L192 ... Je me demandais si tu étais encore là.
Pas grand chose de nouveau à signaler de mon côté, mais quand j'ai repositionné toutes mes bobines de stator à 5 fente, j'ai oublié de repositionner tous mes ponts H, donc ils étaient encore à 6 slots. Vous pouvez imaginer que ça n'a pas bien marché et depuis jai trouvé 9 ponts H-frits. Donc je ne peux plus tester.
J'ai quelqu'un qui va acheter 30 ponts H pour moi pour continuer les test: https://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?ff3=4&toolid=11800&pub=5574900467&campid=5338252492&mpre=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.com%2Fitm%2F200950936475%3FrmvSB%3Dtrue (https://www.ebay.com/itm/200950936475)
Ce sera une semaine ou plus avant que je les reçoive.Donc, c'est confirmé que les L298N ne son pas capable de gérer le courant, peu importe si vous en avez un ou deux par bobine.
Cordialement
Luc
-
Hi Gotoluc,
I will post a photo when I have the build finished.
Let us know how the new bridge boards perform. I have one of those on order for testing.
I also destroyed about 5 of the L298N's and decided to try relays next.
Regards
L192
-
I also destroyed about 5 of the L298N's and decided to try relays next.
Hi L192,
Seems you do not have shotky/zener diodes for protection there? The reverse currents will allways blow up transistors if there are no blocking diodes in series.
And because it is IC I would strongly recommend driving external power mosfets with them which have protection so no more burned parts will end up on your bench.
Cheers!
-
Hi L192,
...The reverse currents will allways blow up transistors if there are no blocking diodes in series.
And because it is IC I would strongly recommend driving external power mosfets with them which have protection so no more burned parts will end up on your bench.
Cheers!
It is the voltage that changes sign (and perhaps size) from input to output (flyback pulse). The current through a coil must be continuous. That is it mustn't make a jump. This is exactly the opposite of what happens for capacitors where it is the voltage that that is continuous and the current that changes direction (and perhaps size) when the power changes direction from input to output.
A diode can clamp the voltage to a safe level. The current then can be directed to somewhere else or be dissipated as heat in the resistance of the coil. A Zener clamp will dissipate the power as heat in the Zener diode. Be sure the Zener diode can handle that power.
More on snubber protection: https://wiki2.org/en/Snubber (https://wiki2.org/en/Snubber)
Regards
Ole
-
A diode can clamp the voltage to a safe level. The current then can be directed to somewhere else or be dissipated as heat in the resistance of the coil. A Zener clamp will dissipate the power as heat in the Zener diode. Be sure the Zener diode can handle that power.
More on snubber protection: https://wiki2.org/en/Snubber (https://wiki2.org/en/Snubber)
Regards
Ole
The classic snubbers mostly are wasting energy while protecting discrete elements. Here we are also trying to recover energy back to the input which makes task a bit more challenging.
-
The classic snubbers mostly are wasting energy while protecting discrete elements. Here we are also trying to recover energy back to the input which makes task a bit more challenging.
Then an active snubber is needed instead of the simple passive ones. Zener diodes are totally wasting power when their clamping voltage is reached. An active snubber is an extra switch (transistor) that diverts the power back to the power supply or perhaps to the load. The energy can be temporarily stored in a capacitor that then is discharged to somewhere else where the energy can be useful.
Looking at Pierre's device dissipating heat in the heat sink while delivering power to itself and also giving off power to an external load it really makes enough power to use the cheaper and simpler passive snubbers. First make it work like Pierre did and then perhaps optimize it or stay with a cheap model even though it may not be as efficient as a more advanced model using active snubbers. After all it's not like a circuit running on a battery where every possible waste of power has to be minimized for extending the period between charging the battery.
Regards
Ole
-
Thanks for the update L192... I was wondering if you were still at it.Not much new to report on my side other then when I re-positioned all my stator coils to 5 slot space I forgot to also reposition all my H-Bridges, so they were still at 6 slot spaces. So you can imagine that did not do well and have since found 9 of the H-Bridges that are fried. So I can no longer test.
I have someone that will buy 30 of these for me to continue: https://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?ff3=4&toolid=11800&pub=5574900467&campid=5338252492&mpre=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.com%2Fitm%2F200950936475%3FrmvSB%3Dtrue (https://www.ebay.com/itm/200950936475)
It will be a week or more before I receive them.
So without a doubt this confirms the L298N are not going to be able handle the current no matter if you have one or even two per coil.
Regards
Luc
Luc, at this point I think it is safest you stick with relays instead of trying another H-bridge configuration. The flyback diodes need to be able to withstand a large reverse voltage and also need to carry a large forward current. If you have taken out the old H-bridges, you should check the flyback diodes on them to see if they are burned out (check in both forward and backward direction). It wouldn't surprise me if they are dead as well.
Stick with relays and get the version that will let you select whether it switches on a low or a high so you won't need to design any additional inverter logic and can drive two relays with one Arduino output. Additionally, you will need to make a flyback diode board like Pierre has (I note he uses two diodes in parallel to increase current capacity). You could ask him for the part number so we can check what current capacity and reverse voltage they need to be able to withstand. Additionally, their reverse current should be as small as possible as they will draw current from the capacitor bank in reverse and thus waist energy.
PmgR
-
The classic snubbers mostly are wasting energy while protecting discrete elements. Here we are also trying to recover energy back to the input which makes task a bit more challenging.
Well actually the diodes on the boards worked just fine. The problem is just that the L298N cannot handle the current required for this device.
I can report no diodes failed.
Originally when I tabled the idea of using the L298N, I thought the coils were being pulsed individually.
Regards
L192
-
Well actually the diodes on the boards worked just fine. The problem is just that the L298N cannot handle the current required for this device.
I can report no diodes failed.
Originally when I tabled the idea of using the L298N, I thought the coils were being pulsed individually.
Regards
L192
You may try circuit similar to my design to handle load - https://i.imgur.com/R3H77fv.png (single module for 4 coils in schematics, multiply to needed amount) and offload coils handling to MOSFETs.
Hopefully that is helpful... :)
-
Hi T-1000,
Per your schematic, you need two Arduino control lines to control a single coil, or one control line per mostfet (or relay). For a 30 (or 36) coil stator, that would require 60 (or 72) control lines. The Arduino only has 54 digital outputs.
You should be able to simplify your schematic from Arduino to H-bridge since you will never turn on the upper and lower mosfet on one side of the coil at the same time.
PmgR
-
Hi T-1000,
Per your schematic, you need two Arduino control lines to control a single coil, or one control line per mostfet (or relay). For a 30 (or 36) coil stator, that would require 60 (or 72) control lines. The Arduino only has 54 digital outputs.
Hi PmgR,
My personal appropach to whole thing is a bit different series connections with just half length driving which would end up with 6 wires per pole repeating 3 times in series in total. This will end up with 18 wires and 36 high+low pins in total to control. I am also planning to test the simplified setup with all coils. Just in single line over E cores in series liike ШШШШШШ with driving coils going on the angle and similar to the concept picture attached before. Then will use all available space for output coils to see what output power I can get after simulating moving magnetic field.
Also if to apply 72 connections the middle logic part of circuit would need another addition for controlling 2 pins at once. Which can be simple set of low power pnp/npn transistors like in Piere's original video where he was controlling 72 relays.
Cheers!
-
have 5 of 9 relay boards working, everything wired and mounted. (except signal/power to the last 4 relay boards).
Need to get a better current power supply. (supply for coils/caps).
Works just fine to set output to high, then set mode as output, no relays flicker or turn on... and setting low to enable relay.
3D Model (https://skfb.ly/6ySGR)
zip is a fullres image.
-
WOW d3x0r!... you are definitely a serious builder ;)
Looking forward to your results
Thanks for sharing
Luc
-
Some many post ago, one user here was going to run this up using armature switching. Was wondering if that user went anywhere with it?
I have been pondering this setup for some time now. As I can't seem to find a 36 vane core as I call it, I am unable to proceed with a build. That doesn't keep me from pondering the way he is getting 60hz from his setup. Has to be in the stepping of the program through the relays on and off. The program says to overlap as in turn the next one on before turning the last one off. That would create a spike in the power line circuit each time one was turned on and again when one was turned off. Since the program is running a serial mode operation, there are many on and off modes creating spikes. The output will see these spikes as cycles. But still not sure if there are enough spikes to create 60hz from. Then it is not a sinus wave at all either.
I have laid out a design for a rotary switch system using brushes that do a make before break but all six sectors switch at the same time. Sore afraid this will screw up the output frequency for sure. I did a small experiment to see it lentz would have any effect on my manually turning a switching system and no it does not. One down for now. Just need that burned up motor housing to continue.
thay
-
The relay noise may not match the video? The video is 30fps; every frame has 2 LEDs on; which is 2 switches (one off, and a new one on ) 3 cycles of 24 happen in a second in the video ( which means each spike of change is registering to the clock ).
and it's not really a full wave of rotation...
the audio is 48HZ according to the ticks of the relays...
-
https://youtu.be/rtSbDTcnsYI don't know if this posted
-
Pierre,
Can You help us;
Do you use the principle of Figuera?
like: S|N (coil) N|S (coil) S|N .....N|S .....
or just Back EMF?
It would help in understanding :)
Thank You !
-
Pierre,
Can You help us;
Do you use the principle of Figuera?
like: S|N (coil) N|S (coil) S|N .....N|S .....
or just Back EMF?
It would help in understanding :)
Thank You !
what is 'coil' ? the pickup coil?
In Figuera, one side approaches, the other receeds; so N-N is appropriate...
this is more about moving maintained magnetic fields... I suppose... you could do an offset such that well... drive every coil as the same polarity, and you get opposite 'virtual poles' I think Bedini called them inbetween that are opposite... like bedini was all same polarity magnets... maybe just run 3 + with 0 -...
(am trying to avoid 'N' and 'S' because specifics don't really matter; unless you believe sprouts grow better when exposed to a South field ala Ken Wheeler which may be relevant in other applications)
back EMF is not the primary function; if it was, the heavy power transformers to the capacitors wouldn't have to be plugged into the device output.
The coils are only like 1-2mH; and with a reasonable 0.5-1.4 resistance 0.5 Ohm, 1.5mH, loses its current over 5ms (http://www.falstad.com/circuit/circuitjs.html?cct=$+1+0.000005+0.5999443210467817+29+5+43%0Ar+176+80+384+80+0+0.5%0As+384+80+448+80+0+1+false%0Aw+176+80+176+352+0%0Al+384+80+384+352+0+0.0015+-1.714352817810738e-7%0Av+448+352+448+80+0+0+40+5+0+0+0.5%0Ar+384+352+448+352+0+0.1%0Ac+272+352+320+352+0+1+-5.00000255846172%0Ad+272+352+224+352+1+0.805904783%0Ad+384+352+336+352+1+0.805904783%0Aw+320+352+336+352+0%0Aw+176+352+224+352+0%0Aw+384+80+400+80+0%0Av+272+384+336+384+0+0+40+5+0+0+0.5%0Aw+272+384+272+352+0%0Ar+336+384+336+352+0+0.001%0Ao+3+64+0+4099+40+51.2+0+2+3+3%0Ao+0+64+0+4099+40+51.2+1+2+0+3%0Ao+6+64+0+4099+20+51.2+2+2+6+3%0A) 1.5Ohm reduces the delay to 3ms (more or less)...
ya sorr I'm kinda rambing...
T-1K did say something about near coils, and I guess they are all shorted, which means they're going to develop as 'eddy currents' or sorts...
could wish I had a 36 channel scope with current probes on each coil :)
I don't know; there's 4 coils between 1, 6; ( 2,3,4,5 ) the 2 and 3 are more under 1 (coupled to) so they should end up getting opposing poles near... as coil 1 and 6 are first energized.. and 4 and 5 are more under 6 than 1, so they should end up getting an opposing pole to 6... which then the increasing current in 2, and 5 are mutually exclusive... Though that current will dampen by the resistance of the coil... which then counter induce in the original 1 and 6 as their current diminishes but the other remains? switching is 16ms...
Then in the second step 2, 7 turn on, for 16 ms... then 1, 6 turn off... but really short so whatever current their coils have can continue.... (shorted).
I don't know... how much ARE the coils coupled?
---
I do have a question for clarification; the 700 feet of bifilar windings; is that 700 each or total (350 each?)
700/11 = 63x the wire for outer windings? (based on 11 feet of gotoluc's windings)
----
Someone mentioned a 36 vaned motor... 36 slots had 35 vanes.
-
what is 'coil' ? the pickup coil?
In Figuera, one side approaches, the other receeds; so N-N is appropriate...
this is more about moving maintained magnetic fields... I suppose... you could do an offset such that well... drive every coil as the same polarity, and you get opposite 'virtual poles' I think Bedini called them inbetween that are opposite... like bedini was all same polarity magnets... maybe just run 3 + with 0 -...
(am trying to avoid 'N' and 'S' because specifics don't really matter; unless you believe sprouts grow better when exposed to a South field ala Ken Wheeler which may be relevant in other applications)
back EMF is not the primary function; if it was, the heavy power transformers to the capacitors wouldn't have to be plugged into the device output.
The coils are only like 1-2mH; and with a reasonable 0.5-1.4 resistance 0.5 Ohm, 1.5mH, loses its current over 5ms (http://www.falstad.com/circuit/circuitjs.html?cct=$+1+0.000005+0.5999443210467817+29+5+43%0Ar+176+80+384+80+0+0.5%0As+384+80+448+80+0+1+false%0Aw+176+80+176+352+0%0Al+384+80+384+352+0+0.0015+-1.714352817810738e-7%0Av+448+352+448+80+0+0+40+5+0+0+0.5%0Ar+384+352+448+352+0+0.1%0Ac+272+352+320+352+0+1+-5.00000255846172%0Ad+272+352+224+352+1+0.805904783%0Ad+384+352+336+352+1+0.805904783%0Aw+320+352+336+352+0%0Aw+176+352+224+352+0%0Aw+384+80+400+80+0%0Av+272+384+336+384+0+0+40+5+0+0+0.5%0Aw+272+384+272+352+0%0Ar+336+384+336+352+0+0.001%0Ao+3+64+0+4099+40+51.2+0+2+3+3%0Ao+0+64+0+4099+40+51.2+1+2+0+3%0Ao+6+64+0+4099+20+51.2+2+2+6+3%0A) 1.5Ohm reduces the delay to 3ms (more or less)...
ya sorr I'm kinda rambing...
T-1K did say something about near coils, and I guess they are all shorted, which means they're going to develop as 'eddy currents' or sorts...
could wish I had a 36 channel scope with current probes on each coil :)
I don't know; there's 4 coils between 1, 6; ( 2,3,4,5 ) the 2 and 3 are more under 1 (coupled to) so they should end up getting opposing poles near... as coil 1 and 6 are first energized.. and 4 and 5 are more under 6 than 1, so they should end up getting an opposing pole to 6... which then the increasing current in 2, and 5 are mutually exclusive... Though that current will dampen by the resistance of the coil... which then counter induce in the original 1 and 6 as their current diminishes but the other remains? switching is 16ms...
Then in the second step 2, 7 turn on, for 16 ms... then 1, 6 turn off... but really short so whatever current their coils have can continue.... (shorted).
I don't know... how much ARE the coils coupled?
---
I do have a question for clarification; the 700 feet of bifilar windings; is that 700 each or total (350 each?)
700/11 = 63x the wire for outer windings? (based on 11 feet of gotoluc's windings)
----
Someone mentioned a 36 vaned motor... 36 slots had 35 vanes.
Yes, pickup coil. The idea is to make Pierre clarify what is going on.
When you reach the rotor you will understand that only in two places power is transferred. Left and right side coil (rotor).
My rotor coil is 0.9mm about 300m single wire. 6,67ohm and 850,5mH
See my video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bE1ilIot8tU
Only one first coil worked. Time delay is 3 ms.
I'm trying to understand ...
-
Pierre,
Can You help us;
Do you use the principle of Figuera?
like: S|N (coil) N|S (coil) S|N .....N|S .....
or just Back EMF?
It would help in understanding :)
Thank You !
FR:
Pierre pouvez-vous nous aider ?
Utilisez-vous le principe de Clemente Figuera:
Comme ceci : S|N (bobine) N|S (bobine) S|N .....N|S .....
Ou juste le Back EMF?
Celà nous aiderait à comprendre .
Merci.
-
....wish I had a 36 channel scope with current probes on each coil :)
Could you use the 16 Analog Inputs of the Mega in a duplex arrangement and log the output via serial for this?
Another advantage of this method is that if there exists a sweet spot in the combination of parameters into the circuit (channels, pulse frequency, pulse width, etc), then you can programmatically iterate over the ranges to cover all possible combinations while logging both the inputs and outputs to later see which combination produced the most interesting results.
-
Yes, pickup coil. The idea is to make Pierre clarify what is going on.
When you reach the rotor you will understand that only in two places power is transferred. Left and right side coil (rotor).
My rotor coil is 0.9mm about 300m single wire. 6,67ohm and 850,5mH
See my video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bE1ilIot8tU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bE1ilIot8tU)
Only one first coil worked. Time delay is 3 ms.
I'm trying to understand ...
Hi r2fpl,
I was watching your video and can't understand what you are saying (not sure what language you are speaking). But one of the things I did notice is that the majority of the windings on your stator look burned out! They look dark and blackened where they come out of stator slots.
Maybe you can shoot a close-up video of the stator to confirm. From what I can see it almost certainly looks like they are burned out.
PmgR
-
Could you use the 16 Analog Inputs of the Mega in a duplex arrangement and log the output via serial for this?
Another advantage of this method is that if there exists a sweet spot in the combination of parameters into the circuit (channels, pulse frequency, pulse width, etc), then you can programmatically iterate over the ranges to cover all possible combinations while logging both the inputs and outputs to later see which combination produced the most interesting results.
That's actually a good idea.
probably spend some time to build a quick javascript server that I can use buttons on a webpage to activate things...
reading a analog in can only be done 100,000/sec; (divide by 16 for all of them) 160us resolution for all; 10us resolution for a single one
-
What these numbers represent:
digitalWrite(1,HIGH), digitalWrite(13,HIGH), digitalWrite(25,HIGH);
These are the numbers of the transistors.
e.g. digitalWrite(1,HIGH) = first transistor = relay 1,14 = 1coil power on +|-
...
Going in this way we have 2xtriangles and exactly one star 6 arms. NSNSNSNS
Why ? because is compared to relays works on video and schematic circle by Pierre.
If the Pierra program is the same one that works 100% we only have a moving magnetic field nothing more. There is no flow of the stream to the rotor in sufficient energy.
We already know everything.
Up to this point everything is correct but what can be different ? what suits the video and information ?
How many coils are powered and how many receivers? The connection method shows that they all do the same. There remains a different combination of only the stator connections between the coils. If it's the way Pierre drew it:
1. Stopping the current
2. Shorting coils
3. joining AC, Yeahhh ...
1. and 2. together
and if an AC current flows in the circuit, it would explain 60Hz. Not from the network but from the inverter ?
-
...reading a analog in can only be done 100,000/sec; (divide by 16 for all of them) 160us resolution for all; 10us resolution for a single one
Consider leaving the Arduino for control and add in a Raspberry Pi with ADCs (say MCP3008 - 8-Channel 10-Bit ADC With SPI Interface) dedicated to logging. Would be cost effective, would give you an order of magnitude more resolution and wouldn't compromise the control side.
-
Consider leaving the Arduino for control and add in a Raspberry Pi with ADCs (say MCP3008 - 8-Channel 10-Bit ADC With SPI Interface) dedicated to logging. Would be cost effective, would give you an order of magnitude more resolution and wouldn't compromise the control side.
Raspberry Pi , ohh
It's better to use STM family board.
-
Hi r2fpl,
I was watching your video and can't understand what you are saying (not sure what language you are speaking). But one of the things I did notice is that the majority of the windings on your stator look burned out! They look dark and blackened where they come out of stator slots.
Maybe you can shoot a close-up video of the stator to confirm. From what I can see it almost certainly looks like they are burned out.
PmgR
Hi PmgR,
This is illusion like burned out. Colour enamel is deep. Wire is ok. This some resistance i checked again for confirm.
-
pmgr
Hi pm.
I just finished my stator build and i measured my coils inductances. It is L=7.52mH per coil. Each coil (22 awg) is of a 22.5m length (73T) and this gives me a 1,1 Ohm resistance. The maximum frequency according the equation is about 25Hz. So i wonder if there is any trick that i can do so to raise the frequency up to 50Hz. Any idea?
Regards
Jeg
ps. In resistance calculator i measured just the ohmic resistance and not the reactance of the coil. Reactance at 7,52mH and 50Hz is 2.3 ohms. If i add it with the ohmic resistance then i am again in the right range. But is that a valid consideration?
Thanks
-
Why no fields in this places ?
You must compare it with the video part 3 or 4 by Pierre
-
Why no fields in this places ?
You must compare it with the video part 3 or 4 by Pierre
Can you give the time points (about) in these films Thanks. And how to see that flux is missing?
Regards Arne
-
Can you give the time points (about) in these films Thanks. And how to see that flux is missing?
Regards Arne
you can see it almost any time
e.g.13:40 part 3
-
you can see it almost any time
e.g.13:40 part 3
there's also a null on the opposite side... I thought it was only 2 gaps 180 degrees opposed; but I see the other near gap you're mentioning...
weak coils?
The rotor is also in it; is it there, but lost into the pickup?
-
pmgr
Hi pm.
I just finished my stator build and i measured my coils inductances. It is L=7.52mH per coil. Each coil (22 awg) is of a 22.5m length (73T) and this gives me a 1,1 Ohm resistance. The maximum frequency according the equation is about 25Hz. So i wonder if there is any trick that i can do so to raise the frequency up to 50Hz. Any idea?
Regards
Jeg
ps. In resistance calculator i measured just the ohmic resistance and not the reactance of the coil. Reactance at 7,52mH and 50Hz is 2.3 ohms. If i add it with the ohmic resistance then i am again in the right range. But is that a valid consideration?
Thanks
Hi Jeg,
You should measure the inductance with and without the rotor in place for each coil. You should see an increase in inductance the closer you get to the rotor, typically a factor of 4 compared to the minimum inductance when away from the rotor.
Pierre's relays are running at around 4Hz, so I don't think your numbers are going to be a problem.
PmgR
-
Hi Jeg,
You should measure the inductance with and without the rotor in place for each coil. You should see an increase in inductance the closer you get to the rotor, typically a factor of 4 compared to the minimum inductance when away from the rotor.
Pierre's relays are running at around 4Hz, so I don't think your numbers are going to be a problem.
PmgR
Hi Pm
Thanks for the suggestion. These days i will test the relay boards to take an idea for the consumption current. I'll report my findings as for a reference.
-
Pierre,
Share your hard work with everyone. Explain how your generator works.
You will register in history and no one will be in front of you. Do not keep it secret!
There is too much evil that makes people slaves like energy.
Do not try to wait and improve something that is already there. It's a waste of life.
Just give it to people.
If you give us the recipe everyone will sign this DZ GENERATOR by PIERRE!
I think that not only I have this request.
-
Pierre,
Share your hard work with everyone. Explain how your generator works.
You will register in history and no one will be in front of you. Do not keep it secret!
There is too much evil that makes people slaves like energy.
Do not try to wait and improve something that is already there. It's a waste of life.
Just give it to people.
If you give us the recipe everyone will sign this DZ GENERATOR by PIERRE!
I think that not only I have this request.
Amen.... ;D
-
I just got inspiration (sorry for that, hate writing)
Agree, I can try to challenge him (IMHO, just in case)
Let say, we wind a coil like we thinks. Indeed, we calculate how many turns we need for input voltage and current
and how many we must have for output.
Than we start like everyone knows, 1 to 6 and 2 to 7 … 6-12 and then we stop and think. What we have done.
We were carefully thinking 6 and simultaneously thinking around to the end.
We realized where the strong are and where next one comes.
Then we find repetition pattern and winding a rest just enough to suit out calculation.
Bingo.
So far so good, but it appears that we need more turns for output, strange?
So we think again and find that 2+2+2 are equal 6. 2 is not a good number for strong one, why?
Because we split 50/50 and spread what we actuality wish to separate as best as possible.
So suddenly we see 9
Apparently 3+3+3 are equal 9, ... wow this is good arrangement, 3 as a strong one. Why?
Let say 100 (We think X^2) and in correct geometry it end up with 9+81+9 instead 50+50.
Pierre you mentioned 4 poles did you tried? (Of course 6 between ;))
We can go further,
We are for now only in 2D, we accomplish that and now we start thinking 3D.
Mowing in X-Y plane and thinking same in Z and then we realize something much bigger…… to be continued ;D
Come on Pierre... ” We know that you know that we know”
d.
-
Je sais que vous avez tous hâte d'avoir les détail du dz générateur mais pour l'instant j'aime mieux mettre mes efforts sur un deuxième prototype que passer mes soirée a répondre au question cela n'est pas trop productif quand ce seras fait il me feras plaisir de tout vous expliquer en détail mais en attendant je continue à suivre vos idée et vos commentaire durant mes pause au travail et j'espère vous en mettre plein la vue avec la deuxième version du dz générateur mais je peut vous dite que cela prendras plusieurs mois a faire car il y a beaucoup de travail avant que ce ne soit fonctionnel merci a tous de votre compréhension . Pierre cotnoir
En. I know you're all looking forward to the details of the dz generator but for now I prefer to put my efforts in building the second prototype than to spend my evening answering questions, that wouldn't be productive. When I have it done I'll be happy to explain everything in detail but in the meantime I'll continue to follow your ideas and comments during my breaks at work and I hope you will be amazed with the second version of the dz generator but I can tell you it will take several months to complete because there's a lot of work to be done before it's functional.
Thank you all for your understanding.
Pierre Cotnoir
-
Good to hear from you Pierre. Best of luck on the 2nd prototype.
-
Je sais que vous avez tous hâte d'avoir les détail du dz générateur mais pour l'instant j'aime mieux mettre mes efforts sur un deuxième prototype que passer mes soirée a répondre au question cela n'est pas trop productif quand ce seras fait il me feras plaisir de tout vous expliquer en détail mais en attendant je continue à suivre vos idée et vos commentaire durant mes pause au travail et j'espère vous en mettre plein la vue avec la deuxième version du dz générateur mais je peut vous dite que cela prendras plusieurs mois a faire car il y a beaucoup de travail avant que ce ne soit fonctionnel merci a tous de votre compréhension . Pierre cotnoir
En. I know you're all looking forward to the details of the dz generator but for now I prefer to put my efforts in building the second prototype than to spend my evening answering questions, that wouldn't be productive. When I have it done I'll be happy to explain everything in detail but in the meantime I'll continue to follow your ideas and comments during my breaks at work and I hope you will be amazed with the second version of the dz generator but I can tell you it will take several months to complete because there's a lot of work to be done before it's functional.
Thank you all for your understanding.
Pierre Cotnoir
Wish you would make videos again and a step-by-step build guide. Fr. Je souhaite que vous fassiez à nouveau des vidéos et un guide de construction étape par étape.
PmgR====
Help end the persecution of Falun Gong * www.faluninfo.net (http://www.faluninfo.net) * www.stoporganharvesting.org (http://www.stoporganharvesting.org)
-
Je sais que vous avez tous hâte d'avoir les détail du dz générateur mais pour l'instant j'aime mieux mettre mes efforts sur un deuxième prototype que passer mes soirée a répondre au question cela n'est pas trop productif quand ce seras fait il me feras plaisir de tout vous expliquer en détail mais en attendant je continue à suivre vos idée et vos commentaire durant mes pause au travail et j'espère vous en mettre plein la vue avec la deuxième version du dz générateur mais je peut vous dite que cela prendras plusieurs mois a faire car il y a beaucoup de travail avant que ce ne soit fonctionnel merci a tous de votre compréhension . Pierre cotnoir
Hi Pierre,
As you are doing second prototype maybe you could help and answer one main question?
When you activate 1 coil, the opposite current flow over rest of 35 coils is requirement for effect to happen or not wanted? That dictates electronics circuit design and coils driving.
Please see my picture attached with 4 coils test and 1st coil activated.
P.S> The opposite current flow creates bucking magnetic fields which cancel out each other. And I have impression most of guys here have that exact problem.
Cheers!
-
So far a 6 field 30 pole rotational system for recovery requires. (see sche). The off state always recovers the negative diode in a boost circuit config. Pierre posts a boost circuit in his post. This has to be important.
I'm not understanding Pierre's recovery and source input. He shows in his vids, the ability to charge caps and recover on the same bank without an additional switch to return the recover to the source. This doesn't make sense.
I'm studying the recovery from the series inductors.
Hopefully this helps,
Jerdee
-
Hi Jerdee,
I am close to running my setup and one of the first tests will be to look at the current recovery through these diodes with a current clamp.
Regards
L192
-
Strength of the fields is only one of the keys. However, just a strong rotational field is NOT going to give you OU. We have to study A/C generator basics. The rotational field is only one part of the equation.
Pierre vids only show relays not using double throw. Look closely, ground is skipping on the even relays, while positive skips on the odds. So he is only using one direction. If Pierre is looking for more room for improvment in rotating the field, he needs to use H-bridges. By allowing the positive/negative rail to flip, you can double the amount of current field strength. Look at sche again, and compare to Pierre's. Pierre is only doing ONE DIRECTION of CURRENT in his relays. So, using both sides of an H-bridge is an improvement for sure, but is it diverging to far from Pierre's original design? I don't think so, you still can use a boost converter design with diodes to recover with polarity flipping on your H-bridges. A boost coverter does not care about your H-bridge's direction. You can recover in either direction. So you improve the field strength, you get more current into the fields, you still maintain rotation of the fields and you can recover the inductive charge in both directions. So why wouldn't this improvement NOT be a benefit for Pierre?
I just keep racking my brain on how he is feeding DC into his cap bank and recovery from the coils to the same cap bank. Anyone that knows how to deal with coil recovery, knows this can't be done, UNLESS you have an additional switch. Could this be why he left pin37 in his code (has no LED blinking) with an additional transistor? It's very possible. Please keep in mind that his original code had a full off position at the end of the loop. I've already proven this with audio examples as well. Go back to my posts. BTW, you have to nudge the audio earlier to line up with the lights, sound takes longer to travel than light when recorded. :) So it is very possible that this off state of all of his relays are the extra step to RETURN the boost cap back to the a source cap bank. Then the question becomes, WHERE IS HIS EXTRA RELAY? You won't find it in his vids. I'm left thinking that the off state at the end of his code explains his return current. Review sche below.
One final thought, his current limiting resistor gets very hot, and mentions replacing it in his video. If he is not using any additional switch for recovery, this explains why his current limiting resistor get very hot. Could this be our explanation we are looking for? With no 37th switch/relay for recovery, forces him to tie source and recovery together but separated by the current limiting resistor. Maybe the current limiting resistor plays a much bigger role than we think? This could explain his source current, can't go through the current limiting resistor quick enough, and yet, his recovery has NO current limiting applied. Seems like a very odd way to deal with recovery. Am I wrong? This form of diversion explains why he is generating large amounts of heat.
Hopfully this all makes sense and why we need to understand how he is returning the inductive charge back to the source caps.
Jerdee
-
Looped is only after inserting the rotor. We do not know this, however, 100%
In my opinion, diodes do not pay so much energy to make it possible.
Maybe I'm wrong but after a few tests it looks like that. Perhaps this secret Pierre increases it.
Pierre separates the rotor from the stator with paper. There is no free passage. There is a "jump".
Jerdee: you've come up with this FET well. Pierre said he uses only 1/2 of 48V -> 24V maybe for that.
-
Strength of the fields is only one of the keys. However, just a strong rotational field is NOT going to give you OU.
If that would be true, the alternators would not give power. They would just function as poor transformers.
In addition to find out if we can do in various solid-state ways, here is V-Gate arrangement to try out:
-
Strength of the fields is only one of the keys. However, just a strong rotational field is NOT going to give you OU. We have to study A/C generator basics. The rotational field is only one part of the equation.
Pierre vids only show relays not using double throw. Look closely, ground is skipping on the even relays, while positive skips on the odds. So he is only using one direction. If Pierre is looking for more room for improvment in rotating the field, he needs to use H-bridges. By allowing the positive/negative rail to flip, you can double the amount of current field strength. Look at sche again, and compare to Pierre's. Pierre is only doing ONE DIRECTION of CURRENT in his relays. So, using both sides of an H-bridge is an improvement for sure, but is it diverging to far from Pierre's original design? I don't think so, you still can use a boost converter design with diodes to recover with polarity flipping on your H-bridges. A boost coverter does not care about your H-bridge's direction. You can recover in either direction. So you improve the field strength, you get more current into the fields, you still maintain rotation of the fields and you can recover the inductive charge in both directions. So why wouldn't this improvement NOT be a benefit for Pierre?
I just keep racking my brain on how he is feeding DC into his cap bank and recovery from the coils to the same cap bank. Anyone that knows how to deal with coil recovery, knows this can't be done, UNLESS you have an additional switch. Could this be why he left pin37 in his code (has no LED blinking) with an additional transistor? It's very possible. Please keep in mind that his original code had a full off position at the end of the loop. I've already proven this with audio examples as well. Go back to my posts. BTW, you have to nudge the audio earlier to line up with the lights, sound takes longer to travel than light when recorded. :) So it is very possible that this off state of all of his relays are the extra step to RETURN the boost cap back to the a source cap bank. Then the question becomes, WHERE IS HIS EXTRA RELAY? You won't find it in his vids. I'm left thinking that the off state at the end of his code explains his return current. Review sche below.
One final thought, his current limiting resistor gets very hot, and mentions replacing it in his video. If he is not using any additional switch for recovery, this explains why his current limiting resistor get very hot. Could this be our explanation we are looking for? With no 37th switch/relay for recovery, forces him to tie source and recovery together but separated by the current limiting resistor. Maybe the current limiting resistor plays a much bigger role than we think? This could explain his[size=78%] source current, can't go through the current limiting resistor quick enough, and yet, his recovery has NO current limiting applied. Seems like a very odd way to deal with recovery. Am I wrong? This form of diversion explains why he is generating large amounts of heat.
Hopfully this all makes sense and why we need to understand how he is returning the inductive charge back to the source caps.
Jerdee
On Pierres power supply, the series resistor would be required for the initial charge, as the current draw will be very high.
On my 30V 30A switch mode supply, the charging current limited at 30A and without limiting it would attempt to draw over 100A when charging the super caps.
His FWBR is rated for over 125A continuous but the transformer isn't and so he has the resistor to limit the current. The resistor dissipates power unnecessarily during running and that could be fixed with a switched mode power supply with current limiting.
Regards
L192
-
Looped is only after inserting the rotor. We do not know this, however, 100%
In my opinion, diodes do not pay so much energy to make it possible.
Maybe I'm wrong but after a few tests it looks like that. Perhaps this secret Pierre increases it.
Pierre separates the rotor from the stator with paper. There is no free passage. There is a "jump".
Jerdee: you've come up with this FET well. Pierre said he uses only 1/2 of 48V -> 24V maybe for that.
Stator/Rotor sizes are from a narrow range of stock sizes and the rotor would always have a gap for a given paired stator.
If you don't wedge the rotor it will move and clatter.
Also the traveling wave generated by the switched distributed windings, is developed in the airgap, in a manner similar to the traveling wave developed in a 3 phase induction motor. The magnetic energy stored in an airgap can be extremely high.
There are plenty of engineering texts on line that support and cover the theory of this.
Regards
L192
-
r2fpl,
Totally agree that diode recovery is not enough. It is only one part of the equation. However in a generator you have an amplifying effect and the diodes will recover more once amplified. :) Again, study AC generator basics. You’ll see what I’m writing about. Just like what Pierre has stated, a rotational system will not give you OU, it’s like an engine without pistons. Thanks for pointing out the 1/2 of 48V.
@L192,
Yes, I totally agree once again. The current limiting resistor has it’s role for charging the cap bank. I understand this already. I’m not easily convinced it has another role either. The switched mode power supply with current limiting would help as well. The current limiting resistor is wasted heat!
Jerdee
-
I can't find a lot of these now; but a couple weeks ago I saw several.
I figured it was included, because it's only a PCB that the current is going through, so the 4Ohm, 100W resistor is just a 3-4A current limiter... (12-16V); if there was no resistance it could easily be 120A or 240A if the ESR is 0.1-0.05
https://www.amazon.com/Farad-Electric-Double-Layer-Capacitor/dp/B00OYILTOA#feature-bullets-btf (https://www.amazon.com/Farad-Electric-Double-Layer-Capacitor/dp/B00OYILTOA#feature-bullets-btf) (2.7V 400F single cap)
ESR DC <10mΩ
so 1200A. (well I guess; there's 6 in series so only 200A)
Although looking for the CSDWell capacitor balance board the specs say 'current: unlimited' which I find hard to believe...
(image from here)
https://www.ebay.com/p/16v-60f-Ultracapacitor-Module-Battery-Eliminator-Car-Audio-Starting-Remot-Solar/1566177167?iid=262390228351&chn=ps (https://www.ebay.com/p/16v-60f-Ultracapacitor-Module-Battery-Eliminator-Car-Audio-Starting-Remot-Solar/1566177167?iid=262390228351&chn=ps)
-
Power from diodes go to directly to cap. Only power supply from transformer is connected to resistor.
Why ? all the current goes from capacitors to relays ?
??? ONLY TWO THIN WIRES POWER RELAYS ???
it would mean that the current is created on the rotor, only ?!
-
Power from diodes go to directly to cap. Only power supply from transformer is connected to resistor.
Why ? all the current goes from capacitors to relays ?
only two thin wires power relays ?
it would mean that the current is created on the rotor, only ?!
That's the 5V power supply - V1; 0:46; (image clip from 0:41)
-
Pierre,
I know this secret. I will keep it for myself until others know it or tell it.
One of the films is "visible" this secret. You need to know what to look for and what is missing.
I confirmed it the way you did it :) and now I understand your surprise successfully!
I wonder about the time of work, and probably you too. Maybe you already know it but it's unusual.
Thank You !
-
Pierre,
I know this secret. I will keep it for myself until others know it or tell it.
One of the films is "visible" this secret. You need to know what to look for and what is missing.
I confirmed it the way you did it :) and now I understand your surprise successfully!
I wonder about the time of action, and probably you too. Maybe you already know it but it's unusual.
Thank You !
r2fpl,
Your email is kind of a mystery. Did you figure out how to get your prototype to work? Can you confirm you successfully replicated Pierre's device?
Also, what do you mean by time of action?? Sorry, but your English is not very clear.
PmgR
-
r2fpl,
Your email is kind of a mystery. Did you figure out how to get your prototype to work? Can you confirm you successfully replicated Pierre's device?
Also, what do you mean by time of action?? Sorry, but your English is not very clear.
PmgR
...I wonder about the time of action, and probably you too. Maybe you already know it but it's unusual.
Sorry PmgR,
This message is for Pierre. He will understand it or not.
...I wonder about the time of work..
-
This is my 30 slot relay build.
The diodes are paired, each is rated at 10A continuous 50A pulsed. These recover narrow spikes of charge current to the super caps at each coil turn off (see attached). There is not much in the way of rotor induction.
Regards
L192
-
This is my 30 slot relay build.
The diodes are paired, each is rated at 10A continuous 50A pulsed. These recover narrow spikes of charge current to the super caps at each coil turn off.
Regards
L192
Good job ! Everything is nicely done :)
I used diodes: stth12r06d
-
Listener
Very clean and nice work. Well done! What is your diodes type?
-
WOW!... excellent job L192
Is that a 30 or a 36 slot stator?
How many segments surfaces does your rotor core cover?
Today I received the 40 Heavy Duty Dual Half Bridge
Thanks for sharing
Luc
-
Listener
Very clean and nice work. Well done! What is your diodes type?
Thanks. I always try to start clean but typically things get messy when you start modifications.https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/10-x-10A10-Rectifier-Diode-10A-1000V-/282075900975
Diodes were a cheap compromise however, if I start seeing large recovery currents I will change for a higher spec diode.
Regards
L192
-
WOW!... excellent job L192
Is that a 30 or a 36 slot stator?
How many segments surfaces does your rotor core cover?
Today I received the 40 Heavy Duty Dual Half Bridge
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Hi Gotoluc,
This one is the 30 slot stator and the rotor covers 9 poles, which is a lot more than the 5 pole coil pitch. I will cut the rotor down but that's not what is impeding induction, as I tried a large coil on a rectangular section and got about the same output.
I am not getting the result I had with the L298N half bridges, although I never had all my coils running with that setup. Of course I could run those at 50/60Hz whereas 5Hz is really pushing the relays and I have noticed incomplete current waveforms at that rate.
With 20V DC input I can only scrape about 100mA out of the rotor coil .The only other thing that has changed, is that I removed the magnets from the rotor.
I have a couple of relays setup as a DC polarity reversal switch however, I can't run these at more than 4A, as the 10A rating is not enough to deal with the combined current from the 6 coil sections.Initial experiments running DC reversals either every step or after every complete sequence, have not yielded anything interesting to report.
Regards
L192
-
Continuer vous êtes sur la bonne voie ,bravo
En. Bravo!... continue, you are on the right track
-
Hi Gotoluc,
This one is the 30 slot stator and the rotor covers 9 poles, which is a lot more than the 5 pole coil pitch. I will cut the rotor down but that's not what is impeding induction, as I tried a large coil on a rectangular section and got about the same output.
I am not getting the result I had with the L298N half bridges, although I never had all my coils running with that setup. Of course I could run those at 50/60Hz whereas 5Hz is really pushing the relays and I have noticed incomplete current waveforms at that rate.
With 20V DC input I can only scrape about 100mA out of the rotor coil .The only other thing that has changed, is that I removed the magnets from the rotor.
I have a couple of relays setup as a DC polarity reversal switch however, I can't run these at more than 4A, as the 10A rating is not enough to deal with the combined current from the 6 coil sections.Initial experiments running DC reversals either every step or after every complete sequence, have not yielded anything interesting to report.
Regards
L192
L192,
Current does not have to be large. I think 3-5A is enough. Do not think about increasing because this is not the way.
-
This is my 30 slot relay build.
The diodes are paired, each is rated at 10A continuous 50A pulsed. These recover narrow spikes of charge current to the super caps at each coil turn off (see attached). There is not much in the way of rotor induction.
Regards
L192
L192, very nice build!!
How do you have your capacitor bank connected? Take a look again at Pierre's very first video. The positive of the capacitor bank does NOT go to the relays. It is only connected to one end of the 4ohm resistor AND to the return of the diodes (but not the relays).
Make sure you have the 4ohms resistor in place.
Also make sure that you drive the switch contacts of the relays (not the Arduino contacts) exactly as Pierre does (see black and red wire in first video top of relay 72): again, they are NOT connected to the capacitor bank, but they are connected to another smaller 400V capacitor (the one that connects to the rectifier diode bridge) through the thin red wire and they connect to the other side of the 4ohm resistor. Makes sure to use a high voltage capacitor.
Then hook up the potentiometer to change the timing of the relays and change it very slowly until you see something happen on the output coil, then fine-tune the timing.
:)
PmgR
-
L192, very nice build!!
How do you have your capacitor bank connected? Take a look again at Pierre's very first video. The positive of the capacitor bank does NOT go to the relays. It is only connected to one end of the 4ohm resistor AND to the return of the diodes (but not the relays).
Make sure you have the 4ohms resistor in place.
Also make sure that you drive the switch contacts of the relays (not the Arduino contacts) exactly as Pierre does (see black and red wire in first video top of relay 72): again, they are NOT connected to the capacitor bank, but they are connected to another smaller 400V capacitor (the one that connects to the rectifier diode bridge) through the thin red wire and they connect to the other side of the 4ohm resistor. Makes sure to use a high voltage capacitor.
Then hook up the potentiometer to change the timing of the relays and change it very slowly until you see something happen on the output coil, then fine-tune the timing.
:)
PmgR
Hi PmgR,
I am using a 0-30V 50A switch mode power supply so I don't need the 4 ohm resistor, as the power supply is current limited.
I will look again at what you have described
regards
L192
-
Hi PmgR,
I am using a 0-30V 50A switch mode power supply so I don't need the 4 ohm resistor, as the power supply is current limited.
I will look again at what you have described
regards
L192
You can hook your power supply up directly to the positive of the capacitor bank. But make sure to still install the 4ohm resistor, one end of the resistor to the positive of the capacitor bank and the other end to the smaller capacitor and the relays (again, see Pierre's first video).
PmgR
-
L192, very nice build!!
How do you have your capacitor bank connected? Take a look again at Pierre's very first video. The positive of the capacitor bank does NOT go to the relays. It is only connected to one end of the 4ohm resistor AND to the return of the diodes (but not the relays).
Make sure you have the 4ohms resistor in place.
Also make sure that you drive the switch contacts of the relays (not the Arduino contacts) exactly as Pierre does (see black and red wire in first video top of relay 72): again, they are NOT connected to the capacitor bank, but they are connected to another smaller 400V capacitor (the one that connects to the rectifier diode bridge) through the thin red wire and they connect to the other side of the 4ohm resistor. Makes sure to use a high voltage capacitor.
:)
PmgR
I was all ready to challenge that... but I see what you mean...
So that will help keep my coils from overheating :) +4 ohms resistance....
-
I was all ready to challenge that... but I see what you mean...
So that will help keep my coils from overheating :) +4 ohms resistance....
The 4 ohm resistor is required if you are using a linear power supply, otherwise the current draw when charging the super caps will be excessive. If I apply 20V from a zero charge starting point, 50A is drawn from my power supply, which is the maximum current limit. It would draw more than that uncontrolled. I don't see that the resistor serves any other purpose.
Regards
L192
-
Listener et all,
I can not confirm but strongly suggest that your coil slots have to line up with your rotational fields! PC uses 36/6 = 6 slots, with 30 poles, you are left with 30/6 = 5 slots per winding. The biggest issue PC is having is his width of the pure field! The criss-crossing of the magnetic windings does not allow him much options. This is why he is building a better device. This is also why we want as many possible slots divisible by 6 on the ROTOR! If we had a 60 slots on the same size stator, we can then get 60 slots divisible by 6 equaling 10 slots per coil. We've now created a wider and smoother area to maintain the PURE field. With the 30 slot rotor, we are doing the opposite, we are losing resolution, which is not good. This is why the 36 slot rotor is better than the 30 slot system. But I still believe we can see this effect for sure even with the 30. Think of it as a digitally controlled rotational field in increments. I believe we want the highest amount of increments per PURE field. With a normal generator, the values are infinite, its analog right?!?!
Again, study generator basics. Every one is only seeing one half of the picture. Again...the rotational field windings is NOT the only answer!!! I keep saying this. There is MORE!!!!!
Also, my original thought of using twice the amount of half bridges to strengthen the field is possibly not good! You will lose something very important. So the schematic shown below only shows three active half bridges with three more later in overlap. So only 6 active at any one point in time. Just like PC. With his and your relay system using no double throw you have no choice but to keep 60 relays on your system. Which I believe will be fine enough to study the effect. You will however lose considerable speed and quality of holding the field in rotation with your relays. This is his hash he is showing in his scope shot. With half bridges, you can easily smooth this out with a bypass cap. This is why half bridges have a considerable advantage. MUCH higher speeds and controlled overlap of the field at these higher speeds. Higher speeds are important for this device.
Remember this....the STATOR is what makes the current, not the current into the relays. Your armature output is only colleting the EMF. I'm certain of this. Have you asked yourself why PC uses 25V? And no, we are not braking lenz law here.
Hope this helps,
Jerdee
-
The 4 ohm resistor is required if you are using a linear power supply, otherwise the current draw when charging the super caps will be excessive. If I apply 20V from a zero charge starting point, 50A is drawn from my power supply, which is the maximum current limit. It would draw more than that uncontrolled. I don't see that the resistor serves any other purpose.
Regards
L192
But it's really between the caps and the coils... once that power supply is disconnected (even momentarily), it's running through the 4ohm resistor still...
-
Listener et all,
I can not confirm but strongly suggest that your coil slots have to line up with your rotational fields! PC uses 36/6 = 6 slots, with 30 poles, you are left with 30/6 = 5 slots per winding. The biggest issue PC is having is his width of the pure field! The criss-crossing of the magnetic windings does not allow him much options. This is why he is building a better device. This is also why we want as many possible slots divisible by 6 on the ROTOR! If we had a 60 slots on the same size stator, we can then get 60 slots divisible by 6 equaling 10 slots per coil. We've now created a wider and smoother area to maintain the PURE field. With the 30 slot rotor, we are doing the opposite, we are losing resolution, which is not good. This is why the 36 slot rotor is better than the 30 slot system. But I still believe we can see this effect for sure even with the 30. Think of it as a digitally controlled rotational field in increments. I believe we want the highest amount of increments per PURE field. With a normal generator, the values are infinite, its analog right?!?!
Again, study generator basics. Every one is only seeing one half of the picture. Again...the rotational field windings is NOT the only answer!!! I keep saying this. There is MORE!!!!!
Also, my original thought of using twice the amount of half bridges to strengthen the field is possibly not good! You will lose something very important. So the schematic shown below only shows three active half bridges with three more later in overlap. So only 6 active at any one point in time. Just like PC. With his and your relay system using no double throw you have no choice but to keep 60 relays on your system. Which I believe will be fine enough to study the effect. You will however lose considerable speed and quality of holding the field in rotation with your relays. This is his hash he is showing in his scope shot. With half bridges, you can easily smooth this out with a bypass cap. This is why half bridges have a considerable advantage. MUCH higher speeds and controlled overlap of the field at these higher speeds. Higher speeds are important for this device.
Remember this....the STATOR is what makes the current, not the current into the relays. Your armature output is only colleting the EMF. I'm certain of this. Have you asked yourself why PC uses 25V? And no, we are not braking lenz law here.
Hope this helps,
Jerdee
Jerdee, your drawing looks correct. Just draw it with relays now instead of H-bridges ;)
And yes, the more slots you have on your stator, the better. It will generate a smoother transition, so indeed less digital, more analog.
PmgR
-
Again, why is he using ~25V on the rotor. I'm very certian this is your answer. If you do not use this on your voltage on your rotor, you will not see the positive effect. There is more!!! I awaite your answer.
Jerdee
-
Again, why is he using ~25V on the rotor. I'm very certian this is your answer. If you do not use this on your voltage on your rotor, you will not see the positive effect. There is more!!! I awaite your answer.
Jerdee
Jerdee, I think I understand what you are getting at.
The 25V on the supercaps will determine what the maximum voltage generated over the coils can be as the diodes will start conducting when the voltage over the coils goes past 25V. The magnetic coupling between the stator coil and the output coils determines what the voltage at the output coil will be and since the voltage over the stator coils is limited to 25V, the voltage for the output coil is limited as well (in Pierre's case to about 140Vrms without load).
PmgR
-
I'm exhausted for the night, need rest....but you are thinking. But again...there is more MUCH more...watch the videos in very slow motion.. Spend time learning generator basics. For example, what types of generators are there? There are many, but which one fits his device. What is the piston to his generator? What is it in your device that is not giving you this piston? Think simple....don't over complicate. Its human to over complicate. Then ask gain, why is he using roughly 25 volts., I won't say how...I think many see this but don't want to say.
Jerdee.
-
I'm exhausted for the night, need rest....but you are thinking. But again...there is more MUCH more...watch the videos in very slow motion.. Spend time learning generator basics. For example, what types of generators are there? There are many, but which one fits his device. What is the piston to his generator? What is it in your device that is not giving you this piston? Think simple....don't over complicate. Its human to over complicate. Then ask gain, why is he using roughly 25 volts., I won't say how...I think many see this but don't want to say.
Jerdee.
~25V depends on this secret but it can be the minimum of this device.
-
But it's really between the caps and the coils... once that power supply is disconnected (even momentarily), it's running through the 4ohm resistor still...
Yes Pierre could have used a diode to bypass the 4 ohm resistor to feed the relays.
Regards
L192
-
Ok. Just a simple question.
If Cap-bank is not feeding something and just lays between the bridge and the collecting coil diodes, then why the bank discharges that fast during transition between main's socket and rotor's output? I mean, if diodes block the charges from either direction while the current that goes to relays is so small then why the bank discharges and so Pierre needs to move very quickly when he changes sockets for a self feeding action?
-
Ok. Just a simple question.
If Cap-bank is not feeding something and just lays between the bridge and the collecting coil diodes, then why the bank discharges that fast during transition between main's socket and rotor's output? I mean, if diodes block the charges from either direction while the current that goes to relays is so small then why the bank discharges and so Pierre needs to move very quickly when he changes sockets for a self feeding action?
The cap bank is feeding the relays back through the 4 ohm resistor, when the line power is interrupted.
My point was it doesn't need to pass through the resistor if Pierre bypassed with a diode.Only initial charge current needs to be limited. Attached photo shows my DC power power supply on initial charge. The voltage was set to 25V but the current limiting reduces this to 12.8V. On a linear power supply at 25V, this current would be very much higher.
Regards
L192
-
Listener et all,
I can not confirm but strongly suggest that your coil slots have to line up with your rotational fields! PC uses 36/6 = 6 slots, with 30 poles, you are left with 30/6 = 5 slots per winding. The biggest issue PC is having is his width of the pure field! The criss-crossing of the magnetic windings does not allow him much options. This is why he is building a better device. This is also why we want as many possible slots divisible by 6 on the ROTOR! If we had a 60 slots on the same size stator, we can then get 60 slots divisible by 6 equaling 10 slots per coil. We've now created a wider and smoother area to maintain the PURE field. With the 30 slot rotor, we are doing the opposite, we are losing resolution, which is not good. This is why the 36 slot rotor is better than the 30 slot system. But I still believe we can see this effect for sure even with the 30. Think of it as a digitally controlled rotational field in increments. I believe we want the highest amount of increments per PURE field. With a normal generator, the values are infinite, its analog right?!?!
Again, study generator basics. Every one is only seeing one half of the picture. Again...the rotational field windings is NOT the only answer!!! I keep saying this. There is MORE!!!!!
Also, my original thought of using twice the amount of half bridges to strengthen the field is possibly not good! You will lose something very important. So the schematic shown below only shows three active half bridges with three more later in overlap. So only 6 active at any one point in time. Just like PC. With his and your relay system using no double throw you have no choice but to keep 60 relays on your system. Which I believe will be fine enough to study the effect. You will however lose considerable speed and quality of holding the field in rotation with your relays. This is his hash he is showing in his scope shot. With half bridges, you can easily smooth this out with a bypass cap. This is why half bridges have a considerable advantage. MUCH higher speeds and controlled overlap of the field at these higher speeds. Higher speeds are important for this device.
Remember this....the STATOR is what makes the current, not the current into the relays. Your armature output is only colleting the EMF. I'm certain of this. Have you asked yourself why PC uses 25V? And no, we are not braking lenz law here.
Hope this helps,
Jerdee
Hi Jerdee,
I Agree with your first paragraph above.
I have confirmed the induction limitation is purely due to the low frequency using relays. Pierre had another means of increasing frequency.
When you say "study generator basics" and "there is more" are you saying that you know what this is?
Regards
L192
-
I have a couple of relays setup as a DC polarity reversal switch however, I can't run these at more than 4A, as the 10A rating is not enough to deal with the combined current from the 6 coil sections.Initial experiments running DC reversals either every step or after every complete sequence, have not yielded anything interesting to report.
Excellent idea though. Thanks for suggesting it..
-
As someone with little knowledge, I ask why use cylindrical design for this when it doesn't have moving parts....wouldn't a linear design provide more flexibility and perhaps efficiency?
-
Hi Jerdee,
I Agree with your first paragraph above.
I have confirmed the induction limitation is purely due to the low frequency using relays. Pierre had another means of increasing frequency.
When you say "study generator basics" and "there is more" are you saying that you know what this is?
Regards
L192
PC's frequency is correct. However there is so much more room for improvement. Wire size and turns will play a big deal moving forward. It will slap you in the face, once you get it. It is hidden for sure, and understand why PC has discovered a very important effect. He has given all the answers in his videos. Constantly ask yourself questions that relate to a true generator. If you don't understand true generator basics. Then you will not get his device. His very uniquely hidden concept is in every single generator. Again, which type of A/C generator does PC's device most closely resemble? Then study it's components and cycles. Ask yourslef what is your device missing that a normal generator always has. When you find the answer...it will hit you hard and you'll see that PC is not hidding any truth in his words and videos.
-
As someone with little knowledge, I ask why use cylindrical design for this when it doesn't have moving parts....wouldn't a linear design provide more flexibility and perhaps efficiency?
Like in http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg521432/#msg521432 ?
At least that one is in the line to test on my bench.
-
As someone with little knowledge, I ask why use cylindrical design for this when it doesn't have moving parts....wouldn't a linear design provide more flexibility and perhaps efficiency?
It's a great idea, but it could very well be too challenging to get the effect you are needing. Both of you are thinking creatively, and that is great! But again, you are not seeing the other half of PC's method. However, once you understand the principle, I'm fairly positive, linear methods will be hard to contain and manage, my suspicions are you need the field windings to be in series, not separated.
Jerdee
-
One of the reasons we have not seen Pierres machine run again, maybe due to relay contacts developing high resistance. This has happened on many of my relays.
Initially they all gave equal coil currents now there is a large variance.
A static test shows the contacts have likely burnt. None were driven over their rating but without arc suppression caps I guess it was inevitable.
Two choices change the relays or back to Half bridges.
L192
-
One of the reasons we have not seen Pierres machine run again, maybe due to relay contacts developing high resistance. This has happened on many of my relays.
Initially they all gave equal coil currents now there is a large variance.
A static test shows the contacts have likely burnt. None were driven over their rating but without arc suppression caps I guess it was inevitable.
Two choices change the relays or back to Half bridges.
L192
Because you use too much Amps. I say that it is not about a large work current that is just minimum.
-
PC's frequency is correct. However there is so much more room for improvement. Wire size and turns will play a big deal moving forward. It will slap you in the face, once you get it. It is hidden for sure, and understand why PC has discovered a very important effect. He has given all the answers in his videos. Constantly ask yourself questions that relate to a true generator. If you don't understand true generator basics. Then you will not get his device. His very uniquely hidden concept is in every single generator. Again, which type of A/C generator does PC's device most closely resemble? Then study it's components and cycles. Ask yourslef what is your device missing that a normal generator always has. When you find the answer...it will hit you hard and you'll see that PC is not hidding any truth in his words and videos.
I have no problem in understanding the two basic types of AC generator.The stator distributed windings and wound rotor are similar to a synchronous alternator in reverse, except the stator winding is
energised instead of the rotor.
The big difference is the energisation of whole sections of the DZ stator windings, whereas the alternator only energises the rotor (DC) which sweeps across the stator windings. For a two pole rotor, every 180 degrees there is a flux polarity reversal. In the case of the DZ generator there are 6 polarity reversals in 360 degrees.
Both generators use distributed windings to approximate a sinewave, although on a 30 slot stator a 3 phase alternator only has to accommodate 3 groups of windings so there is a gap between coils which produces more of a sine rather than a triangular wave.
So Jerdee, why are you so cryptic in your posts, I thought this is supposed to be an open forum?
Regards
L192
-
Because you use too much Amps. I say that it is not about a large work current that is just minimum.
No the contacts will burn at 3A without capacitors due to the inductive load. Its just a matter of time before this happens.
L192
-
Just looking at the relay specs,it may be false economy to replace these.
The 10,000 operation life would easily be exceeded in a couple of hours running.
L192
-
No the contacts will burn at 3A without capacitors due to the inductive load. Its just a matter of time before this happens.
L192
Yes, but they are quite cheap relays, maybe a few of them had worse conduction and burned. I have one strip from another manufacturer and only 2/8 are good!
There was never more than 10A for ALL.
-
PC's frequency is correct. However there is so much more room for improvement. Wire size and turns will play a big deal moving forward. It will slap you in the face, once you get it. It is hidden for sure, and understand why PC has discovered a very important effect. He has given all the answers in his videos. Constantly ask yourself questions that relate to a true generator. If you don't understand true generator basics. Then you will not get his device. His very uniquely hidden concept is in every single generator. Again, which type of A/C generator does PC's device most closely resemble? Then study it's components and cycles. Ask yourslef what is your device missing that a normal generator always has. When you find the answer...it will hit you hard and you'll see that PC is not hidding any truth in his words and videos.
I have no problem in understanding the two basic types of AC generator.The stator distributed windings and wound rotor are similar to a synchronous alternator in reverse, except the stator winding is
energised instead of the rotor.
The big difference is the energisation of whole sections of the DZ stator windings, whereas the alternator only energises the rotor (DC) which sweeps across the stator windings. For a two pole rotor, every 180 degrees there is a flux polarity reversal. In the case of the DZ generator there are 6 polarity reversals in 360 degrees.
Both generators use distributed windings to approximate a sinewave, although on a 30 slot stator a 3 phase alternator only has to accommodate 3 groups of windings so there is a gap between coils which produces more of a sine rather than a triangular wave.
So Jerdee, why are you so cryptic in your posts, I thought this is supposed to be an open forum?
Regards
L192
Is there field self excitation? Some feedback from the armature back into the stator windings? Has this been either confirmed or denied?
-
Just looking at the relay specs,it may be false economy to replace these.
The 10,000 operation life would easily be exceeded in a couple of hours running.
L192
This is one of reasons to replace them with solid state MOSFETs... https://i.imgur.com/fmLCUGR.png
Or just make like Figuera with simple disk and contacts on it.
Cheers!
-
@ L192 and all
Pierre told me that some time ago most of the relays on his device caught on fire. The stator is fine but all the rest is fried.
So even if he would of been opened to having someone go for a live demo he had nothing to show. Lucky for us he made the videos before the fire.
So you are right, those who chose relays will only have a certain amount of time before your relays contacts fail and weld shut and possibly catch fire.
Pierre decided to rebuild with improvements but that will take take him months. Meanwhile we are free to use what he shared and from our tests we can try to find the missing ingredient.
Jerdee lives very close to me and we've been working together as a team. He does the programming and research (think tank) and I build and test.
Working together we think we may of found something but I have to rebuild using the 40 Amp Dual Half Bridge to test if it works as Jerdee thinks it will.
So nothing is certain but for sure there are clues to be found which Jerdee has spent weeks researching.
We will give an update when we can but we also have to respect Pierre's wishes which is to protect him and his discovery from theft. So we should not publicly share until we know Pierre has protection in place which I will know when it is and notify the group. After that, Pierre or any of us (who have figured it out) can publicly share.
I hope you and everyone else building Pierre's device understand and respect his wishes.
Kind regards
Luc
Fr. @ L192 et tout
Pierre m'a dit qu'il y a quelque temps la plupart des relais de son appareil ont pris feu. Le stator va bien mais tout le reste est frit.
Donc, même s'il voulait invité à faire une démonstration en direct, il n'avait rien à montrer. Heureusement pour nous, il a fait les vidéos avant le feu.
Vous avez raison, ceux qui ont choisi les relais n'auront qu'un certain temps avant que les contacts tombent en panne ou qu'il soudre et prenne feu.
Pierre a décidé de reconstruire avec des améliorations mais cela prendra des mois. En attendant, nous sommes libres d'utiliser ce qu'il a partagé et de nos tests, nous pouvons essayer de trouver l'ingrédient manquant.
Jerdee vit très près de moi et nous avons travaillé ensemble en équipe. Il fait de la programmation et de la recherche (think tank) et je construis et test.
En travaillant ensemble, nous pensons avoir trouver quelque chose, mais je dois reconstruire en utilisant le Dual Half Bridge de 40 Amp pour tester si cela fonctionne comme Jerdee le pense.
Donc, rien n'est certain, mais il est certain que Jerdee a passé des semaines à chercher des indices.
Nous donnerons une mise à jour quand nous le pourrons mais nous devons aussi respecter les souhaits de Pierre qui est de le protéger et de le protéger contre le vol. Donc, nous ne devrions pas partager publiquement jusqu'à ce que nous sachions que Pierre a mis en place une protection que je saurai quand et aviser le groupe. Après cela, Pierre ou l'un d'entre nous (qui l'a compris) peut partager publiquement.
J'espère que vous et tous ceux qui construisent l'appareil de Pierre comprennent et respectent ses désirs.
Sincères amitiés
Luc
-
Yes, but they are quite cheap relays, maybe a few of them had worse conduction and burned. I have one strip from another manufacturer and only 2/8 are good!
There was never more than 10A for ALL.
I opened one and found just by using some solvent spray I was able to restore contact resistance in the milliohm range. It may be possible to drill a small hole (without removing relay from the board) to inject some solvent.
My two relays I used for polarity reversal did get very hot, as they were carrying the whole load. To actually catch fire, I think more than 10A would have to be applied. So much for the theory that 3.5 to 5A is enough.
Regards
The192
-
I opened one and found just by using some solvent spray I was able to restore contact resistance in the milliohm range. It may be possible to drill a small hole (without removing relay from the board) to inject some solvent.
My two relays I used for polarity reversal did get very hot, as they were carrying the whole load. To actually catch fire, I think more than 10A would have to be applied. So much for the theory that 3.5 to 5A is enough.
Regards
The192
good idea :))
-
The last experiment I conducted before relay failure was to remove the "coil always on" in code, so each sequenced "on" delay "off". Due to the inductance then seen, the recovery is much higher and 10 switch cycles per rotation are seen. With the sequence running at 5Hz this provided better induction, developing about 75V off load.
This puts a greater strain on the relays and without suppressor caps would be asking for failure but the same could be achieved by switching the +rail with a MOSFET, in between relay switching and keeping the coil always on, so the large current change would always be though closed contacts.
L192
-
Is there field self excitation? Some feedback from the armature back into the stator windings? Has this been either confirmed or denied?
Power is recovered into the super caps from the switching process,also when looped the linear power supply is powered from the rotor AC 115V 60Hz output (note we have not seen this waveform).So yes self excitation.
L192
-
Yes, but they are quite cheap relays, maybe a few of them had worse conduction and burned. I have one strip from another manufacturer and only 2/8 are good!
There was never more than 10A for ALL.
Ya I was noticing that too.. one board (6-8) has really strong currents that cause a magnet to turn VERY quickly... but the others are fairly weak... some are very weak; but I blame that on my poor soldering skills :) Some coils might have cold-ish joints and I mean to walk though each to check...
-
I stripped the relays off 1 board, opened them, cleaned and adjusted the contacts now all are 10 m ohms or less. They all have to be this way to achieve the max current.
If the 60Hz were generated purely by what we can see... 10 sequences x 10ms =100ms per rotation.
That's 10 rotations per second, 6 polarity reversals in each rotation, so 10 x 6= 60Hz.
The max time to switch is 10ms, so in practice you would be lucky to get 5ms on time.
I would conclude that only 30Hz would be achievable.
L192
-
I stripped the relays off 1 board, opened them, cleaned and adjusted the contacts now all are 10 m ohms or less. They all have to be this way to achieve the max current.
If the 60Hz were generated purely by what we can see... 10 sequences x 10ms =100ms per rotation.
That's 10 rotations per second, 6 polarity reversals in each rotation, so 10 x 6= 60Hz.
The max time to switch is 10ms, so in practice you would be lucky to get 5ms on time.
I would conclude that only 30Hz would be achievable.
L192
Again; in the video he shows 60.5Hz; the video is at 30FPS, and in every frame there are 2 LEDS on on the transistors. The relay states are changing a total of 60 times per second (between every 2 on there's a 1 off and a 2 on, so 2*30 = 60 ).
no relay changes faster than 48ms though. (from on (0); turn off prior (1); turn on next (2), turn off original (3) ; 3 * 16.66ms (1000/60) )
but there certainly aren't 60 full rotations of the field (or 30)... it takes a third of a second second to get through a cycle of 12 steps; which is only at best 6 pole per quarter second... (if 3 pairs; one across top of rotor, one across bottom in 12 steps ) so by rotations like 6Hz is all it would be...
-
Like in http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg521432/#msg521432 ?
At least that one is in the line to test on my bench.
Yes. But would there be any gains from swapping the armature and field coil lines, i.e. field center with two armatures running either side? I'm wondering if the flux is being underutilized as is with one end of the electromagnet outwardly facing? Would my proposed arrangement make it a two phase system?
-
I'm exhausted for the night, need rest....but you are thinking. But again...there is more MUCH more...watch the videos in very slow motion.. Spend time learning generator basics. For example, what types of generators are there? There are many, but which one fits his device. What is the piston to his generator? What is it in your device that is not giving you this piston? Think simple....don't over complicate. Its human to over complicate. Then ask gain, why is he using roughly 25 volts., I won't say how...I think many see this but don't want to say.
Jerdee.
What does DZ represent? Direct Z? Dimension Z (Z axis)? Does anyone know?
What type of generator does the DZ represent?
I believe the only obvious reason the case is used for the field is to have more coils = better resolution = the most accurate reproduction of field rotation. Conversely, a 36 slot field rotor of similar size to achieve the same resolution would likely be impossible to get. However, if you could get such a rotor, then the case could instead contain the armature, and so you'd have a "digital" type reproduction of a standard "analog" A/C cylindrical rotor generator.
As far as I can tell, the DZ appears to have about as much in common with an induction motor as it does generator. It's like a stalled induction motor where the torque is unused but the induced current is used.
I'm probably focusing too much on the mechanical aspects, so can it be considered a transformer, rather than a generator? Then what gains are to be had from a rotating field vs a sinusoidal alternating field?
If by type you mean electrical aspects, it is compound wound, etc, then I need to study the videos...
-
Yes. But would there be any gains from swapping the armature and field coil lines, i.e. field center with two armatures running either side? I'm wondering if the flux is being underutilized as is with one end of the electromagnet outwardly facing? Would my proposed arrangement make it a two phase system?
The open magnetic system behavior is a bit different. Even in Pierre's case it is still half-open system due range between coils opposite magnetic polarities facing outward in stator frame.
Cheers!
-
What does DZ represent? Direct Z? Dimension Z (Z axis)? Does anyone know?
What type of generator does the DZ represent?
I believe the only obvious reason the case is used for the field is to have more coils = better resolution = the most accurate reproduction of field rotation. Conversely, a 36 slot field rotor of similar size to achieve the same resolution would likely be impossible to get. However, if you could get such a rotor, then the case could instead contain the armature, and so you'd have a "digital" type reproduction of a standard "analog" A/C cylindrical rotor generator.
As far as I can tell, the DZ appears to have about as much in common with an induction motor as it does generator. It's like a stalled induction motor where the torque is unused but the induced current is used.
I'm probably focusing too much on the mechanical aspects, so can it be considered a transformer, rather than a generator? Then what gains are to be had from a rotating field vs a sinusoidal alternating field?
If by type you mean electrical aspects, it is compound wound, etc, then I need to study the videos...
This applet shows the situation in a three phase induction motor.
http://www.nptel.ac.in/courses/IIT-MADRAS/Electrical_Machines_II/animation/sinwave3-9.htm (http://www.nptel.ac.in/courses/IIT-MADRAS/Electrical_Machines_II/animation/sinwave3-9.htm)
Its the traveling wave that drags the rotor around. If this were a 3 phase transformer i.e. a second set of windings, you would have induction due to the traveling wave and induction due to the pulsating wave (the three phase AC).
In the DZ there is a traveling wave but no pulsating component (unless you pulse each coil set off and on).
L192
-
This applet shows the situation in a three phase induction motor.
http://www.nptel.ac.in/courses/IIT-MADRAS/Electrical_Machines_II/animation/sinwave3-9.htm (http://www.nptel.ac.in/courses/IIT-MADRAS/Electrical_Machines_II/animation/sinwave3-9.htm)
Its the traveling wave that drags the rotor around. If this were a 3 phase transformer i.e. a second set of windings, you would have induction due to the traveling wave and induction due to the pulsating wave (the three phase AC).
In the DZ there is a traveling wave but no pulsating component (unless you pulse each coil set off and on).
L192
OK, so the DZ does have more in common with a generator than a motor. I still can't determine "which one (generator) fits his device" but I'm now thinking he means "fit" in terms of electrical characteristics, not mechanical.
"Piston"; presumably that refers to the transfer of force, the flux in this case. Perhaps the polarity is being manipulated more than is apparent.
-
Can anyone advise...
Is a winding on a transformer that is open the same as one that is in a complete circuit, except blocked by diodes?
To eliminate the mutual induction on other stator coils I was considering adding diodes to the ground side (or power side) that prevents current in the other coils...
like this Falstad sim (http://www.falstad.com/circuit/circuitjs.html?cct=$+1+0.000005+0.015335496684492848+39+5+50%0Av+144+240+144+160+0+0+40+5+0+0+0.5%0Aw+144+160+144+96+0%0Aw+144+96+224+96+0%0Aw+224+96+272+96+0%0Aw+224+96+224+256+0%0Aw+144+240+144+288+0%0Aw+256+288+256+64+0%0AS+384+80+304+80+0+0+false+0+2%0AS+400+272+320+272+0+0+false+0+2%0Aw+320+256+288+256+0%0Aw+288+256+224+256+0%0Aw+272+96+304+96+0%0Aw+400+272+416+272+0%0Aw+384+80+416+80+0%0Aw+416+80+464+80+0%0Aw+416+272+464+272+0%0Ar+144+288+208+288+0+1%0Aw+208+288+256+288+0%0Aw+512+128+512+80+0%0Aw+512+80+464+80+0%0Aw+512+208+512+272+0%0Aw+512+272+464+272+0%0Aw+512+512+464+512+0%0Aw+512+448+512+512+0%0Aw+512+320+464+320+0%0Aw+208+528+256+528+0%0Ar+144+528+208+528+0+1%0Aw+464+512+464+448+0%0Aw+416+512+464+512+0%0Aw+464+320+464+368+0%0Aw+416+320+464+320+0%0Aw+384+320+416+320+0%0Aw+400+512+416+512+0%0Aw+272+336+304+336+0%0Aw+288+496+224+496+0%0AS+400+512+320+512+0+0+false+0+2%0AS+384+320+304+320+0+1+false+0+2%0Aw+256+528+256+304+0%0Aw+144+480+144+528+0%0Aw+224+336+272+336+0%0Aw+144+336+224+336+0%0Aw+144+400+144+336+0%0Aw+144+400+64+400+0%0Aw+64+400+64+160+0%0Aw+64+160+144+160+0%0Aw+144+240+96+240+0%0Aw+96+240+96+480+0%0Aw+96+480+144+480+0%0Aw+896+272+848+272+0%0Aw+896+208+896+272+0%0Aw+896+80+848+80+0%0Aw+896+128+896+80+0%0Aw+592+288+640+288+0%0Ar+528+288+592+288+0+1%0Aw+848+272+848+208+0%0Aw+800+272+848+272+0%0Aw+848+80+848+128+0%0Aw+800+80+848+80+0%0Aw+768+80+800+80+0%0Aw+800+144+800+80+0%0Aw+800+224+800+272+0%0Aw+784+272+800+272+0%0Aw+672+224+752+224+0%0Aw+672+256+672+224+0%0Aw+688+144+736+144+0%0Aw+688+96+688+144+0%0Ad+800+144+736+144+1+0.805904783%0Ad+800+224+752+224+1+0.805904783%0Aw+656+96+688+96+0%0Aw+672+256+608+256+0%0Aw+704+256+672+256+0%0AS+784+272+704+272+0+0+false+0+2%0AS+768+80+688+80+0+1+false+0+2%0Aw+640+288+640+64+0%0Aw+528+240+528+288+0%0Aw+608+96+656+96+0%0Aw+528+96+608+96+0%0Aw+528+160+528+96+0%0Av+528+240+528+160+0+0+40+5+0+0+0.5%0Ad+320+528+256+528+1+0.805904783%0Ad+304+304+256+304+1+0.805904783%0Aw+512+448+512+432+0%0Aw+512+128+576+368+0%0Aw+512+208+576+432+0%0A169+576+432+512+432+0+4+1+-0.32010574286436466+1.7143528285856746e-7+1.7145140018826055e-7+0.99%0Aw+512+400+464+368+0%0Aw+512+368+896+128+0%0Aw+512+400+896+208+0%0Ad+304+64+256+64+1+0.805904783%0Ad+320+288+256+288+1+0.805904783%0Ad+704+288+640+288+1+0.805904783%0Ad+688+64+640+64+1+0.805904783%0Aw+320+496+288+496+0%0Aw+224+496+224+336+0%0A) kinda (sorry it's kinda a tangled mess; substituted a tapped transformer and tied existing things to it...
Edit: Sorry didn't check it after pasting in wong mode... should have been condensed like that.
-
Hi d3X
Please use this link to reduce your very long url link to a small one, this way this page will remain as usual, ok?
https://tinyurl.com/ (https://tinyurl.com/)
Gyula
EDIT: Just have made it for you, this is the link to your Falstad simulation: https://tinyurl.com/ya9wmepj (https://tinyurl.com/ya9wmepj) Please go back and delete
your original very long link by scrolling horizontally to the very right corner of your above post and click on the Modify icon.
Include this link instead of the long one: https://tinyurl.com/ya9wmepj (https://tinyurl.com/ya9wmepj)
To Save your modification, scroll again horizontally to the right side... ;)
-
To eliminate the mutual induction on other stator coils I was considering adding diodes to the ground side (or power side) that prevents current in the other coils...
Yes, that is the way if you use mosfets. I think that there is no need for this extra diode when using igbt's but i have to recheck it.
regards
-
Pierre,
I know this secret. I will keep it for myself until others know it or tell it.
One of the films is "visible" this secret. You need to know what to look for and what is missing.
I confirmed it the way you did it :) and now I understand your surprise successfully!
I wonder about the time of work, and probably you too. Maybe you already know it but it's unusual.
Thank You !
Hi r2fpl,
I assume if you know the secret, then you by now should be reproducing the same results on your setup.
Do you have a photo of your test results that show this, or a video?
Regards
L192
-
Right! Yes it shakes during the first "field flash sequence". / Arne
If you look Pierre uses a rectangular laminated stack and has applied a resin loaded with steel particles.
I guess he made a tight fitting cylindrical mould and then just poured in the resin.
L192
-
r2fpl,
Totally agree that diode recovery is not enough. It is only one part of the equation. However in a generator you have an amplifying effect and the diodes will recover more once amplified. :) Again, study AC generator basics. You’ll see what I’m writing about. Just like what Pierre has stated, a rotational system will not give you OU, it’s like an engine without pistons. Thanks for pointing out the 1/2 of 48V.
@L192,
Yes, I totally agree once again. The current limiting resistor has it’s role for charging the cap bank. I understand this already. I’m not easily convinced it has another role either. The switched mode power supply with current limiting would help as well. The current limiting resistor is wasted heat!
Jerdee
Jerdee,
The amplifying effect in a synchronous generator, is due to the rotor having a large number of turns with respect to the stator windings.
The flux developed is dependent on the amp turns, so a large flux can be developed with only a small DC current, which results in a large induction in the stator windings.
The DZ generator is running in reverse to a synchronous generator, so the only increase in voltage is due to the transformer action between stator and rotor. Recovery through the diodes is proportional to the rate of change in flux, which in the case of the "always on" coils, is a relatively small change, which I have confirmed and posted current waveforms.
For there to be significant recovery energy, a large change in flux is required, so this must be happening, although in the code we have been given, the only such potential change is the end of the sequence when all coils are turned off. I say potential, as the single diode scheme only provides a current path for recovery, if a low side switch remains on. There is evidence of this also in the scope shot I provided however the pulses are very narrow and probably only occur at all , due to at least one of the low side switches being on for a short duration during the turn off of all the other high side switches.
There is likely another switching event, such as a polarity reversal that would result in significant recovery energy. You wont see this in the blue LED timing, it is probably in the relay wiring.
Now you are probably going to say the amplifying effect is the due to a series of six coils in series acting as a boost converter when the low side switch turns off. There is a problem with that ... the high side switches are linked to corresponding low side switches, so they both turn off together. Without the high side switch remaining on, the energy stored in the series coils cannot be recovered via the diode as there is no current path. You may say what about the next high side switch along, that will still be on. Yes, but so will its paired low side switch so still no release of stored coil energy.
Now if there were a polarity reversal to the relay supply rails, this may work.
Stator coil inductance and hence energy storage will increase whilst in registration with the rotor,under no load. This inductance being reduced by counter current due to
load. If inductance is reduced then energy recovery is reduced.
As the system has demonstrated that it is load invariant, more current is automatically supplied. The system behaves, as if lenz is not directly acting on source.
L192
-
It is not easy to repeat the first time because you have to adjust.
You must find the answer that you are missing in what you did. It is not easy to understand immediately. "Think straight and you will find". I agree with these words. It is a cliché but it is. Do not look for mA search A. The diodes have two functions I think that you already know. When the effect appears, they come to life. Everything will be the same.
It's hard to think about it with what you have on the table because there is too much going on there. Even I do not know how to do it right now. You need a lot of work to continue joining the whole.
I apologize for not showing you the video, but if I showed you, you would know what to do. Do not take offense at me.
It's good that you write about what you do. Maybe you will come by yourself and maybe someone will tell you more. Jardee says that maybe a few people already know. Possible. Certainly there are those who do not write and do.
If you do not find it yourself, Pierre has promised us that he will show and say how it works and how to do it. If more people would be interested in this, it would be stated.
The system behaves, as if lenz is not directly acting on source.
L192
Lenz, I do not think so.
-
@r2fpl
I do not understand your attitude. Here is a forum to share, exchange ideas and finds, not to hide while hinting that you have understood something.
Pierre is silent to protect his invention, but you are not the author, you have nothing to lose by explaining your idea or showing your results.
fr: je ne comprends pas votre attitude. Ici c'est un forum pour partager, échanger idées et trouvailles, pas pour cacher tout en laissant entendre que vous avez compris quelque chose.
Pierre se tait pour protéger son invention, mais vous vous n'êtes pas l'auteur, vous n'avez rien à perdre en expliquant votre idée ou en montrant vos résultats.
-
@r2fpl
. . . attitude. Here is a forum to share, exchange ideas and finds, not to hide while hinting that you have understood something.
Dont forget that Pedro1 also is a member of this forum. "pierres-170w-in-1600w-out . . . ."
-
@r2fpl
I do not understand your attitude. Here is a forum to share, exchange ideas and finds, not to hide while hinting that you have understood something.
Pierre is silent to protect his invention, but you are not the author, you have nothing to lose by explaining your idea or showing your results.
fr: je ne comprends pas votre attitude. Ici c'est un forum pour partager, échanger idées et trouvailles, pas pour cacher tout en laissant entendre que vous avez compris quelque chose.
Pierre se tait pour protéger son invention, mais vous vous n'êtes pas l'auteur, vous n'avez rien à perdre en expliquant votre idée ou en montrant vos résultats.
Sorry cheors but I've been in constant communications with Pierre and know how he wants to proceed. It's not a question of attitude or wanting to hide things. It's a question of protection and to follow a well though out plan.
I use to believe public domain sharing would protect everyone but the reality is not so. Yesterday Pierre sent me an email to thank me for my post asking the active experimenters to hold off on sharing all the ingredients needed for a working device until Pierre is ready to go public himself or tells us we can do so.
Regards
Luc
Fr. Désolé, mais je suis en communication constante avec Pierre et je sais comment il veut procéder. Ce n'est pas une question d'attitude ou de vouloir cacher des choses. C'est une question de protection et de suivre un bon plan.
J'ai cru que le partage du domaine public protégerait tout le monde, mais la réalité ne l'est pas. Hier, Pierre m'a envoyé un email pour me remercier de mon post demandant aux expérimentateurs actifs de ne pas partager tous les ingrédients nécessaires pour un appareil en état de marche jusqu'à ce que Pierre soit prêt à rendre public lui-même ou nous dit que nous pouvons partager.
Cordialement
Luc
-
@gotoluc
I appreciate your attitude with this project and research.
Hopefully Pierre will come through with some public information so that everyone can benefit.
Waiting. . . .
truesearch
-
An update on my re-build: https://youtu.be/IOf96febR60 (https://youtu.be/IOf96febR60)
-
@gotoluc
I appreciate your attitude with this project and research.
Hopefully Pierre will come through with some public information so that everyone can benefit.
Waiting. . . .
truesearch
Thanks for your post truesearch.
I trust Pierre to do the right thing at the right time.
Regards
Luc
-
There is likely another switching event, such as a polarity reversal that would result in significant recovery energy.
Perhaps the polarity is being manipulated more than is apparent.
We've both arrived at the same conclusion.....and I just found I have a 36 slot stator laying around.
-
Let's be serious.
Imagine four equal coils (solenoid) with core, connected in series so the last one, at the end, is connected to first.
Place them on steel ring or plate. Connect negative from a battery or whatever power source you have to the junction between coil one and four.
Connect capacitor positive to positive of the power source and negative to same junction of coil one and four.
Connect diode anode to junction between the coil two and three and cathode to positive of the capacitor, where the positive power source is connected.
Now connect one new wire to the junction of coil two/three/anode and touch with other end positive of the capacitor/power source junction.
If you find it interesting you can try to touch faster or slower and do some measurements, for each coil or some other places.
Compass or a small magnet can be used for the unfolding sense.
(I copied this, sometimes in the past, don’t remember, with small fixes, do not forget diode)
“Suppose us charging capacitor. The slope of the voltage is constantly decreasing, so the current drawn is constantly decreasing in value. Eventually, the slope becomes 0, that is to say, the capacitor is fully charged, and is accepting no more current, at this value of voltage, the current value is zero. It is about to cross the X-axis, meaning the current is going negative. The only way for this to be true, is for the capacitor voltage to be higher than the source voltage, which is the case as the voltage sine wave begins to drop off (considering the cap was fully charged at V slope = 0, IE peak) Now the capacitor begins to return energy to the circuit or oppose the source voltage, in the very same way a resistor oppose voltage. This is why reactance is at a ninety degree phase shift and resistance is not. This is why a capacitors voltage and current are not in phase. And - it is also why we must add them as vectors. So, the patter continues, of source voltage being higher than cap voltage, charging, cap voltage being higher than source voltage, discharging, so energy is returned to the circuit every period, which is why capacitive (and inductive) reactance values are frequency dependent, and also, if you can imagine the periodicity in time of a sine wave, it explains the omega (angular velocity portion as well) multiplying frequency by two pi gives us total radians covered by the circuit in a second, multiplied by the capacitance, we have a total value for reactance.”
(It will be too much to go in LC resonant frequency so we don’t have to deal with all kind of harmonic spikes)
And then a current will go in the way we wish.
d.
-
An update on my re-build: https://youtu.be/IOf96febR60 (https://youtu.be/IOf96febR60)
Hi Gotoluc,
Impressive build once again.
Regards
L192
-
It's not a question of attitude or wanting to hide things. It's a question of protection and to follow a well though out plan.
The danger is always the same: too often the men and their inventions disappear suddenly ! Stan Meyer, Troy Reed, ....
FR:
Le danger est toujours le même:trop souvent les hommes et leurs inventions disparaissent subitement !
Stan Meyer, Troy Reed, ....
-
@r2fpl
I do not understand your attitude. Here is a forum to share, exchange ideas and finds, not to hide while hinting that you have understood something.
Pierre is silent to protect his invention, but you are not the author, you have nothing to lose by explaining your idea or showing your results.
fr: je ne comprends pas votre attitude. Ici c'est un forum pour partager, échanger idées et trouvailles, pas pour cacher tout en laissant entendre que vous avez compris quelque chose.
Pierre se tait pour protéger son invention, mais vous vous n'êtes pas l'auteur, vous n'avez rien à perdre en expliquant votre idée ou en montrant vos résultats.
You started doing it. I and others invest their time and money, so have respect and show that you do it and do not wait for it. If you built it, maybe you would already know.
Do not worry, we're following in Pierre's footsteps so there's more of us.
-
Good job ! Everything is nicely done :)
I used diodes: stth12r06d
Hi r2fpl,
Re message 811... What is this scope shot monitoring?
RegardsL192
-
You started doing it. I and others invest their time and money, so have respect and show that you do it and do not wait for it. If you built it, maybe you would already know.
Do not worry, we're following in Pierre's footsteps so there's more of us.
Yes, i started something
https://youtu.be/IqUf29SFd4A (https://youtu.be/IqUf29SFd4A)
-
Yes, i started something
https://youtu.be/IqUf29SFd4A (https://youtu.be/IqUf29SFd4A)
Nice attempt just the coils are separate to each positition. This makes magnetic flux to interrupt before moving to next coil. You need 3/2 coiils for one pole which mean at least 3 coils for one magnetic pole sharing same core. So you can switch magnetic pole position in 3D space over same core without interruption.
-
Yes, i started something
https://youtu.be/IqUf29SFd4A (https://youtu.be/IqUf29SFd4A)
Hi Cheors, very nice compact build!
I would guess you have 4 poles (NSNS) and you are driving 2 coils per pole (requires 2 half bridges)? Or do you have 8 poles with 1 coil per pole (NSNSNSNS) which would require 4 half bridges.
I note that for both cases you would have two poles of the same kind facing eachother at 180deg.
Can you post your schematic?
PmgR
-
YES I SHARE , I D'ONT KEEP FOR MYSELF !!!!
-
And Arduino program with Slow /Fast ranges:
YES I SHARE !!!
-------------------------------------------------
/* Main.ino file generated by New Project wizard
*
* Created: Mars 2018
* Processor: ATmega328P
* Compiler: Arduino AVR
Champ tournant en 8 états
Version 7 avec toutes bobines à la fois AVEC courtcircuit bobines
Programme d'origine adapté au Arduino Nano
*/
int raz = 13;
#define Frequency A6
#define SlowFast A7
int T1 = 0;
int T2 = 0; //OVERLAPPING
int Slow;
void setup()
{
DDRB = 0b00000011; // PORTB D8 D9 EN SORTIE
DDRC = 0b00111111; // PORTC en sortie sauf A6 A7
DDRD = 0b11111111; // PORTD en sortie
PORTC = 0;//Disable
PORTD = 0;//Disable
digitalWrite(raz, HIGH); // turn the raz on (relâche le reset au départ)
pinMode(SlowFast,INPUT_PULLUP);
}
// the loop function runs over and over again forever
void loop()
{
//Fast:
T1 =map(analogRead(Frequency),0,1023,1,50);
if(T1 == 0)
{
T1 =10;
}
T2 = T1; // A modifier éventuellement
Slow = analogRead(SlowFast);
if(Slow <= 10)
{
T1=T1*10;
T2 =T1;
goto Slow;
}
// de 0 à 9 = PORTD
// de 14 à 19 = PORTC
Fast:
digitalWrite(0,HIGH),digitalWrite(14,HIGH),digitalWrite(9,HIGH);
delayMicroseconds(T1);
digitalWrite(2,HIGH),digitalWrite(16,HIGH),digitalWrite(19,HIGH);
delayMicroseconds(T1);
digitalWrite(0,LOW),digitalWrite(14,LOW),digitalWrite(9,LOW);
delayMicroseconds(T2);
digitalWrite(3,HIGH),digitalWrite(17,HIGH),digitalWrite(18,HIGH);
delayMicroseconds(T1);
digitalWrite(2,LOW),digitalWrite(16,LOW),digitalWrite(19,LOW);
delayMicroseconds(T2);
digitalWrite(4,HIGH),digitalWrite(8,HIGH),digitalWrite(15,HIGH);
delayMicroseconds(T1);
digitalWrite(3,LOW),digitalWrite(17,LOW),digitalWrite(18,LOW);
delayMicroseconds(T2);
digitalWrite(5,HIGH),digitalWrite(9,HIGH),digitalWrite(14,HIGH);
delayMicroseconds(T1);
digitalWrite(4,LOW),digitalWrite(8,LOW),digitalWrite(15,LOW);
delayMicroseconds(T2);
digitalWrite(6,HIGH),digitalWrite(16,HIGH),digitalWrite(19,HIGH);
delayMicroseconds(T1);
digitalWrite(5,LOW),digitalWrite(9,LOW),digitalWrite(14,LOW);
delayMicroseconds(T2);
digitalWrite(7,HIGH),digitalWrite(17,HIGH),digitalWrite(18,HIGH);
delayMicroseconds(T1);
digitalWrite(6,LOW),digitalWrite(16,LOW),digitalWrite(19,LOW);
delayMicroseconds(T2);
digitalWrite(8,HIGH),digitalWrite(1,HIGH),digitalWrite(15,HIGH);
delayMicroseconds(T1);
digitalWrite(7,LOW),digitalWrite(17,LOW),digitalWrite(18,LOW);
delayMicroseconds(T2);
digitalWrite(8,LOW),digitalWrite(1,LOW),digitalWrite(15,LOW);
delayMicroseconds(T2);
goto Fast;
Slow:
digitalWrite(0,HIGH),digitalWrite(14,HIGH),digitalWrite(9,HIGH);
delay(T1);
digitalWrite(2,HIGH),digitalWrite(16,HIGH),digitalWrite(19,HIGH);
delay(T1);
digitalWrite(0,LOW),digitalWrite(14,LOW),digitalWrite(9,LOW);
delay(T2);
digitalWrite(3,HIGH),digitalWrite(17,HIGH),digitalWrite(18,HIGH);
delay(T1);
digitalWrite(2,LOW),digitalWrite(16,LOW),digitalWrite(19,LOW);
delay(T2);
digitalWrite(4,HIGH),digitalWrite(8,HIGH),digitalWrite(15,HIGH);
delay(T1);
digitalWrite(3,LOW),digitalWrite(17,LOW),digitalWrite(18,LOW);
delay(T2);
digitalWrite(5,HIGH),digitalWrite(9,HIGH),digitalWrite(14,HIGH);
delay(T1);
digitalWrite(4,LOW),digitalWrite(8,LOW),digitalWrite(15,LOW);
delay(T2);
digitalWrite(6,HIGH),digitalWrite(16,HIGH),digitalWrite(19,HIGH);
delay(T1);
digitalWrite(5,LOW),digitalWrite(9,LOW),digitalWrite(14,LOW);
delay(T2);
digitalWrite(7,HIGH),digitalWrite(17,HIGH),digitalWrite(18,HIGH);
delay(T1);
digitalWrite(6,LOW),digitalWrite(16,LOW),digitalWrite(19,LOW);
delay(T2);
digitalWrite(8,HIGH),digitalWrite(1,HIGH),digitalWrite(15,HIGH);
delay(T1);
digitalWrite(7,LOW),digitalWrite(17,LOW),digitalWrite(18,LOW);
delay(T2);
digitalWrite(8,LOW),digitalWrite(1,LOW),digitalWrite(15,LOW);
delay(T2);
goto Slow;
}
-
Hi r2fpl,
Re message 811... What is this scope shot monitoring?
RegardsL192
Hello everyone,
Is the rotor winding an oscillating circuit?
FR : Le bobinage du rotor est-il un circuit oscillant ?
MichelM
-
And Arduino program with Slow /Fast ranges:
YES I SHARE !!!
-------------------------------------------------
}
Cheors, trying to go through your code to figure out how you are driving your coils. I noticed that you are not using D1 anywhere in your code. Can you describe how you are driving your coils.
PmgR
Edit: Never mind, I figured it out. You are driving 2 poles around, each consisting of 4 coils.
-
It is an honorable thing to respect Pierre's work from the vantage point of protecting the intellectual property of his generator. However, the possibility exists in this case that prior art does exist and has been applied for through the US Patent Office. The application in question is attached below and I would recommend that any interested replicators or otherwise study the claims of this application and also become familiar with the patent term DoE or Doctrine of Equivalents which is used as a main determinate in patent infringement.
It should be noted that as of this date, this application has not been issued as a final patent and this begs the question, why?
Regards,
Pm
-
It is an honorable thing to respect Pierre's work from the vantage point of protecting the intellectual property of his generator. However, the possibility exists in this case that prior art does exist and has been applied for through the US Patent Office. The application in question is attached below and I would recommend that any interested replicators or otherwise study the claims of this application and also become familiar with the patent term DoE or Doctrine of Equivalents which is used as a main determinate in patent infringement.
It should be noted that as of this date, this application has not been issued as a final patent and this begs the question, why?
Regards,
Pm
Nice find :) Technically that's not prior art for DZ Generator because it uses its own switching instead of relying on external phases...
replication of CEG
http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=245 (http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=245) (no success)
(Classifications)
H ELECTRICITY
H02 GENERATION; CONVERSION OR DISTRIBUTION OF ELECTRIC POWER
H02K DYNAMO-ELECTRIC MACHINES
H02K53/00 Alleged dynamo-electric perpetua mobilia
(these are both the same... subsequent versions of each)
https://patents.google.com/patent/US20020125774A1/en?inventor=Alberto+Molina-Martinez (https://patents.google.com/patent/US20020125774A1/en?inventor=Alberto+Molina-Martinez)
2002-03-06 US10091863 Abandoned
2002-09-12 US20020125774A1 Application
(WO2002095911) (https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2002095911&recNum=1&maxRec=&office=&prevFilter=&sortOption=&queryString=&tab=PCT+Biblio) (international)
https://patents.google.com/patent/US20030168921A1/en?inventor=Alberto+Molina-Martinez (https://patents.google.com/patent/US20030168921A1/en?inventor=Alberto+Molina-Martinez)
2003-01-27 US10351806 Abandoned
2003-09-11 US20030168921A1 Application
(Antimatter electrical generator)
https://patents.google.com/patent/US20070110208A1/en?inventor=Alberto+Molina-Martinez (https://patents.google.com/patent/US20070110208A1/en?inventor=Alberto+Molina-Martinez)
2005-11-17 US11280636 Abandoned
2007-05-17 US20070110208A1 Application
-
It is an honorable thing to respect Pierre's work from the vantage point of protecting the intellectual property of his generator. However, the possibility exists in this case that prior art does exist and has been applied for through the US Patent Office. The application in question is attached below and I would recommend that any interested replicators or otherwise study the claims of this application and also become familiar with the patent term DoE or Doctrine of Equivalents which is used as a main determinate in patent infringement.
It should be noted that as of this date, this application has not been issued as a final patent and this begs the question, why?
Regards,
Pm
Hi Partzman,
I have research this patent in the past. I believe the patent was abandoned by the author. In fact, if I recall correctly, someone from a forum contacted Molina/Martinez and he said that it wouldn't work when a load was attached. It might even have been Hartberlin who contacted him, not 100% sure.
PmgR
-
I noticed that you are not using D1 anywhere in your code. Can you describe how you are driving your coils.
PmgR
See the sequence's last lines :
"
digitalWrite(8,HIGH),digitalWrite(1,HIGH),digitalWrite(15,HIGH);
delayMicroseconds(T1);
digitalWrite(7,LOW),digitalWrite(17,LOW),digitalWrite(18,LOW);
delayMicroseconds(T2);
digitalWrite(8,LOW),digitalWrite(1,LOW),digitalWrite(15,LOW);
"
-
Look at to visualize the switching sequence:
https://youtu.be/47xF5ed20Eo (https://youtu.be/47xF5ed20Eo)
Regards
-
je voit qu'il y a beaucoup de similitude avec Alberto Molina-Martinez qui a dit que la rotation d'un champ magnétique ne générait pas de sure unité et je suis totalement d'accord avec lui ce n'est qu'un aspect je l'avait déjà mentionné antérieurement et j'ignorait que une autre personne avait travailler sur un projet similaire mais forcé de constaté une chose ou il y a eu un échec moi j'ai réussi c'est pour cela qu'il vaut mieux ne pas regarder ce qui a été fait ailleurs pour ne pas être influencer en copient d'autre idée ,j'ai eu et j'ai encore quelque problème mais il faut prendre le temps de s'assoir et de réfléchir a comment résoudre chaque problème c'est comme cela que l'on réussi a fabriquer quelque chose qui fonctionne cesser de vous poser la question du comment et du pourquoi lui ressemble au dz non celle ci pourquoi ne pas vous concentrez a faire quelque chose de constructif mon premier dz générateur a fonctionner parce que je ne me suis fier sur rien a part du principe de base d'un générateur et j'ai réussi a régler chaque problème que j'ai rencontré et il y en a un beaucoup mais a chaque fois j'ai trouver la solution ,quelque fois cela prenait des journées mais il a eu quelque fois que cela a pris des semaines de réflexion pour trouver une solution je ne me suis fier sur rien pour crée le dz et pour le deuxième prototype quand il seras terminé et protéger il me feras plaisir de divulguer a toute la planète le fonctionnement du dz générateur et cesser de fabuler sur quoi ressemble le dz il ne sort que de ma tête alors il est impossible qu'une autre personne ait fait la même chose que moi la preuve c'est que le mien a fonctionner.
En.
I see that there's a lot of similarity with Alberto Molina-Martinez who said that the rotation of a magnetic field would not generate overunity and I totally agree with him, this is only one aspect I had already mentioned previously and I didn't know another person had work on a similar project but forced to admit failure which I managed to achieve. Which is why it's better not to look at what has been done elsewhere so not to be influenced by copying other ideas. I got it but still have some problems. You have to take the time to sit down and think about how to solve each problem, this is how we managed to make something to work. Stop asking questions of how and why does it look like the dz generator. Why not concentrate on doing something constructive. My first dz generator worked because I did not rely on anything other then the basic principle of a generator and I managed to solve each problem I encounter and there were a lot but each time I found a solution. Sometimes it took days and sometimes it took weeks of thinking to find the solution. I did not rely on anything to create the dz generator. When my second prototype is finished and protected, I'll be pleased to disclose to the whole world how it operates. Stop fabulating on what the dz looks like. It comes from my mind, so it's impossible that another person has done the same thing as me. The proof is mine worked.
-
The application in question is attached below and I would recommend that any interested replicators or otherwise study the claims of this application and also become familiar
This patent application proposes rotating magnetic field around inducing coils axis and that is main reason why there is just transformer action going on. The magnetic field have to move in 3D space like a moving magnet in order to make generator.
Hopefully this clarify difference.
Cheers!
-
je voit qu'il y a beaucoup de similitude avec Alberto Molina-Martinez qui a dit que la rotation d'un champ magnétique ne générait pas de sure unité et je suis totalement d'accord avec lui ce n'est qu'un aspect je l'avait déjà mentionné antérieurement et j'ignorait que une autre personne avait travailler sur un projet similaire mais forcé de constaté une chose ou il y a eu un échec moi j'ai réussi c'est pour cela qu'il vaut mieux ne pas regarder ce qui a été fait ailleurs pour ne pas être influencer en copient d'autre idée ,j'ai eu et j'ai encore quelque problème mais il faut prendre le temps de s'assoir et de réfléchir a comment résoudre chaque problème c'est comme cela que l'on réussi a fabriquer quelque chose qui fonctionne cesser de vous poser la question du comment et du pourquoi lui ressemble au dz non celle ci pourquoi ne pas vous concentrez a faire quelque chose de constructif mon premier dz générateur a fonctionner parce que je ne me suis fier sur rien a part du principe de base d'un générateur et j'ai réussi a régler chaque problème que j'ai rencontré et il y en a un beaucoup mais a chaque fois j'ai trouver la solution ,quelque fois cela prenait des journées mais il a eu quelque fois que cela a pris des semaines de réflexion pour trouver une solution je ne me suis fier sur rien pour crée le dz et pour le deuxième prototype quand il seras terminé et protéger il me feras plaisir de divulguer a toute la planète le fonctionnement du dz générateur et cesser de fabuler sur quoi ressemble le dz il ne sort que de ma tête alors il est impossible qu'une autre personne ait fait la même chose que moi la preuve c'est que le mien a fonctionner.
En.
I see that there's a lot of similarity with Alberto Molina-Martinez who said that the rotation of a magnetic field would not generate overunity and I totally agree with him, this is only one aspect I had already mentioned previously and I didn't know another person had work on a similar project but forced to admit failure which I managed to achieve. Which is why it's better not to look at what has been done elsewhere so not to be influenced by copying other ideas. I got it but still have some problems. You have to take the time to sit down and think about how to solve each problem, this is how we managed to make something to work. Stop asking questions of how and why does it look like the dz generator. Why not concentrate on doing something constructive. My first dz generator worked because I did not rely on anything other then the basic principle of a generator and I managed to solve each problem I encounter and there were a lot but each time I found a solution. Sometimes it took days and sometimes it took weeks of thinking to find the solution. I did not rely on anything to create the dz generator. When my second prototype is finished and protected, I'll be pleased to disclose to the whole world how it operates. Stop fabulating on what the dz looks like. It comes from my mind, so it's impossible that another person has done the same thing as me. The proof is mine worked.
I have some friends who operate a world-class scientific laboratory dedicated to researching this kind of systems. They are in the Toronto area and would be more than happy to spend an afternoon in your laboratory so you can demonstrate your apparatus running itself and a microwave oven without any external power input once it is started. Let me know when it is convenient for you and I'll arrange the meeting. My friends are well known in this research area for over 20 years, they will sign strong NDAs and assure your intellectual property is fully protected... and they speak French. They _could_ also be a great source of funding and laboratory assistance... if you can show them something interesting.
-
My friends are well known in this research area for over 20 years, they will sign strong NDAs and assure your intellectual property is fully protected... and they speak French.
As a side note - the NDAs and greed for money after inventors make something is what is keeping our world under unity for more than hundred years...
-
This patent application proposes rotating magnetic field around inducing coils axis and that is main reason why there is just transformer action going on. The magnetic field have to move in 3D space like a moving magnet in order to make generator.
Hopefully this clarify difference.
Cheers!
T-1000
Can you enlighten us about the 3D space movement? Pierre's setup is a 2D setup only. There is no variation along the Z-axis (which would be going from the front of the stator to the back of the stator; just a finite size). As such the magnetic field moves in X/Y only.
PmgR
-
I have some friends who operate a world-class scientific laboratory dedicated to researching this kind of systems. They are in the Toronto area and would be more than happy to spend an afternoon in your laboratory so you can demonstrate your apparatus running itself and a microwave oven without any external power input once it is started. Let me know when it is convenient for you and I'll arrange the meeting. My friends are well known in this research area for over 20 years, they will sign strong NDAs and assure your intellectual property is fully protected... and they speak French. They _could_ also be a great source of funding and laboratory assistance... if you can show them something interesting.
Thanks for the offer TK but unfortunately Pierre has no working device to demonstrate at this time. After the video demos were made the relays were getting worse and then started to fuse together and all the wiring switching side caught on fire. All that remains is the stator and even the rotor core Pierre reused the wire for his second build attempt. I say attempt because after he had wound half of it he realized it would not work well in that different winding configuration. Pierre told me he is not interested in rebuilding the first prototype. He only wants to use his limited time and work at his pace (without pressure from us) to make an improved version. I know this because I made the suggestion I could rebuild his first prototype (under NDA) to help expedite a 3rd party evaluation. He got frustrated and said he is not in any hurry and doesn't want to pushed or under pressure to provide. It will be done at his pace and I can tell you from the changes he shared that may only be around December.I know this goes against the appropriate protocols of not changing something that works but it's not up to us.
Regards
Luc
Fr. Merci pour l'offre TK mais malheureusement, Pierre n'a plus de dispositif fonctionnel à démontrer en ce moment. Après les démonstrations vidéo, les relais se sont dégradés, puis ont commencé à fusionner et tous les commutateurs de câblage ont pris feu. Tout ce qui reste est le stator et même le noyau du rotor Pierre a réutilisé le fil pour sa deuxième tentative de construction. Je dis tentative parce que, après en avoir enroulé la moitié, il s'est rendu compte que cela ne fonctionnerait pas bien dans cette configuration d'enroulement différente.
Pierre m'a dit qu'il n'était pas intéressé a reconstruire le premier prototype. Il veut seulement utiliser son temps (limité) et travailler à son rythme (sans pression de notre part) pour faire une version améliorée.
Je le sais parce que j'ai fait la suggestion que je pourrais reconstruire son premier prototype (sous NDA) pour aider à accélérer une évaluation par un tiers. Il a été frustré et a dit qu'il n'était pas pressé et ne voulait pas pousser ou sous pression pour fournir. Cela se fera à son rythme et je peux vous dire, d'après les changements qu'il a partagés, que cela ne se fera pas avant décembre.
Je sais que cela va à l'encontre des protocoles appropriés de ne pas changer quelque chose qui fonctionne mais ce n'est pas à nous de decider.
Cordialement
Luc
-
T-1000
Can you enlighten us about the 3D space movement? Pierre's setup is a 2D setup only. There is no variation along the Z-axis (which would be going from the front of the stator to the back of the stator; just a finite size). As such the magnetic field moves in X/Y only.
PmgR
There is no short answer and it would not fit into this thread as it is dedicated for Pierre's contraption.
I will just point out some general direction which is very related to what is happening with magnetic forces with paralel magnets and magnetic pole switching of permanent magnets. Please see Howard Johnson magnetic motor research and patents (http://www.rexresearch.com/johnson/1johnson.htm) in order to gain more insight. When 3 magnetic poles come into action to each other the resulting forces are in 3D vectors and it is possible to change 3D position of the center of resulting magnetic pole.
Hopefully that helps.
-
There is no short answer and it would not fit into this thread as it is dedicated for Pierre's contraption.
I will just point out some general direction which is very related to what is happening with magnetic forces with paralel magnets and magnetic pole switching of permanent magnets. Please see Howard Johnson magnetic motor research and patents (http://www.rexresearch.com/johnson/1johnson.htm) in order to gain more insight. When 3 magnetic poles come into action to each other the resulting forces are in 3D vectors and it is possible to change 3D position of the center of resulting magnetic pole.
Hopefully that helps.
Maybe part of the phenomenon Science is now recognizing which d3x0r posted and Pierre replied right after? https://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg521079/#msg521079
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6fe6yiUTRY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6fe6yiUTRY) near earth magnetic re-connections...
-
Are you sure it's not just simple physics doing that?
I would not go lots into conspiracy theories but there are much suppression and many inventors deaths right before they wanted to present free energy devices to the world.
If you do your reseach on each invention history you will see lots of "accident" / "natural death causes" / "suicide" repeating stories all over there...
P.S> Sorry if that deviates from the thread topic. "Red pill (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_pill_and_blue_pill)" was just given to TK.
-
Once upon a time there was a baker that was accused to had sold bread with bugs within it. He was standing in front of the judge and the judge asked him if he admitted to have baked bread with bugs within it and pointed at the evidence objects in front of the baker. Some brownish bugs from his bread.
No no said the baker you're wrong Sir, these are only raisins. Took the bugs and put them in his mouth and swallowed them. Thereby was the evidence objects gone.
::) ::) ::)
-
And you can moderate me all you like, Luc, removing my posts and censoring me on this OPEN SOURCE forum, but it won't change the FACTS, and in December, or next December, you STILL won't have a self running, microwave oven powering, 170w in, 1600w out Looped device. You will, however, have lots of very expensive doorstops. Mark my words....and be sure to tell L. what I'm saying about this system.
There's a good chance you're right TK but what if this one is different from the 99 previous claims that didn't pan out? ... we'll never know if we don't try. And yes, L is quite aware of the situation.
I know your flame has been extinguished of the possibility of OU over the decades you been in research but this forum exists for those who still have hope.
At this point in your life I would suggest it's unhealthy for you to participate if it only stirs up frustration. We should only participate in what brings us joy.
Let it go for health sake, as this forum is going to be around for many years to come and it's main theme is search of OU. I respect you, your knowledge and experience. Rare are those to achieve your level. However, I committed to moderating the topic by keeping the post supportive to the goal and will continue to do so.
Respectfully
Luc
-
This is the prototype that was shown "running itself" and also "powering a microwave oven"?
So... what is the moral position of someone who has built and demonstrated an ACTUAL FREE ENERGY OVERUNITY DEVICE that could, IF TRUE, save the world from a whole lot of ills, but doesn't want to repair it because... he's just too busy?
Yes, it's the same prototype. I know, it doesn't look good but everyone has free will and make choices based on their needs. It could of been worse, he may of never bothered making video demos and just kept it to himself. From all the work I put into this device so far I can tell you I've found no reason to doubt this cannot be a working device. The more we look into it the more we find.
Regards
Luc
-
Pourquoi réparer et mettre des efforts sur quelque chose qui a fonctionner mais n'as pas été capable de résister en plus d'avoir d'autre problème Je n'avait pas de patience de tout recommencer un autre prototype pareil qui aurait eu les même problème et vue que j'ai conçue et fabriquer un prototype fonctionnel je connait tres bien comment répliquer ce que j'ai construit en améliorant tout les points qui on été défaillant C'est pour cela que j'ai décider d'aller de l'avant avec une deuxième version qui devrai être beaucoup mieux que l'ébauche que j'avait fait avec mon premier dz pour de ce qui est du fait qu'il n'y a plus beaucoup de chose de mon premier prototype il faut dire qu'il y avait beaucoup de pièce qui n'était plus fonctionne et vue que je suis pas vraiment riche j'ai décidé de récupérer mes pièce pour le deuxième prototype je fait de mon mieux avec le peut de moyen que je dispose pour faire un telle prototype le fait que cela seras long comme j'ai expliquer a Luc est le fait que je travail entre 50 et 60hrs par semaine en plus d'avoir des enfants a m'occuper et les travaux d'entretien normal de ma maison malheureusement je ne suis pas à la retraite et je n'ai toujour pas inventer un appareil pour ralonger les journées je travail sur le dz quand j'ai quelque minute alors oui ça seras long pour tout ceux qui voudrait que je travail sur le dz a temps plein et bien cela ne seras pas possible il faut dire que mon premier dz avait prit près de deux ans à réaliser mais je partait de rien cette fois ci j'ai toute les fondation pour mon deuxième dz oui C'est une grande découvert mais je ne bouculerai rien de mon train de vie par le passer j'ai fait une crisse de coeur et si je ne veut pas que cela se reproduise il faut que je me ménage déjà j'en donne beaucoup et je ne dors que 5 à 6hrs par nuit et si vous ne voulez pas que je quitte ce monde en apportant tout mes secret avec moi il faut que je travail à mon rythme j'espère terminer le nouveau dz le plus vite possible mais il ne me faut que du temps je ne croit pas que quelque mois vont changer quelque chose en bout de ligne merci de votre comprention , j'aimerai dire un gros merci à Luc car je ne doute pas qu'il travail tres fort pour s'occuper du site de overunity et traduire mes commentaires en plus des projets qu'il travail et je sait que ce n'est pas toujour facile pour lui merci Luc. A bientôt Pierre c.
En. Why repair and put effort on something that worked but was not able to last plus had other problems. I have no patience to rebuild the same prototype with the same problems. Since I designed and built the first functional prototype I know very well how to replicate it and will improve all the weak points that failed. That's why I decided to go ahead with an improved version that's better than the first dz. I must say there wasn't much good parts left of my first prototype and since I'm not wealthy I tried to reuse parts tying my best to manage with what I have available. It will take some time to complete as I explain to Luc. Plus the fact that I work between 50 and 60hrs a week on top of having children to take care of plus the normal maintenance work of my house. Unfortunately I'm not retired yet and I havn't invented a device to lengthen days. I work on the dz when ever I have some free time, so it's going to take some time to complete. It wouldn't be possible for me to work on the dz full time. My first dz took almost two years to complete but I was starting from scratch that time. Now I have the foundation for the second device.
I know it's a great discovery but I won't let it affect my lifestyle. I've had a heart attack in the past and if I don't want that to happen again, I need to maintain myself. I already gave a lot. I only sleep 5 to 6hrs a night. So if you don't want me to leave this world and bring my secrets with me, I have to work at my own pace. I hope to finish the new dz as soon as possible but I need time and I don't believe that some months will change things in the end. Thank you for your understanding. I would like to give a big thank you to Luc because no doubt he works very hard to take care of the overunity site and translates my comments in addition to the projects that he works on and I know that it is not always easy for him.
Thank you Luc. See you soon
Pierre C.
-
Thank you pedro.
We are in no rush. Tell them all that if they want something fast then they can build devices and figure it out themselves. ;D ;D ;D
Merci pedro. Nous ne sommes pas pressés. Dites-leur que s'ils veulent quelque chose rapidement, ils peuvent construire les appareils eux-mêmes. ;D ;D ;D
-
'magnetic flux rope'
This is probably not helpful but it is interesting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlyhCOJKOFU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBdcqP8YjyU
-
Has anyone looked at video 3 in detail? I noticed that the system becomes overunity only when the main transformer is plugged into the output coil.
Initially the capacitor bank is charged up to about 24.9V. When the small power supplies are unplugged, the voltage drops quickly, but the drop-down slows down when the power supplies are plugged into the output coil. So at this point, compared to earlier when the small power supplies were still in the wall outlet, some power is fed-back to the capacitor bank internally (not through the transformer), yet not enough to maintain the voltage. So the voltage drops, but slower than before (so no overunity yet). The only way this can happen is through BEMF and the diodes. This means current flowing in the output coil causes BEMF on the coils (which works against the capacitor bank votlage and decreases current flow) and more voltage on the diodes which then produce more current going back to the capacitor bank. So BEMF is definitely present in this prototype.
Eventually, the voltage drops to around 20.3V which is when the main transformer gets unplugged (voltage drops down fast again to 19.8 , then when the transformer is plugged into the output coil, the voltage starts going up again until settling at about 23.7V.
So this means that the output coil has two positive feedback mechanisms; one is internally where plugging in a load causes the system to draw less current overall (less draw on capacitor bank, more feedback through the diodes), second one is with external feedback where power is drawn from the output coil and directly fed back into the system.
PmgR
-
Has anyone looked at video 3 in detail?
Where are the copies?
So this means that the output coil has two positive feedback mechanisms; one is internally where plugging in a load causes the system to draw less current overall (less draw on capacitor bank, more feedback through the diodes), second one is with external feedback where power is drawn from the output coil and directly fed back into the system.
Has anyone yet drawn a schematic that details this arrangement?
-
Where are the copies?
Pierre removed them about a month ago. Most of us who were here from the beginning saved ourselves a copy for our own research but it would be wrong (against Pierre's wishes) to distribute them.
So unfortunately you're out of luck now.
Regards
Luc
-
Rotor trimmed, now covers 6 slots instead of 9. Would work better at 5 slot width.
This was running with all relays working (initially).230V -26V 50Hz transformer. 26VAC RMS rectified by two parallel 35A FWBR connected directly to 150uF/400V cap. Relay feed directly from this cap.
Super caps supplied via 4 Ohm 50W resistor, recovery direct to super caps.
Recovery current pulses 10A approx.
Even with 0.1uF 400V caps across each relay, the contact resistance slowly increased and setup has become useless again.
Before failure the output was driving a 60W lightbulb with about half intensity.
Unable to perform additional tests.
Code original, adjusted for 30 slots.
The first run also attached, see how the coil drive current is consistent compared with the later shot which is at twice the clock rate.
A couple of high side 100V 0.1uF caps across relay contacts failed. These were replaced by either 400V or 1000V caps, which were OK.
Difficult to see how Pierre got this to run for any length of time on the same boards with the songle relays.
RegardsL192
-
I cannot see how the relays could be run fast enough with the current code. The output increased until a point was reached where they could not switch fast enough.Perhaps inverting the DC supply to the second half of the relays would double the output frequency and get us close to 50/60Hz albeit with a waveform that would be a quarter sine.
I would also mention that the lack of the 6th coil decreases inductance and output.
By using a low value cap for the 400V cap, half wave DC or a pulsating waveform could be obtained for switching via the relays.
See the attached link.
http://www.nptel.ac.in/courses/IIT-MADRAS/Electrical_Machines_II/animation/sinwave3-9.htm (http://www.nptel.ac.in/courses/IIT-MADRAS/Electrical_Machines_II/animation/sinwave3-9.htm)
A regular 3 phase induction motor has two moving flux components, a traveling wave and a pulsating wave due to the AC.
By using a low value cap for the 400V cap, half wave DC or a pulsating waveform could be obtained for switching via the relays.
If both waveforms are in frequency/phase synchronism, then they may reinforce each other.
Regards
L192
-
The caps charge up to about 30V without the device running, this is higher than 25V shown in the videos,so instead of 26VAC RMS I think Pierre's transformer must be closer to 22VAC RMS
L192
-
Hi L192, 25V in ultracaps bank and 7V in 4Ohm resistor.
GM
-
Hi L192, 25V in ultracaps bank and 7V in 4Ohm resistor.
GM
The 4 ohm resistor just limits the charging current to the cap bank. There is no volt drop across the resistor once the caps are charged, (in the non running state).
L192
-
??
" the resistor is really hot "
-
??
" the resistor is really hot "
I did not see this.
Although 10A pulses were being returned to the cap bank via the recovery diodes, most of the current to drive the relays was coming from the line supply. So the resistor stayed cold throughout operation. The voltage on the cap bank did not elevate much above the DC supply on the 400V 150uF cap. I just could not clock the relays fast enough to achieve a higher output.
Regards
L192
-
Fr:
Etes vous sur de la valeur de 150 uF pour le condensateur ? Peu importe, cette valeur est trop faible pour obtenir une tension stable avec un courant de plusieurs ampères dans les relais..
A mon avis cette tension varie pour que le courant varie dans les inductances (un des objectifs signalés par Pierre)
Pourquoi 400v d'isolation si c'était uniquement pour filtrer la tension de sortie du pont redresseur ?
Parce ce qu'il y a surtensions des inductances qui sont aussi renvoyées vers les supercaps à travers la résistance de 4 ohms.
Qu'en pensez-vous ?
En:
Are you sure of 150 uF for the capacitor? Anyway, this value is too low to obtain a stable voltage with a current of several amperes in the relays.
In my opinion this voltage varies so that the current can change in the inductances (one of the objectives indicated by Pierre)
Why 400v of isolation if it was only to filter the output voltage of the bridge rectifier?
Because there are overvoltages inductances that are also sent back to the supercaps through the 4 ohm resistor.
What do you think ?
-
Fr:
Etes vous sur de la valeur de 150 uF pour le condensateur ? Peu importe, cette valeur est trop faible pour obtenir une tension stable avec un courant de plusieurs ampères dans les relais..
A mon avis cette tension varie pour que le courant varie dans les inductances (un des objectifs signalés par Pierre)
Pourquoi 400v d'isolation si c'était uniquement pour filtrer la tension de sortie du pont redresseur ?
Parce ce qu'il y a surtensions des inductances qui sont aussi renvoyées vers les supercaps à travers la résistance de 4 ohms.
Qu'en pensez-vous ?
En:
Are you sure of 150 uF for the capacitor? Anyway, this value is too low to obtain a stable voltage with a current of several amperes in the relays.
In my opinion this voltage varies so that the current can change in the inductances (one of the objectives indicated by Pierre)
Why 400v of isolation if it was only to filter the output voltage of the bridge rectifier?
Because there are overvoltages inductances that are also sent back to the supercaps through the 4 ohm resistor.
What do you think ?
A cap of that size will be between 150uF and 330uF.
The voltage rating is that of the cap seen in video 1.I know the size of the, cap as I know the size of the Crydom FWBR along side it.I planned to try 330uF next, unfortunately the relays have failed again so that wont be possible.
The thought was that the half wave ripple may be significant to operation, after all why have such a low value cap there in the first place?
Regards
L192
-
Yes, i agree : we could have a rotating magnetic field with a current change during the rotation.
Close to Clemente Figuera principle.
Is this part of the secret ?
Regards
Oui, je suis d'accord: nous pourrions avoir un champ magnétique tournant avec un changement de courant pendant la rotation.
Proche du principe de Clemente Figuera.
Cela fait partie du secret?
-
Here is what you get from one set of 5 coils on a 30 slot stator at 25V using the BTN7960 Bridge boards.
When in registration, the inductance of the rotor reduces the current down to about 3A peak. About the same result as the L298N boards.
The BTN7960's don't even get warm.
Increasing the gauge of the wire would reduce coil heat and allow more current at 25V (if required).
L192
-
A cap of that size will be between 150uF and 330uF.
The voltage rating is that of the cap seen in video 1.I know the size of the, cap as I know the size of the Crydom FWBR along side it.I planned to try 330uF next, unfortunately the relays have failed again so that wont be possible.
The thought was that the half wave ripple may be significant to operation, after all why have such a low value cap there in the first place?
Regards
L192
Hi L192
How much is the positive ripple across the 150uF cap? Is it a 100% ripple or less?
-
Hi Jeg,
The relays failed before I could make any further measurements.
I only have a single bridge board at the moment but with that you can get consistant switching. If you run the clock at 10HZ you can see significant line ripple so I am optimistic about this approach. It will be a few weeks before I get the other bridge boards.
Regards
L192
-
Hi Jeg,
The relays failed before I could make any further measurements.
I only have a single bridge board at the moment but with that you can get consistent switching. If you run the clock at 10HZ you can see significant line ripple so I am optimistic about this approach. It will be a few weeks before I get the other bridge boards.
First of all thanks for all your kind reports. I had already purchased my relay boards but after yours and Pierre's last failure reports i moved to Mosfets. Just finished my stator these days.
About this "Ripple" approach, i am also positive. But it will need a some kind of sync between switching and ripple's minimums/maximums. ;)
-
Hi Jeg,
The only hole in this theory is that the system still functions off the super caps, although this could just be less than OU as observed. Why have a frequency control at all? Perhaps it is really being used as a crude phase control when running the transformer from the line supply. When running looped the phase will be the same.
Regards
L192
-
Hi Jeg,
The only hole in this theory is that the system still functions off the super caps, although this could just be less than OU as observed. Why have a frequency control at all? Perhaps it is really being used as a crude phase control when running the transformer from the line supply. When running looped the phase will be the same.
Well, looks like that caps are just for absorbing the spikes. It should be less than OU as "Spike return" never showed something promising. At least by itself.
I don't really see why the phase will be the same when running lopped. As i am thinking it, a maximum value of ripple voltage (120Hz), should be presented when we have a full registration as you call it during both cycles.
Some pics for the records
-
J'ai voulue faire cette méthode mais je me suis rendue compte a mi-chemin que cela ne fonctionnera pas très beau travail quand même et cela pourra donner un excellent transfo pour le reste j'ai quelque reticence
En. I wanted to use this method but I realized half way through the build it won't work as I thought but nice job anyways and it could make a great transformer! but for the rest I have some reservations.
-
Hello Pierre ;)
Thanks for your comments. Yes it is a different approach and it will not work by driving it the same way as your first prototype.
Regards
Jeg
-
L192 et al,
With respect to the diodes and how Pierre has them hooked up, please see the attached images (I note that Pierre does not have the ground side diodes).
In the attached images, Vdd is connected to the rectifier bridge (small red cable that drives the relays). Vc is connected to the capacitor bank.
Since Vdd is always larger than Vc, the diode (D1_p in the attached image) that is connected to the relay that is turned on (S1_p in attached image) will always sink current to the capacitor bank through that relay.
So if the capacitor bank is not fully charged (or empty), it will be mostly charged directly through the relay and the diode and not through the 4 ohms resistor.
So it is very important that the capacitor bank is fully charged up to Vdd before starting the Arduino, otherwise it will be very likely that too much current will go through the relay (and diode) and overload the relay and maybe even the diode if its current rating is too low. The 4 ohm resistor is not going help much (if at all) in limiting the current to the capacitor bank in this case as it is parallel with the relay/diode.
And once one relays fails, the other switched on relays are going to get the current of this relay in addition to what they are already carrying and so they will fail as well. And since the Arduino is switching all relays one after another, eventually all relays will quickly fail.
And I note that this will also be the case if you are using H-bridges or MOSFETs. A capacitor bank can sink many many amps of current, so it is crucial to put a fuse in the main Vdd line, between rectifier bridge and relays, and make sure the capacitor bank is fully charged up.
Pierre, this is probably what caused all your relays to burn out.
There is a simple solution to this problem: make sure the capacitor bank is fully charged before starting the Arduino and use a fuse.
Lastly I note that if your output coil is sinking too much current and draining the capacitor bank to a voltage too low, this problem will also occur once the capacitor bank gets discharged to a value a lot lower than Vdd.
PmgR
====
Help end the persecution of Falun Gong * www.faluninfo.net (http://www.faluninfo.net) * www.stoporganharvesting.org (http://www.stoporganharvesting.org)
-
L192 et al,
With respect to the diodes and how Pierre has them hooked up, please see the attached images (I note that Pierre does not have the ground side diodes).
In the attached images, Vdd is connected to the rectifier bridge (small red cable that drives the relays). Vc is connected to the capacitor bank.
Since Vdd is always larger than Vc, the diode (D1_p in the attached image) that is connected to the relay that is turned on (S1_p in attached image) will always sink current to the capacitor bank through that relay.
So if the capacitor bank is not fully charged (or empty), it will be mostly charged directly through the relay and the diode and not through the 4 ohms resistor.
So it is very important that the capacitor bank is fully charged up to Vdd before starting the Arduino, otherwise it will be very likely that too much current will go through the relay (and diode) and overload the relay and maybe even the diode if its current rating is too low. The 4 ohm resistor is not going help much (if at all) in limiting the current to the capacitor bank in this case as it is parallel with the relay/diode.
And once one relays fails, the other switched on relays are going to get the current of this relay in addition to what they are already carrying and so they will fail as well. And since the Arduino is switching all relays one after another, eventually all relays will quickly fail.
And I note that this will also be the case if you are using H-bridges or MOSFETs. A capacitor bank can sink many many amps of current, so it is crucial to put a fuse in the main Vdd line, between rectifier bridge and relays, and make sure the capacitor bank is fully charged up.
Pierre, this is probably what caused all your relays to burn out.
There is a simple solution to this problem: make sure the capacitor bank is fully charged before starting the Arduino and use a fuse.
Lastly I note that if your output coil is sinking too much current and draining the capacitor bank to a voltage too low, this problem will also occur once the capacitor bank gets discharged to a value a lot lower than Vdd.
PmgR
====
Help end the persecution of Falun Gong * www.faluninfo.net (http://www.faluninfo.net) * www.stoporganharvesting.org (http://www.stoporganharvesting.org)
PmgR
Yes: 4 ohms they depend on the voltage on which the voltage capacitors are. It allows current from either the bridge or capacitors and it is important to fully charge the capacitors before switching on.
-
Some pics for the records
Hi Jeg,
The magnetic field polarities will be on wrong direction with such coil arrrangement. Please see https://www.miniphysics.com/ss-magnetic-field-due-to-current-in-a-solenoid.html (https://www.miniphysics.com/ss-magnetic-field-due-to-current-in-a-solenoid.html) for explanation.
Cheers!
-
Hi PmgR,
Good point. If the presence of line ripple is not a significant factor then suggest using a switch mode power supply with current limiting is used and leave out the 4 ohm resistor. This way initial charging current is limited and just use the super cap bank for supply and recovery.
With the new bridge board, out of registration the current draw was 6A peak from a 25V supply.so 18A with 3 coil sets on, closer to 36A with overlap coils on. This was measured at 10Hz clock. So even with a 40A current limit this should be within the rating of the 45A rating of the bridge board.
When in registration the inductance increases and a single coil set current draw drops to 3A or 18 A in total. As the out of registration coils perform no useful work, the current limit could be set to 20A. If the recovery voltage rises above the current limited supply, then more current could be drawn by the bridge boards without limiting.
Regards
L192
-
Hi Jeg,
The magnetic field polarities will be on wrong direction with such coil arrrangement. Please see https://www.miniphysics.com/ss-magnetic-field-due-to-current-in-a-solenoid.html (https://www.miniphysics.com/ss-magnetic-field-due-to-current-in-a-solenoid.html) for explanation.
possibilitys
Reagards Arne
-
Pmgr
Thanks a lot for the analysis.
T-1000
I don't understand your point. Do you mean that torroid cores and normal winding coils can not produce OU as Akula and so many others did many times now? Anyway, i know that i move to something different than what Pierre showed but i have something very specific in my mind to try. ;)
-
T-1000
I don't understand your point. Do you mean that torroid cores and normal winding coils can not produce OU as Akula and so many others did many times now? Anyway, i know that i move to something different than what Pierre showed but i have something very specific in my mind to try. ;)
When coils are like in Pierre's contraption they are facing about 20 degrees off the pickup coil core. In your photo they are on 90 degrees. So the magnetic polarities as they produce magnetic lines towards closest opposite pole.
And in regards to Pierre's case it is not just single coil on core, the multiple coils are sharing same core and are positioned with offset to the side on each which allow different 3D location of magnetic poles towards center on each coil powered on.
-
When coils are like in Pierre's contraption they are facing about 20 degrees off the pickup coil core. In your photo they are on 90 degrees.
That is true, but i am not going to use a fixed rotor coil as Pierre did. I will use some of the 36 coils as a secondary. :)
-
First test with new 40 Amp Solid State switches: https://youtu.be/1RhUY8HX90Y
-
First test with new 40 Amp Solid State switches: https://youtu.be/1RhUY8HX90Y (https://youtu.be/1RhUY8HX90Y)
AWESOME!!
-
Vraiment impressionnant!! il y a beaucoup de progrès depuis ton premier essai et a tu réussi a le pousser un peut plus ou C'est a venir n'oublie pas que plus tu injecteras du courant plus que tu devrais avoir de meilleur performance tu pourras tordre le champ de façon plus efficace n'oublie pas que j'ai alimenter mes bobine avec 26volt et je voulait me rendre à 48volt mais je croit que tu devrait commencer à avoir des résultats intéressant a 20volts
En,
Really impressive !! there's a lot of progress since your first try and you have managed to push it a little more and I guess more to come.
Don't forget, the more current you inject the better the performance and you will be able to twist the field in a more effective way.
Don't forget my coil input was 26volt and I would of preferred to go to 48volt but I think you should start to see interesting results at 20volts
-
AWESOME!!
Thanks :)
Here is another video demo focused on the coil return (collapsing field & collecting diodes) which many have been wondering how much power is actually returned from the coils discharges.
I can confirm at the low frequency Pierre was working at, it looks to be less then 10%. So if the diodes return is a big part of the effect we are not getting much from our low inductance 35 turns coils at low frequencies. However, the higher the frequency the more efficient and around 400Hz the scopes (in vs out) current probes measure the coil return to be about 80% of the input power but the output is much less.
Link to video: https://youtu.be/IaWbGIsAT14 (https://youtu.be/IaWbGIsAT14)
-
Hi Luc,
Have you tried loading the device with a real load (resistor) instead of the reactive load (capacitor). A reactive load gives back as much energy as it received during a full cycle.
Regards
Ole
-
Thanks :)
Here is another video demo focused on the coil return (collapsing field & collecting diodes) which many have been wondering how much power is actually returned from the coils discharges.
I can confirm at the low frequency Pierre was working at, it looks to be less then 10%. So if the diodes return is a big part of the effect we are not getting much from our low inductance 35 turns coils at low frequencies. However, the higher the frequency the more efficient and around 400Hz the scopes (in vs out) current probes measure the coil return to be about 80% of the input power but the output is much less.
Link to video: https://youtu.be/IaWbGIsAT14 (https://youtu.be/IaWbGIsAT14)
Luc, interesting too see you can take your H-bridges all the way up to 200-400Hz.
Another thing you should take a look at is the current in each of the 6 coil sets. As I stated before, ideally, they should all be biased with the same current to get 6 even poles with coils 1 and 4 180deg out of phase, coils 3 and 6 180deg out of phase and coils 5 and 2 180deg out of phase. But for the way Pierre has them biased, there will be a 120deg phase difference between coilsets 1-4, 3-6 and 5-2.
PmgR
-
Hi Luc,
Have you tried loading the device with a real load (resistor) instead of the reactive load (capacitor). A reactive load gives back as much energy as it received during a full cycle.
Regards
Ole
Hi Ole,
Yes, I also tried it with resistive loads. No difference. The output will not be good until certain perimeters have been achieved.
Luc, interesting too see you can take your H-bridges all the way up to 200-400Hz.
I think they can go up to 20kHz
Another thing you should take a look at is the current in each of the 6 coil sets. As I stated before, ideally, they should all be biased with the same current to get 6 even poles with coils 1 and 4 180deg out of phase, coils 3 and 6 180deg out of phase and coils 5 and 2 180deg out of phase. But for the way Pierre has them biased, there will be a 120deg phase difference between coilsets 1-4, 3-6 and 5-2.
PmgR
Is this done in the programming? if so, then this is Jerdee's department and quite sure he will read this post.
Regards
Luc
-
Hi Ole,
Yes, I also tried it with resistive loads. No difference. The output will not be good until certain perimeters have been achieved.
I think they can go up to 20kHz
Is this done in the programming? if so, then this is Jerdee's department and quite sure he will read this post.
Regards
Luc
Just make two measurements:
1. To determine if the 180deg phase shift exists, put a current clamp on coil 1 and one on 16 (pole 1 and pole 4). Or pick any other coil pair with 15 coils separation. E.g. coil 6 and 21 (pole 2 and 5), or coil 11 and coil 26 (pole 3 and 6). One clamp should read the opposite of the other clamp.
2. To determine the 120deg phase shift, put a current clamp on coil 1 and one on coil 11 (pole 1 and pole 3), or e.g. coil 11 and coil 21 (pole 3 and 5), or coil 21 and 1 (pole 5 and 1). These traces should be shifted by 120deg.
PmgR
-
What does the armature output windings do in a NORMAL A/C or DC generator while the fields are cut?
Again, everyone is over thinking. Think simple. Research normal generator basics!!! Pierre is utilizing this effect, while ALL ENGINEERS ARE TRYING TO REMOVE IT in the mechanical version!!! Find what engineers are trying to remove...and then you'll see why Pierre's device works.
Again, think simple, don't over complicate!!
Jerdee
-
Excellent workmanship Luc!
You should now have a platform to route out this mystery. As I would expect from a craftsman like yourself, take your time, don't damage anything and conduct simple tests that will guide you to the solution. Try to imagine in your mind what is happening and confirm it with applied reasoning. You'll get it, no need to rush to please the crowd.
D1
-
What does the armature output windings do in a NORMAL A/C or DC generator while the fields are cut?
Again, everyone is over thinking. Think simple. Research normal generator basics!!! Pierre is utilizing this effect, while ALL ENGINEERS ARE TRYING TO REMOVE IT in the mechanical version!!! Find what engineers are trying to remove...and then you'll see why Pierre's device works.
Again, think simple, don't over complicate!!
Jerdee
The challenge in small stator 3 phase AC generators is to develop a decent sine output with minimum triplen harmonics which waste energy. This is accomplished with distributed windings but the effectivity is limited by the number of slots available. The other item is to minimise IR losses hence heat disappation, which is constrained by wire size and slot CSA available, Rotor energization current being DC obtained from stator windings after rectification, is minimized by small gauge high turn coils maintaining maximum flux. Rotor/stator gap is maintained at a minimum to maximise flux coupling.
I guess you dont mean any of those things.
L192
-
Hi Luc
Nice to see Pierre himself is encouraging and giving out compliments on your excellent work. This is very good sign everything will be working out great.i think very soon.
Seems like there is still something elusive and mysterious about how it operates in looped mode.
I am sure when you do find it, it will become simple to understand and hopefully teach to others too
Keep going and don't stop to argue!
That's what "they" hope your project will degenerate to...
Loop it publically, expect to be thrown into shark feeding frenzy...
You are the boss man now go go go
-
What does the armature output windings do in a NORMAL A/C or DC generator while the fields are cut?
...
Then the armature is free to spin and will do so without loading the prime mover if that is still running.
In Pierre's device the stator field is always on as well as the load on the locked rotor. The stator field just moves in steps instead of being fixed or variable as in motor stators. My guess for the excess energy is harvesting the difference in energy levels between separate and coherent fields. The input energy goes to separate coils as seen from the power supply. The stator coils are electrically in series but magnetically in both series and parallel.
The output coil (on the armature) sees the fields from different coils as a coherent field which represents more energy than the single fields when just added. The combined fields make up the coherent field. This I guess is the 'Principle of Inversion' as described by Wilbert B. Smith in 'The New Science' chapter 10 (http://www.rexresearch.com/smith/newsci~1.htm#ch10forces (http://www.rexresearch.com/smith/newsci~1.htm#ch10forces))
Regards
Ole
-
Hi Luc
Am thinking why 10% recovery at slow speeds
And 80% at very high speeds?
Probably because of difference in pulse width?
If there is no pulse width adjust to compensate for different frequncies,
Pulse width will be too fat at slow speeds and core and coil will over-saturate and backspike/flyback/backemf energy will be cntained witbin d and trapped within coil and core's over-saturation period for that measly 10% return of energy you see.
However at high frequencies now the pulse becomes just right for good return energy of 80%
Combining and making induced generated energy with flyback energy also perhaps will "cohere" using short pulse width
perhaps this one of secrets
I dont know but nothing will get through (or out) when everything over saturated.
Perhaps chop pulse going into inductor at the perfect pulse width so instead of one long 1ms pulse instead give .1ms pulse width five times with .1ms off time between too for total of 1ms pulse period this just example but idea here is first find best pulse width for inductor and voltage and current input for best recovery
Then go from there
-
Hi Ole
I like reading the W.O.Smith writings especially understanding nothingness and the quadrature concepts. It is hard to grasp but fun to think over after absorbing the ideas in printed words.
Making all those overlapping windings combine and cohere into amplified and overunity energy is probably what it is all about...
Perhaps making short list what will prevent coherence of the fields and rectify those problems would be good troubleshoot process for Luc and others working on this
-
Hi Luc
Am thinking why 10% recovery at slow speeds
And 80% at very high speeds?
Probably because of difference in pulse width?
If there is no pulse width adjust to compensate for different frequncies,
Pulse width will be too fat at slow speeds and core and coil will over-saturate and backspike/flyback/backemf energy will be cntained witbin d and trapped within coil and core's over-saturation period for that measly 10% return of energy you see.
However at high frequencies now the pulse becomes just right for good return energy of 80%
Combining and making induced generated energy with flyback energy also perhaps will "cohere" using short pulse width
perhaps this one of secrets
I dont know but nothing will get through (or out) when everything over saturated.
Perhaps chop pulse going into inductor at the perfect pulse width so instead of one long 1ms pulse instead give .1ms pulse width five times with .1ms off time between too for total of 1ms pulse period this just example but idea here is first find best pulse width for inductor and voltage and current input for best recovery
Then go from there
Yes, you are correct to a point except this is not the final secret. I've placed duty cycle in the code to fully understand. :) Luc has full understanding of this We have overlap and hold control as the field rotates. This was interesting at first to see and understand, but this is not the secret unfortunately. Its a simple tuning factor or tweak that may be helpful later on. This helps, but not enough. You see Pierre wanted to have regulated input power, there is a reason for this. As you build this device it reveals clues. We can clearly see a systematic issue at each point we learn something. Once you are presented with the problem..you know were to go from there.
For those still learning, review my posts on full bridge mode control. This is still not enough but will certianly help, you'll see why when you do this method. Currently we don't have enough pin outs on the MCU to control this and only using half bridge mode. I have logic gates ordered and should be in any day to complete full bridge mode. Otherwise, you will easily run out of pins on your MCU, and I'm postive we don't need to go to shift registers to get more outputs.
Jerdee
-
When making generator you move magnetic field across generator windings. This is constant field moving through windings. In Solid State Alternator (SSA - I call it) you move magnetic field by multiple overlapping windings arrangement. So please forget BEMF recovery/pulsing/etc for a moment and focus on making same magnetic field movement for induction. And do not overthink it because Faraday's law of induction (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday%27s_law_of_induction) is simple as that.
-
What does the armature output windings do in a NORMAL A/C or DC generator while the fields are cut?
If the field is cut, i.e. no flux then perhaps the armature is then a reactive load.
Pierre is utilizing this effect, while ALL ENGINEERS ARE TRYING TO REMOVE IT in the mechanical version!!! Find what engineers are trying to remove...and then you'll see why Pierre's device works.
Perhaps you are referring to armature reaction and cross magnetizing effect? But this will not occur if the field is cut. It will occur however when the flux is cut.
-
When making generator you move magnetic field across generator windings. This is constant field moving through windings. In Solid State Alternator (SSA - I call it) you move magnetic field by multiple overlapping windings arrangement. So please forget BEMF recovery/pulsing/etc for a moment and focus on making same magnetic field movement for induction. And do not overthink it because Faraday's law of induction (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday%27s_law_of_induction) is simple as that.
AMEN!!!! 110% agree!!!
-
AMEN!!!! 110% agree!!!
I thought we previously agreed that what we see with the moving stepped waveform is flux linkage as in a transformer. Obviously not the same as flux cutting with a flux moving in space. So this has always been the question how do you simulate the quantum effect of a flux moving in space?
L192
-
So this has always been the question how do you simulate the quantum effect of a flux moving in space?
The answer is in moving magnet case. The 3D position of N/S polarities are changing while the constant strength of magnetic field is maintained inside of the magnet.
In transformer we alter magnetic field strength inside of the magnet and the 3D position of N/S poles are not changing.
By making overlapping windings and overlapping switch-on/switch-off delays in those coils we are making N/S poles 3D position change while magnetic field strength of mutual virtual magnet is not changing. The rest is same as with moving magnet case.
P.S> If you have offline copy of first Pierre's video please see how magnet moves inside his alternator with frame-by-frame sequence.
-
The answer is in moving magnet case. The 3D position of N/S polarities are changing while the constant strength of magnetic field is maintained inside of the magnet.
In transformer we alter magnetic field strength inside of the magnet and the 3D position of N/S poles are not changing.
By making overlapping windings and overlapping switch-on/switch-off delays in those coils we are making N/S poles 3D position change while magnetic field strength of mutual virtual magnet is not changing. The rest is same as with moving magnet case.
P.S> If you have offline copy of first Pierre's video please see how magnet moves inside his alternator with frame-by-frame sequence.
The field is a series discrete fields arriving at slightly different angles to the rotor however, this is not a contiguous flux moving in 3D space. Physically it will drag a magnet around by virtue of the change in the flux level i.e. the stepped waveform. The rotor sees a change in polarity and also flux strength changes. For the short run I had with the bridge boards I had substantial rotor output current that was lighting a 60 W bulb so there was flux change however, the device performed like loose coupled transformer.
Referring back to a previous post...
There is nothing special about the overlapping windings they just produce a stepped flux increasing and decreasing in amplitude and alternately changing polarity. The six coils examined as one set of coils on the stator just add their fields where they physically overlap. You can verify this with a flux probe which I have done.
Regards
L192
-
.
-
The field is a series discrete fields arriving at slightly different angles to the rotor however, this is not a contiguous flux moving in 3D space. Physically it will drag a magnet around by virtue of the change in the flux level i.e. the stepped waveform. The rotor sees a change in polarity and also flux strength changes. For the short run I had with the bridge boards I had substantial rotor output current that was lighting a 60 W bulb so there was flux change however, the device performed like loose coupled transformer.
Referring back to a previous post...
There is nothing special about the overlapping windings they just produce a stepped flux increasing and decreasing in amplitude and alternately changing polarity. The six coils examined as one set of coils on the stator just add their fields where they physically overlap. You can verify this with a flux probe which I have done.
Regards
L192
Hi L192,
If there's nothing special about the way the fields are generated then do you think that a standard 3-phased stator with suitable 3 phased current will give overunity too as claimed in the Molina-Martinez (https://patents.google.com/patent/US20030168921A1/en) and Hyun Chung (https://patents.google.com/patent/US20040007932) patent applications? This would make it possible to make a self-runner by using a three phased frequency converter which are off shelve devices.
The six coils examined as one set of coils on the stator just add their fields where they physically overlap. You can verify this with a flux probe which I have done.
Are you sure the fields are just added and not actually becoming coherent. If coherent the field strength is more than added. Then the currents are squared after the addition while as single fields they are squared before the addition. This gives big difference in field strength and is the key to extracting energy form the cosmic background according to W.B. Smith.
Regards
Ole
-
Hi L192,
If there's nothing special about the way the fields are generated then do you think that a standard 3-phased stator with suitable 3 phased current will give overunity too as claimed in the Molina-Martinez (https://patents.google.com/patent/US20030168921A1/en) and Hyun Chung (https://patents.google.com/patent/US20040007932) patent applications? This would make it possible to make a self-runner by using a three phased frequency converter which are off shelve devices.
Are you sure the fields are just added and not actually becoming coherent. If coherent the field strength is more than added. Then the currents are squared after the addition while as single fields they are squared before the addition. This gives big difference in field strength and is the key to extracting energy form the cosmic background according to W.B. Smith.
Regards
Ole
Sorry this is nonsense. If it were true, you would see the same behaviour in the distributed windings of induction motors, which you don’t. If you complete a build yourself and make measurements with a flux probe you will see they just add. The Hyun Chung transformer works on the principle off induction due to the travelling wave and induction due to the pulsating component from the 3 phases.Read the patent again.
Regards
L192
-
These new 40 Amp 28 Volt switches are so robust that I can feed in power to the the point the stator windings will catch on fire. I tested just to see how far I can push it (as is) at 28 volts and the coils could only handle 20 Amps of the 40 Amps maximum. I could not go below 92Hz, anything lower I would have to reduce the voltage or it would burn the coils.
During the test the output was loaded with a 100 Ohm resistor which reached 23.7 Volts RMS = 5.6 Watts which has zero effect back to the input loaded or not.
Link to video demo: https://youtu.be/3mea6Dwh4p8 (https://youtu.be/3mea6Dwh4p8)
-
Hi Luc and everyone
Had thought the locked rotor winds does not just become induced from the crawling motion of rotating stator field and make power out to load
But this locked rotor field will have 2nd purpose to induce itself right back into the overlapping stator field winds that are not beeing pulsed
Then this power created coming back into the stator winds shoves itself through the recovery diodes and into cap bank reinforcing filling of cap bank.
I would think this is already happening but maybe not to the degree it should for looped operation perhaps experiment with pulse width and frequencies of rotation and somehow measure what does actually return to unpulsed stator winds coming back from locked rotor see.if way to increase this
-
Hi L192
If 3ph a.c. induction motor is in rotovertor mode with only two of three phases connected to a.c. input, the third virtual/ rotating transformer phase will show.in best case I have seen 5 times the input current circulating and near same voltage as compared to input currents and voltage
Of course this greater currents circulating not under load but using series transformer to extract to load overunity x 1.618 can happen believe it or not doesnt matter but what I am getting at is those unpulsed un-connected to a.c. Iinput 3rd virtual phase winds in rotovertor does perhaps do something as Ole theorizes along with W Smith and perhaps this is similar to my dumb idea of unpulsed stator winds in Pierre generator sucking back power from induced locked rotor into unpulsed overlapped stator winding.
Maybe "coherent" if backemf forces in just-pulsed stator winds overlap in same direction of flow as locked rotor field "returned" energy ...such as 5 degree delay like echo as example.
Don't want to make big thing or argument as I might be way off base easy to throw out my idea but might be something important to ponder what Ole and W Smith are getting at don't dismiss so fast
-
Hi L192
If 3ph a.c. induction motor is in rotovertor mode with only two of three phases connected to a.c. input, the third virtual/ rotating transformer phase will show.in best case I have seen 5 times the input current circulating and near same voltage as compared to input currents and voltage
Of course this greater currents circulating not under load but using series transformer to extract to load overunity x 1.618 can happen believe it or not doesnt matter but what I am getting at is those unpulsed un-connected to a.c. Iinput 3rd virtual phase winds in rotovertor does perhaps do something as Ole theorizes along with W Smith and perhaps this is similar to my dumb idea of unpulsed stator winds in Pierre generator sucking back power from induced locked rotor into unpulsed overlapped stator winding.
Maybe "coherent" if backemf forces in just-pulsed stator winds overlap in same direction of flow as locked rotor field "returned" energy ...such as 5 degree delay like echo as example.
Don't want to make big thing or argument as I might be way off base easy to throw out my idea but might be something important to ponder what Ole and W Smith are getting at don't dismiss so fast
No sorry this changes nothing regarding what I have said above. Not sure why you mention the rotoverter. If it were an over unity device why would we and yourself be bothering with the DZ generator? Resonant circuits that develop large circulating currents depend on hi Q. As soon as you load them Q reduces and with it any chance of extracting energy.
L192
-
Some stuff from http://www.energeticforum.com 2017
(http://www.energeticforum.com/299241-post2322.html), (http://www.energeticforum.com/299247-post2325.html)
Table comparing the features of transformers, generators, and Figuera generator pic1:
A Transformer have FLUX LINKING as the type of induction.
A generator have FLUX CUTTING as the type of induction
Generator: different types
Its no problem to see from my second picture of a generator (type A), that this represent FLUX CUTTING. The bunch of wires really cuts the field -lines when the coil rotates.
But with picture three ( type B) it is more difficult to see flux cutting. Anyhow to me. Its more of FLUX LINKING because the rotating maget now close to the stator core acts as a coil in a transformer divided with a small air gap, increasing its magnetic power And then decreasing the same. The magnetic field-lines goes thru the core as in a normal transformer.
How to interpret that as FLUX CUTTING? (DZ gen)
Regards / Arne
-
Sorry this is nonsense. If it were true, you would see the same behaviour in the distributed windings of induction motors, which you don’t. If you complete a build yourself and make measurements with a flux probe you will see they just add. The Hyun Chung transformer works on the principle off induction due to the travelling wave and induction due to the pulsating component from the 3 phases.Read the patent again.
Regards
L192
Hi L192,
From the Hyun Chung patent application (https://patents.google.com/patent/US20040007932):
[0014] With such arrangement, the alternating field and traveling magnetic field, which are set up by the alternating magnetic flux produced by an energizing current flowing in the primary winding, induce electromotive forces generated by these fields to the secondary winding. The electromotive force induced into the secondary winding by the alternating field is substantially equal to the electric power which is supplied to the primary winding in order to flow an energizing current and from which some losses such as iron loss and copper loss are deducted. Thus, the electromotive forces (a force generated by the alternating field plus one generated by the traveling magnetic field), which are greater than the power supplied to the primary winding, are induced to the secondary winding so that self-excitation occurs.
The bold lines could sound like claiming overunity even though this isn't put in the claims. Of course it is a mixture of EMF and power so who knows what he meant?! Then in paragraph 16:[0016] If at least part of the electromotive forces induced in the secondary winding is provided to the primary winding, this enables self-excitation without a supply of electric energy from outside except the primary stage of starting-up.
Coherent fields
In a coil it is clearly seen that the field is coherent as doubling the turns number quadruples the stored energy at the same current. Doubling the turns number quadruples the inductance of the coil. The energy stored in an inductor is (1/2)LI2. Thus quadrupling the inductance L at the same current I quadruples the stored energy.
If on the other hand the turns number is doubled by just putting two similar coils in series without having their magnetic fields share the same space in the same direction the inductance is just added up (doubled). Thus the stored energy is also only doubled.
The trick is to input the energy as separate waves and then mix the waves into a single coherent wave before extracting the energy. Several free energy devices looks like using this principle which W.B. Smith calls 'The Principle of Inversion.'
Energy in an inductor: https://wiki2.org/en/Inductor#Stored_energy (https://wiki2.org/en/Inductor#Stored_energy)
Inductance formulas: https://wiki2.org/en/Inductor#Inductance_formulas (https://wiki2.org/en/Inductor#Inductance_formulas)
Regards
Ole
-
When making generator you move magnetic field across generator windings. This is constant field moving through windings. In Solid State Alternator (SSA - I call it) you move magnetic field by multiple overlapping windings arrangement. So please forget BEMF recovery/pulsing/etc for a moment and focus on making same magnetic field movement for induction. And do not overthink it because Faraday's law of induction (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday%27s_law_of_induction) is simple as that.
je ne pourrait dire mieux que T-1000 tout est la ,cesser de vous compliquer la vie avec des champs qui se croise haute fréquence et toute les autre théorie c'est tellement simple que cela va vous sauter dans les yeux REGARDER ET RÉFLÉCHISSER A UN GÉNÉRATEUR ,TOUTE EST LA et tenté de réplique un générateur avec ce que je vous ait montrez avec la rotation magnétique vous avez un des gros morceau du secret du dz générateur il ne suffit de trouvez le reste des petits détail qui reste et réfléchissez 36 bobine peuvent être relier avec une autre et vous pouvez isoler chaque bobine avec un relais (petit input)vous serez surpris par la simplicité du deuxième dz générateur qui est en cours de fabrication (un monstre de bobine et de fer )compliquer et simple a la fois .alors penser simple et ne vous éloigner pas trop de ses bases très simple.
Pierre C.
En.
I could not say it any better than T-1000!... everything is there, stop complicating your life with fields that cross high frequency and all the other theory. It's so simple that it will jump in your face. LOOK AND REFLECT ON A GENERATOR, EVERYTHING IS THERE. Attempt to replicate a generator with what I have showed you with magnetic rotation. You have one of the big part of the secret of the DZ Generator. All that's left is to find the rest of the small details and reflect 36 coils can be connected with another and you can isolate each coil with a relay (small input) you will be surprised by the simplicity of the second dz generator that is being manufactured (a monster of coil and iron) complicate and simple at the same time. So think simple and don't drift away from its simple base.
Pierre C.
-
je ne pourrait dire mieux que T-1000 tout est la ,cesser de vous compliquer la vie avec des champs qui se croise haute fréquence et toute les autre théorie c'est tellement simple que cela va vous sauter dans les yeux REGARDER ET RÉFLÉCHISSER A UN GÉNÉRATEUR ,TOUTE EST LA et tenté de réplique un générateur avec ce que je vous ait montrez avec la rotation magnétique vous avez un des gros morceau du secret du dz générateur il ne suffit de trouvez le reste des petits détail qui reste et réfléchissez 36 bobine peuvent être relier avec une autre et vous pouvez isoler chaque bobine avec un relais (petit input)vous serez surpris par la simplicité du deuxième dz générateur qui est en cours de fabrication (un monstre de bobine et de fer )compliquer et simple a la fois .alors penser simple et ne vous éloigner pas trop de ses bases très simple.
Pierre C.
En.
I could not say it any better than T-1000!... everything is there, stop complicating your life with fields that cross high frequency and all the other theory. It's so simple that it will jump in your face. LOOK AND REFLECT ON A GENERATOR, EVERYTHING IS THERE. Attempt to replicate a generator with what I have showed you with magnetic rotation. You have one of the big part of the secret of the DZ Generator. All that's left is to find the rest of the small details and reflect 36 coils can be connected with another and you can isolate each coil with a relay (small input) you will be surprised by the simplicity of the second dz generator that is being manufactured (a monster of coil and iron) complicate and simple at the same time. So think simple and don't drift away from its simple base.
Pierre C.
Thank you Pierre. I can completely see why you are holding out on a much better prototype. There are better ways to rotate the field. once you understand the concept of how to control it. I know see how you can isolate each coil, and collect reflected signals together. Much better signal field for flux cutting. Thank you for your hard work and dedication. Very much appreciate your endeavors.
Jerdee
-
Hi L192
Why would I bother with DZ generator is obvious
It loops
Plus video shows 170W in 1600w out
Duh
Who would not want to bother with it?
Rotovertor motor has overlapping winds in staor why I mentioned it and virtual phase is overunity in that rotating transformer phase
Could have similarities to DZ generator functioning
-
This is how the field rotates. It consists of 6 fields. They spin together but are electrically separated. This is obvious but not everyone understands it.
-
Salut Pierre
Ma conjecture est la simplicité que nous manquons est que si vous imaginez les vents induits électromagnétiques de rotor verrouillé comme aimant permanent, il incitera la puissance dans tous les vents de stator rotatifs qui ne sont pas pulsés.
Peut-être que c'est la puissance que Luc mesures bouchons de remplissage, mais n'a rien à faire backemf/Fly-Back puisque les champs de stator tournant ne jamais s'éteindre brusquement.
Peut-être aussi il ya une combinaison de backemf. forces (pas le Fly Back mais réel backemf) lorsque l'induction de retour aux vents stator du rotor excité se produit, et ils combinent et multiplient la puissance produite depuis backemf forces "normalement se heurter " sont maintenant en même flux de direction que la puissance induite par le retour du rotor?
Hi Pierre
My guess is the simplicity we are missing is that If you imagine the induced electromagnetic locked rotor winds as a permanent magnet, it will induce power into all of the rotating stator winds that are not being pulsed.
Perhaps this is the power that Luc measures filling caps but has nothing to do backemf/ flyback since rotating stator fields never actually turn off abruptly.
Perhaps also there is a combining of backemf.forces (not the flyback but actual backemf) when the returning induction to stator winds from energized rotor occurs, and they combine and multiply power produced since backemf forces "normally clashing" are now in same direction flow as the returning induced power from rotor?
-
Is every stator coil there is in rotating field energized and this
Mass of 6 fields rotated?
So no time is there " unpulsed" stator winds?
If so this blows my feeble theory but perhaps the fields in register with the rotor core ends do recieve extra power from the induced rotor winds and the back enf forces normally clashing combine because of same flow direction
-
Hi Everyone
So when a 6 pole stator wind is pulsed, lets say it is 30 pole stator..
Power comes in to for example pole-slot #1, is wound LHR for example, then jumps over the poles and slots between, and then winds around slot #5 but now RHR wound....so there is a electromagnet created there, N one end, S other end, or other way around depending on if LHR or RHR at ends....
This electromagnet stretches across those 5 poles, and the stator poles between are NOT energized directly from the windings and pulse but are induced by the N pole piece at one end, and the S pole piece the other end....
so this would resemble and be just like if a permanaet magnet was there in the place of this stator-electromagnet created by the pulsing......and so there are 6 of these electromagnets all around the stators...each butted end to end to fill up all the stator winds...
so what I am saying is there are unpulsed windings between each pulsed stator pole-end true??
And what happens to these when not only do the stator pole ends create electromagnet, but also the rotor itself "reflects:" itself back upon these unpulsed stator windings?
Sorry to kick this idea around too much maybe it is something....
Maybe I have this wrong, and it is LHR for example and jumps across 5 slots and poles and is also again LHR? Not RHR?
If so same thing, what happens to winds in between pole ends, and what does the induced locked rotor winds do to these? (returns the power to reinforce the power created in stators and it all gets sent through the diodes to fill up cap)
Salut tout le monde
Ainsi, quand un vent stator 6 pôles est pulsé, disons qu'il est 30 pôle stator..
La puissance entre par exemple Pole-slot #1, est la plaie LHR par exemple, puis saute sur les pôles et les fentes entre, puis les vents autour de la fente #5 mais maintenant RHR Wound....so il ya un électro-aimant créé là, n une extrémité, S autre extrémité, ou l'autre manière autour selon si LHR ou RHR à la fin....
Cet électro-aimant s'étend sur ces 5 pôles, et les pôles de stator entre ne sont pas alimentés directement par les enroulements et le pouls, mais sont induits par la pièce N de pôle à une extrémité, et la pièce de poteau de S l'autre extrémité....
donc, ce serait ressembler et être juste comme si un aimant permanaet était là à la place de ce stator-électro-aimant créé par le pulsation...... et donc il y a 6 de ces électro-aimants tout autour des stators... chaque bout à bout pour remplir tous les vents du stator...
donc ce que je dis, c'est qu'il y a des enroulements non pulsés entre chaque pôle de stator pulsé-fin vrai??
Et ce qui arrive à ces quand non seulement
-
Ok, I'm not expert on generators but I think T-1000 said enough so it's no purpose to hide it. If I'm wrong then correct me...
I think you have to move field but not change it so the flux linking never occur. Once it occur even slightly the effect is gone. The field in generators is constant. The way to accomplish it , is simple - the armature current must be steady. Imho in solid state generators you can find how to do it in old patents . Mostly they used complex commutators and ohm law ;-)
-
Low Frequency test requested by Pmgr plus other higher Frequency comparisons.
Everyone, please keep in mind I am not testing an exact replication of Pierre's device. These are as is tests. There are still many modifications to be completed.
Link to video: https://youtu.be/QRV8MxjM-vA (https://youtu.be/QRV8MxjM-vA)
-
Link to video: https://youtu.be/QRV8MxjM-vA (https://youtu.be/QRV8MxjM-vA)
Hi Luc,
Thanks for taking time on testing in different frequencies ranges. This is showing where optimal power transfer can be. Which is low frequency due your metal core characteristics.
There are also few things I would like to mention:
1) The coupling between switching coils and output coil seems are too loose;
2) The switching coils need to be re-calculated to match electromagnet/DC motor type windings. This will stop burning amps from input for no-reason.
3) The capacitor you are putting is behaving like LC circuit. Which is unwanted part. The only way I see to use capacitor is to smooth out switching transition in electromagnet coils. Which can be find out with very small capacity across each switching coil. You will have to find best middle point between power-off delay and unwanted start of self-oscillation.
Cheers!
-
Hi all
Look at this translated quote from Pierre:
"reflect 36 coils can be connected with another"
reflect = remember?
connected with another = connected with each other??
connected with another = connected with another coil???
If it is "another coil" then why not connect all 36 coils directly with the locked rotor coil which is "another coil"
If another coil is "with each other" then all 36 coils connected in series?
Why does he say "Can be" why not say "they are" .....
Sorry to pester so much you can always skip over my nonsense if that is what it is
-
Hi Luc,
Thanks for taking time on testing in different frequencies ranges. This is showing where optimal power transfer can be. Which is low frequency due your metal core characteristics.
There are also few things I would like to mention:
1) The coupling between switching coils and output coil seems are too loose;
2) The switching coils need to be re-calculated to match electromagnet/DC motor type windings. This will stop burning amps from input for no-reason.
Yes, I agree and this is what I was trying to establish and test: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxFxnVld9-8 before winding the coils but I made errors and was way off in my calculations and no one helped since they probably didn't understand what I was trying to do.
3) The capacitor you are putting is behaving like LC circuit. Which is unwanted part. The only way I see to use capacitor is to smooth out switching transition in electromagnet coils. Which can be find out with very small capacity across each switching coil. You will have to find best middle point between power-off delay and unwanted start of self-oscillation.
Cheers!
I know that. I only use it to get a more accurate scope readings, without it it's too much noise for the scope to read correctly. I try to use minimal values but for that demonstration I couldn't keep changing the cap values as I go up in frequency since it would of taken too much time but I did it once at the end so we could see the real load value.
RegardsLuc
-
Made a new center rotor core yesterday but only posting the results today.
Video Part 1: https://youtu.be/Y4oJ0e9BcZc (https://youtu.be/Y4oJ0e9BcZc)
Video Part 2: https://youtu.be/PSGs6xbah00 (https://youtu.be/PSGs6xbah00)
Video Part 3: https://youtu.be/8hrBa8qRhY4
-
@gotoluc
you're making a miscalculation in your head...
input + recovered = energy that was used through the device.
recovered doesn't go nowhere; it goes back into power to be used through the coils...
100% recovery would take your input down to 0...
but if you had input of 10W and recovered 30W , that's 40W to the coils...
if you didn't recover any... you'd get 40W input and 0W recovered...
It's not input - recovered... though recovered does lower the input; the input is already lowered by it when you read the input.
so you could say 'The input is now 10W, and we're recovering 8, so the input *would be* 18W" so you're saving 8 watts of input by recovering the output... but it's still 10W input.
-
@gotoluc
you're making a miscalculation in your head...
input + recovered = energy that was used through the device.
recovered doesn't go nowhere; it goes back into power to be used through the coils...
100% recovery would take your input down to 0...
but if you had input of 10W and recovered 30W , that's 40W to the coils...
if you didn't recover any... you'd get 40W input and 0W recovered...
It's not input - recovered... though recovered does lower the input; the input is already lowered by it when you read the input.
so you could say 'The input is now 10W, and we're recovering 8, so the input *would be* 18W" so you're saving 8 watts of input by recovering the output... but it's still 10W input.
That's what you think I'm doing but the fact is I'm just showing the differences as it gets more efficient when frequency goes up.
It has nothing to do with what you wrote.
Regards
Luc
-
That's what you think I'm doing but the fact is I'm just showing the differences as it gets more efficient when frequency goes up.
It has nothing to do with what you wrote.
Regards
Luc
so for input of 4.3 wats and rercovered 4.3 watts it's still 8.6 watts total used... and only 50% recovered. not 90% like you claimed.
again, the input already has the recovered taken away from it when you read it; so you can't say it's any less than what it already is.
90% recovery owuld be if you had like 9 watts on the recovered side and 1 watt on the input.
-
so for input of 4.3 wats and rercovered 4.3 watts it's still 8.6 watts total used... and only 50% recovered. not 90% like you claimed.
again, the input already has the recovered taken away from it when you read it; so you can't say it's any less than what it already is.
90% recovery owuld be if you had like 9 watts on the recovered side and 1 watt on the input.
I don't dispute anything you wrote, all is correct. What's incorrect is you assume I don't know this.
If you're a trained EE then the way a say things won't sound right to you as I have no schooling.
However, it's good that you point this out for others that will assume differently.
Regards
Luc
-
so for input of 4.3 wats and rercovered 4.3 watts it's still 8.6 watts total used... and only 50% recovered. not 90% like you claimed.
again, the input already has the recovered taken away from it when you read it; so you can't say it's any less than what it already is.
90% recovery owuld be if you had like 9 watts on the recovered side and 1 watt on the input.
Whaaat!? Wait a minute, let's reason together. We have a black box that we connect to a fixed power supply. The box has three ports that is, an input, output, and common. The input and output both connect to the positive terminal of said power supply and the negative lead of the supply connects to the common terminal. We now attach a watt meter to the input and measure 1 watt of power drawn from the supply. We also attach a watt meter to the output and we measure 9 watts returned to the same supply. Our black box is somehow giving us an 800% gain not 90% recovery.
Regards,
Pm
-
Whaaat!? Wait a minute, let's reason together. We have a black box that we connect to a fixed power supply. The box has three ports that is, an input, output, and common. The input and output both connect to the positive terminal of said power supply and the negative lead of the supply connects to the common terminal. We now attach a watt meter to the input and measure 1 watt of power drawn from the supply. We also attach a watt meter to the output and we measure 9 watts returned to the same supply. Our black box is somehow giving us an 800% gain not 90% recovery.
Regards,
Pm
the measure isn't on the common. It's not 800% gain. It's 9W from one side + 1W on the other side, one can know that 10W is used on the input common.
The recover is going to the caps, the power supply is going to the caps, if the power supply doesn't have to apply that much power (1W) because most of what was used was returned by recovery....
very similar to the way a resonant circuit is; in a tank you can have KW of power for a few watts of input...
At initial power on in the 90% recovery case... the power supplied would have to be 100% (10W), after the first cycle of recovery, 9W returns from the coils, which leaves 1W required from the power supply.
There's no gain... it's still no more than the required 10W total.
@gotoluc :) just makin sure... I did hope you knew... but that's not exactly the words you were sayin; sorry to seem like a grammar nazi :)
-
@gotoluc :) just makin sure... I did hope you knew... but that's not exactly the words you were sayin; sorry to seem like a grammar nazi :)
No problem :)
So I decided to add a switch on the combined 30 diode output lead I use for the clamp amp probe to show the difference when we switch off the return but now I'm confused because I thought the input power would go up when I switch off the diode collection but it only has a small increase. Not sure what's up with that?
Have a look: https://youtu.be/9ELVELKx4LU (https://youtu.be/9ELVELKx4LU)
-
No problem :)
So I decided to add a switch on the combined 30 diode output lead I use for the clamp amp probe to show the difference when we switch off the return but now I'm confused because I thought the input power would go up when I switch off the diode collection but it only has a small increase. Not sure what's up with that?
Have a look: https://youtu.be/9ELVELKx4LU (https://youtu.be/9ELVELKx4LU)
Hi Gotoluc,
How can you turn off recovery the upper and lower switch diodes are the MOSFET body diodes you can’t turn them off, all you can do is look at the bridge board supply with the current clamp to see the current pulses returned to the caps when the MOSFETs turn off.
Regards
L192
-
the measure isn't on the common. It's not 800% gain. It's 9W from one side + 1W on the other side, one can know that 10W is used on the input common.
The recover is going to the caps, the power supply is going to the caps, if the power supply doesn't have to apply that much power (1W) because most of what was used was returned by recovery....
very similar to the way a resonant circuit is; in a tank you can have KW of power for a few watts of input...
At initial power on in the 90% recovery case... the power supplied would have to be 100% (10W), after the first cycle of recovery, 9W returns from the coils, which leaves 1W required from the power supply.
There's no gain... it's still no more than the required 10W total.
@gotoluc :) just makin sure... I did hope you knew... but that's not exactly the words you were sayin; sorry to seem like a grammar nazi :)
Who said anything about measuring the common? How do you account for 10W total input? Refer to the attached schematic. This is an example of my understanding of Luc's measurements but using your values. Using the current flows shown, we consume 1 watt from the supply via the input, and we return 9 watts via the output thru the recovery diode to the supply. Thee black box is magically generating
8 watts over and above the input consumption of 1 watt.
Regards,
Pm
-
Hi Gotoluc,
How can you turn off recovery the upper and lower switch diodes are the MOSFET body diodes you can’t turn them off, all you can do is look at the bridge board supply with the current clamp to see the current pulses returned to the caps when the MOSFETs turn off.
Regards
L192
Yes, I forgot about the mosfet body diode. So basically when I shut off my 30 external quality diodes the mosfet's body diode kick in which is not quite as good quality and why we see a slight increase in input current.
Thanks for the reminder
Regards
Luc
-
"réfléchissez 36 bobine peuvent être relier avec une autre"
My translation as i understand Pierre:
Think again, 36 coils could be (possibility, probability) connected to one more coil (a 37th coil inside the core ?)
Remember the wire(s) going directly to the core not through the 5 green connectors !
And remember 37 transistors !!
just a thought
-
"réfléchissez 36 bobine peuvent être relier avec une autre"
My translation as i understand Pierre:
Think again, 36 coils could be (possibility, probability) connected to one more coil (a 37th coil inside the core ?)
Remember the wire(s) going directly to the core not through the 5 green connectors !
And remember 37 transistors !!
just a thought
Thanks cheros,
you're right, looking at Pierre's French writing again, the word "réfléchissez" is the action of thinking over something which could be translated as "Think about it" or as you wrote "Think again"
You're also right that the word "peuvent" may be more related to the word "could" instead of "can" as I wrote
So I translated :
Fr. et réfléchissez 36 bobine peuvent être relier avec une autre
to En. and reflect 36 coils can be connected with another
but it could also be: En. and think about it, 36 coils could be connected to one more
Notice I did not add the word coil at the end as he did not write that.
Thanks for bringing this up and you or anyone else is free to point out translation options as it can or should I write could change the outcome,
Regards
Luc
-
Maybe you could get some good ideas from the next link:
https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/my-interpretation/ (https://figueragenerator.wordpress.com/my-interpretation/)
According to that, the key is to distort the magnetic fields in order to bend the magnetic lines and create flux cutting induction. Creating two fields in repulsion is one possible way to distort their magnetic lines and get the wires cut by those magnetic lines.
-
Who said anything about measuring the common? How do you account for 10W total input? Refer to the attached schematic. This is an example of my understanding of Luc's measurements but using your values. Using the current flows shown, we consume 1 watt from the supply via the input, and we return 9 watts via the output thru the recovery diode to the supply. Thee black box is magically generating
8 watts over and above the input consumption of 1 watt.
Regards,
Pm
In1 + In2 = InT... as Recovey goes up, (never to exceed in1 form the powesupply) ... nevemrind just rehashing that point...
The measuements ae the common voltage top of the capcitor, current from power supply, and currrent from recovery diodes. Power at InT Is not erally measurable because it's thorugh a multitude of bus lines and not from a single source.
-
Yes, I agree and this is what I was trying to establish and test: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxFxnVld9-8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxFxnVld9-8) before winding the coils but I made errors and was way off in my calculations and no one helped since they probably didn't understand what I was trying to do.
RegardsLuc
Luc, we discussed this before. Based on the measurements you did, your coils have a resistance of 0.53ohm and an inductance of about 0.56mH. When in registration with the rotor, this increases with about a factor of 4, so about 2.1mH.
The time constant of a coil is L/R and cut-off frequency (3dB point) is fc=R/(2*pi*L). Filling in the above values gives fc=0.53/(2*pi*2.1e-3)=40Hz.
Considering your stator steel was probably designed for 50-60Hz, the fc of 40Hz that you have for your coils is not bad. In fact it is in the correct ballpark.
The questions is why we are not seeing more voltage on the output coil. There can be two answers to that:
1. You don't have enough windings on the output coil. Solution: try and output coil with more windings, like a factor of 5 or so.
2. The output rotor is too thick and shorting part of the two neighboring poles when they pass the rotor. Solution: use a thinner rotor.
Or do a combination of both. Hope this helps.
PmgR
-
Luc, we discussed this before. Based on the measurements you did, your coils have a resistance of 0.53ohm and an inductance of about 0.56mH. When in registration with the rotor, this increases with about a factor of 4, so about 2.1mH.
The time constant of a coil is L/R and cut-off frequency (3dB point) is fc=R/(2*pi*L). Filling in the above values gives fc=0.53/(2*pi*2.1e-3)=40Hz.
It doesn't matter what calculations come to. What matters is the real world tests and what I was trying to find before moving forward. For me, the time constant is right when you get to the frequency just before the inductive discharge drops in output. If you lower the frequency and your input goes up but your inductive discharge does not then your time constant is too long and you're just wasting input power. So at what frequency did you observe this to happen in my video demo?
Considering your stator steel was probably designed for 50-60Hz, the fc of 40Hz that you have for your coils is not bad. In fact it is in the correct ballpark.
I agree the stator laminations are suited for 50 to 60Hz but you can clearly see your calculations did not work out with the low frequency tests.
I'm not criticizing you but I don't understand how you can not see that from the video demo I made for you?
The questions is why we are not seeing more voltage on the output coil. There can be two answers to that:
1. You don't have enough windings on the output coil. Solution: try and output coil with more windings, like a factor of 5 or so.
You're saying the same thing again even after I added a 600 turn coil which made no difference. You think adding another 600 turns will output more current? ... There's a huge amount of flux in the stator, that's not the problem. The problem is and I've said it before there's NO CHANGE!... the flux is all equal and keeps rotating around evenly. We need something to make a change to create a dis-balance, maybe then the flux will move from one side to the other to re-balance and hopefully it will go through the rotor to do so. Then we may have a chance of more output. I will be testing this and many other variations. However, (as is) it's not going to do anything more then what I demonstrated no matter how many winding turns I add on the rotor core. That's a fact.
-2. The output rotor is too thick and shorting part of the two neighboring poles when they pass the rotor. Solution: use a thinner rotor.
Did you not see these tests: https://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg522156/#msg522156 (https://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg522156/#msg522156)
Regards
Luc
-
Made a new center rotor core yesterday but only posting the results today.
Video Part 1: https://youtu.be/Y4oJ0e9BcZc (https://youtu.be/Y4oJ0e9BcZc)
Video Part 2: https://youtu.be/PSGs6xbah00 (https://youtu.be/PSGs6xbah00)
Video Part 3: https://youtu.be/8hrBa8qRhY4 (https://youtu.be/8hrBa8qRhY4)
Luc, these are very interesting results, especially the last video.
Regarding the two different rotors that you have tried, probably the ideal thickness of the rotor is something in between, so maybe half the original thickness, maybe double/triple the the thickness of the thin rotor.
What is clear is that we need to go to higher voltage on the output coil by increasing the number of turns on the output coil (not the input coils).
How many windings did you have on the first rotor and how many on the second thin rotor (400turns on second thin rotor I believe recalling the video?)
Since your original coil has a double winding, you can try and put those two windings in series instead of parallel. That should give you double the voltage and will be a good datapoint, but probably still not enough voltage. It would be even better if you could increase it to a factor of 5 so you can get 100-150V on the output coil.
It might be easier to get more windings on the thinner second rotor to try it, so try that first before increase the thickness of that thin rotor. It should be easy to add another 400 turns, then repeat your measurements, then add another 400 turns and repeat your measurements.
Make sure to be safe going forward though: the output coil will have higher voltage that you can't just touch with your hands.
Lastly, regarding your last video, these are your power consumptions:
1. Power supply in: 750mA rms at 7.16V or 5.35W (versus your math trace of 4.74VA)
2. Recovered power: 840mA rms at 7.13V or 5.99W (versus your math trace of 4.35VA)
3. Power consumed in load resistor: 5.4V rms over 100ohms or 0.3W
4. Power consumed in input coils: each single coil is 0.53ohm. You have six coils in series and six of these series coilsets in parallel, so 0.53ohm overall resistance.
Assuming total input current to coils is what comes from the power supply plus what comes from the recovery (assuming the capacitor voltage remains constant): 750mA rms + 840mA rms, or 1.59A rms (btw it would be good to check what the current is that actually goes into the coils together; not sure if you can do that with your current configuration).
So total power absorbed in input coils is: 0.84W.
Let's see the balance (let's take the math trace numbers): out/in = (0.3 + 0.84)/4.74 = 24% efficiency
PmgR
-
Luc,
As you state it, you want the output coil to have more current. The way physics works, this is not something you can do directly. The only way to do this is by making sure the output coil has enough voltage to support a low resistance load which will then give a high current.
Voltage on the output coil is proportional to -Nout*dflux/dt where Nout is the number of windings on the output coil. The flux is generated by the input coils and the flux captured by the output coil is proportional to M*Iin where M is the coupling from input coil to output coil and Iin is the input current.
The coupling M between input and output is proportional to k*sqrt(Lin*Lout) where Lin is the input inductance and Lout the output inductance and k a constant related to the stator and rotor coupling.
So you can increase the output voltage by either increasing Iin, Lin or Lout, k or a combination.
Lin is proportional to Nin*Nin, Lout is proportional to Nout*Nout and just as in a transformer, output voltage divided by input voltage is proportional to Nout/Nin, just like in a regular transformer.
So if you want to increase the output voltage, you will either need to increase Nin, Nout, k or Iin. Since you don't want to increase your input voltage, the only options left over are increasing Nout, k or Iin.
You can maximize k for better coupling between stator and rotor by adjusting its thickness. This is what you have already done. Just find the optimum rotor thickness.
You have already changed the amount of current as well with still no good results for increased output voltage.
So the only thing left is to increase the number of turns on the output coil. You can increase the input inductance as well, but in that case you still need to increase the output inductance as well, otherwise your voltage is still not going up. If you want the output voltage to increase, you need to put more turns on the output than you are putting on the input.
Lasty, if you go to a higher frequency, that will increase your voltage as well, but if you are moving past the frequency limit of the stator iron, that will decrease the voltage, so these work against each other.
That's why I say to leave the input coils the same so they are in the ballpark of the stator frequency, but increase the number of turns on the output coil and find the best width for the rotor.
PmgR
-
Hi gotoluc and everyone
To increase volages from the output coil it would be nice if the inductive spikes would manifest themselves in its output too.
But now the cap bank seems to be absorbing them all
In dc pulse motor, if I wrap a large pickup wind around and behind a motor coil, both coils sharing same core, the inductive kickback spikes will manifest in the pickup winds quite strong and will help to fill cap faster and higher in voltage
But seems the inductive spikes do not "ride on top" of the output coil in the video tests for some reason.
Maybe pre charge caps first like Pierre does and the fact caps are fuly filled up will prevent spikes from entering and so spikes will enter instead the output coil and help with seeing some higher volages there (just idea)
Also all this said there is question about just what is the recovered power?
How can it be inductive spikes if stator coils never turn off and only rotate around?
Maybe the crawling motion dynamics of coil A on them coil A and B on them coil B for stator field rotation does create the inductive spikes energy shown on scope...??
Two other questions:
Inductive spikes seen on scope are at least x20 higher voltage than input voltage so when filling up super caps around 20v seems like almost all is lost?
(But is the recovered energy shown in scope ireally inductive spikes?)
Finally the watts output is calculation of when voltage is over, or on "top of" of the current...so if no overlapping in time of current form with voltage form, how can scope show anything but "volts amps" but never watts as far as the recovered energy goes ...so you see only currents by themselves and voltage by itself....
Also maybe separate independent cap bank being filled by "recovered energy" would be better than filling up same cap bank that is also running the show as this causes a lot of clashing and butted heads in current flows so lots will be cancelled out and you don't get full picture
-
Hi Gotoluc,
Jerdee indicates he has the missing component, so have you tried adding that yet?
Regards
L192
-
Hi L192,
From the Hyun Chung patent application (https://patents.google.com/patent/US20040007932):The bold lines could sound like claiming overunity even though this isn't put in the claims. Of course it is a mixture of EMF and power so who knows what he meant?! Then in paragraph 16:
Coherent fields
In a coil it is clearly seen that the field is coherent as doubling the turns number quadruples the stored energy at the same current. Doubling the turns number quadruples the inductance of the coil. The energy stored in an inductor is (1/2)LI2. Thus quadrupling the inductance L at the same current I quadruples the stored energy.
If on the other hand the turns number is doubled by just putting two similar coils in series without having their magnetic fields share the same space in the same direction the inductance is just added up (doubled). Thus the stored energy is also only doubled.
The trick is to input the energy as separate waves and then mix the waves into a single coherent wave before extracting the energy. Several free energy devices looks like using this principle which W.B. Smith calls 'The Principle of Inversion.'
Energy in an inductor: https://wiki2.org/en/Inductor#Stored_energy (https://wiki2.org/en/Inductor#Stored_energy)
Inductance formulas: https://wiki2.org/en/Inductor#Inductance_formulas (https://wiki2.org/en/Inductor#Inductance_formulas)
Regards
Ole
This is from another member that commented on the points I made. I could not word a better response so here it is.[/size]
[/size]
A B-field is proportional to a coil current. When you detect it with another coil, the captured flux is proportional to the B-field and the generated EMF is proportional to dflux/dt. There is no squaring action so flux just adds up. If you were talking about force, then yes, force is proportional to B*I, so that will leave you with an I squared (I*I). This is actually what is used in reluctance motors. I note an I squared (not a B squared)[/size]
[/size]
L192[/size]
-
The last paragraph is speaking of "detection" of one coil with another and then the "cspturing" of the field
Detecting then capturing is not.creating coherence as far as i dont know
-
This is from another member that commented on the points I made. I could not word a better response so here it is.[/size]
[/size]
A B-field is proportional to a coil current. When you detect it with another coil, the captured flux is proportional to the B-field and the generated EMF is proportional to dflux/dt. There is no squaring action so flux just adds up. If you were talking about force, then yes, force is proportional to B*I, so that will leave you with an I squared (I*I). This is actually what is used in reluctance motors. I note an I squared (not a B squared)[/size]
[/size]
L192[/size]
Chung is careful on his wording not to say over unity. What he is saying is "self looped without external energy after the initial start-up"
-
Hi Gotoluc,
Jerdee indicates he has the missing component, so have you tried adding that yet?
Regards
L192
Hi L192,
I first wanted to test the device (as is) so that we have a baseline and know what it can do. Hopefully everyone is satisfied with my tests and are convinced the device is not capable of anything special without a variation or modification of some kind, other then adding more turns to the fixed rotor.
We have now tried the variation Jerdee was quite convinced was the missing component, However, it has not assisted the output as he hopped.
We are reviewing Pierre's newest hints and today Jerdee is writing several program variation to observe some finer differences. I will post videos of the tests once I have them. One of the tests will be looking at full H-Bridge AC output which we already know from the previous L298M tests helps the output.
With Pierre new hint of coil isolation we are considering the extra set of 36 diodes and relays may be used full AC input?... can you please have a look at that possibility and let us know what you think.
I'm interested in testing bucking coils and a momentary shut off of one field side to create a dis-balance. So as you can see we still many option variations to test and peoples suggestions are also welcomed since it looks like I may be the only one with a device that can be tested without switching issues.
Regards
Luc
-
Hi Gotoluc ,
With the relays ,I was running line ripple into the coils but with the bridge boards you can’t separate supply and recovery, so that won’t be possible. In fact you will only be able to make current reversals with the bridge switches. You could try changing the polarity on line 6 in the sequence. This will provide a large step change and half the clock rate for a given output frequency.
My rotor coils likely had over 1000T hence the high voltages I measured. They were the original generator rotor coils.
Regards
L192
-
We are reviewing Pierre's newest hints and today Jerdee is writing several program variation to observe some finer differences. I will post videos of the tests once I have them. One of the tests will be looking at full H-Bridge AC output which we already know from the previous L298M tests helps the output.
With Pierre new hint of coil isolation we are considering the extra set of 36 diodes and relays may be used full AC input?... can you please have a look at that possibility and let us know what you think.
I believe we are having major issues with cutting the flux lines on our armature due to our inefficient fields. This has to be our problem. We've done enough work with high amps and plenty enough voltage on these windings...to the point of cooking the enamel. You see, when driving 5 coils in series, you only have the middle three that are effectively working. This is only 60% of the 5 coils that are doing anything important. This is NOT good.
With a 36 poles, you have much more effective field.
It all comes down to creating a stronger field to cut the armature windings. Isolated coils is the answer!!!
When you isolate the coils, you have to rethink switching. This is why you need FULL A/C mode and not just the half bridges. So the switching is more involved, but good news, we've already done this test from the earlier bridges. This method works!!! We just didn't isolate the coils.
Pierre is clearly moving forward with NOT tying the coils together in series! This is NOT needed. You cancel the fields at the end of the 5 coils. Or 6 on a 36 poles. You want the strongest field presented to the armature without loss. The code is more complicated, but not that much. I simply export switch states from excel. It's quite efficient really. Believe, after a while, you find ways to be more efficient and have no errors in switching states.
So the answer is to isolate the coils, and don't place them in series. Tie all the diodes together.
This is my focus on research right now.
Hopefully this clear up some confusion. There is still more to come.
Again, I'm trying to think very systematically, and not overcomplicate. Pierre device is a much simpler than many of us our thinking. Keep it simple.
Jerdee
-
It is probably better not to think you have the missing component and say study generator basics etc until you have verified and confirmed the idea. At the very least such statements are patronising and at worst time wasting. I think Pierre is the only one that can make a statement like that, as he is the only one that has demonstrated the working device and the only one that knows the simple idea.
If anyone disagrees with me, then show me a working device.
Wether something is simple or not, is a subjective matter.
L192
-
Luc,
As you state it, you want the output coil to have more current. The way physics works, this is not something you can do directly. The only way to do this is by making sure the output coil has enough voltage to support a low resistance load which will then give a high current.
Voltage on the output coil is proportional to -Nout*dflux/dt where Nout is the number of windings on the output coil. The flux is generated by the input coils and the flux captured by the output coil is proportional to M*Iin where M is the coupling from input coil to output coil and Iin is the input current.
The coupling M between input and output is proportional to k*sqrt(Lin*Lout) where Lin is the input inductance and Lout the output inductance and k a constant related to the stator and rotor coupling.
So you can increase the output voltage by either increasing Iin, Lin or Lout, k or a combination.
Lin is proportional to Nin*Nin, Lout is proportional to Nout*Nout and just as in a transformer, output voltage divided by input voltage is proportional to Nout/Nin, just like in a regular transformer.
So if you want to increase the output voltage, you will either need to increase Nin, Nout, k or Iin. Since you don't want to increase your input voltage, the only options left over are increasing Nout, k or Iin.
You can maximize k for better coupling between stator and rotor by adjusting its thickness. This is what you have already done. Just find the optimum rotor thickness.
You have already changed the amount of current as well with still no good results for increased output voltage.
So the only thing left is to increase the number of turns on the output coil. You can increase the input inductance as well, but in that case you still need to increase the output inductance as well, otherwise your voltage is still not going up. If you want the output voltage to increase, you need to put more turns on the output than you are putting on the input.
Lasty, if you go to a higher frequency, that will increase your voltage as well, but if you are moving past the frequency limit of the stator iron, that will decrease the voltage, so these work against each other.
That's why I say to leave the input coils the same so they are in the ballpark of the stator frequency, but increase the number of turns on the output coil and find the best width for the rotor.
PmgR
Fully agree.
L192
-
Fully agree.
L192
I'm sure Pmgr EE Theory is correct but I'm interested in physical results. So why is it not working out that way in the real physical tests?
Regards
Luc
-
Hi Luc
"peoples suggestions are also welcomed since it looks like I may be the only one with a device that can be tested without switching issues"
OK!
I would say to forget about the crawling-rotation of coils always being ON...pulse all the coils you can do in a string ON-OFF give some decent OFF time so the coils can breath stay cool and kick out much better backemff/recoil/flyback....and hopefully thist will include some of the inherent backemf forces too and caps will fill up like crazy.
Common generators work on the make and break principle if all make and no break you don't get much...
Think about WHERE does the energy really "come from" in a generator - its actually a very mysterious thing to ponder and no amount of textbook science can fully explain - its not the magnets or electromagnets, or the windings or the rotation or anything else physical it does not come from THOSE THINGS it comes from "out there" somewhere and supply is endless...
Use your intuition along with common sense what to try next...
( I like the bucking idea!)
Don't let people (like me) influence you too much its your baby
-
I would say to forget about the crawling-rotation of coils always being ON...pulse all the coils you can do in a string ON-OFF give some decent OFF time so the coils can breath stay cool and kick out much better backemff/recoil/flyback....and hopefully thist will include some of the inherent backemf forces too and caps will fill up like crazy.
If your objective is to make pulse transformer that is a way to go...
In generator the magnetic field is always ON from magnets/electromagnets.
-
Hi Luc
this is an overunity looping electrical device with over1KW of power being produced....so this is something impossible, something that works outside of conventional science and theory so don't expect conventional science and theory to guide you down right path to take...maybe it will to some degree (but I doubt it)...
Use your intuition and common sense!
Everything they teach you in school turns out to be wrong anyways so don't worry about it eh
-
Hi T-1000
Sorry but very respectfully to you, I have to disagree
magnets or electromagnets are always "energized" this is true,
but it is their "make and break" reaction to the windings that makes real power in either the flipover of AC happening (NSNS magnet sweep)
or the airgap between magnet-sweep in N-N-N-N magmet rotor creating make and break situation ...
for example shoving strong magnet one direction over very long coil makes nothing but eddy current reaction...move that magnet back and forth now you get something.
-
Hi Luc
this is an overunity looping electrical device with over1KW of power being produced....so this is something impossible, something that works outside of conventional science and theory so don't expect conventional science and theory to guide you down right path to take...maybe it will to some degree (but I doubt it)...
Use your intuition and common sense!
Everything they teach you in school turns out to be wrong anyways so don't worry about it eh
No the device operates within conventional science we just don’t understand the mechanism yet. Anything else is pseudo science.
L192
-
Here is a questions I think everyone can answer here.
Do you ever see overlapped field poles on a DC or AC generator?
So why the heck are we connecting 5/6 coils in series to create our POLE? Hopefully this is more clear and why this direction needs to be resolved. Pierre's stator is nothing more than rotating field poles. As long as you keep the poles opposite from each other on the armature, your fine. So the slot spacing per coil is your POLE width as well as it determines your opposing location on the armature! Another words, you can not create this device with 5 poles. You can do it with 2 or 6....but not 3 or 5 poles.
Hopefully this is making sense.
Jerdee
-
Hi L192
OK sorry let me re-phrase a bit;
It (probably) does not work with conventional scientific understanding!
It certainly would be nice if it did .... maybe it will who knows.
Pseudo science could also be called theories requiring proof
Even Pierre says he does not understand how it works and would like to know
-
Here is a questions I think everyone can answer here.
Do you ever see overlapped field poles on a DC or AC generator?
So why the heck are we connecting 5/6 coils in series to create our POLE? Hopefully this is more clear and why this direction needs to be resolved. Pierre's stator is nothing more than rotating field poles. As long as you keep the poles opposite from each other on the armature, your fine. So the slot spacing per coil is your POLE width as well as it determines your opposing location on the armature! Another words, you can not create this device with 5 poles. You can do it with 2 or 6....but not 3 or 5 poles.
Hopefully this is making sense.
Jerdee
No you don’t because 3 phases are the most you would see on a 30 slot stator not 6 phases. Much current is also used on coils that are not in rotor registration and are performing no useful work.
L192
-
No you don’t because 3 phases are the most you would see on a 30 slot stator not 6 phases. Much current is also used on coils that are not in rotor registration and are performing no useful work.
L192
I respectfully dissagree. I never said 6 phases either. The rotational field poles on the stator are acting like magnets moving across the armature. That is it...don't overcomplicate.
-
You said overlapped field poles not coils. A 3 phase generator will largely not have overlapping poles but will have overlapping coils to develop the sine wave (distributed windings). No over complication just how it is.. and please don’t tell me to keep it simple again because your keep it simple ideas have yielded nothing of value so far.
If you have something to say just say it plainly or not at all.
L192
-
... I'm interested in testing bucking coils and a momentary shut off of one field side to create a dis-balance. So as you can see we still many option variations to test and peoples suggestions are also welcomed since it looks like I may be the only one with a device that can be tested without switching issues.
Regards
Luc
Bonjour Luc,
d'abord merci de prendre la peine de publier les vidéos des tests.
Je voudrais donc faire une suggestion : il me semble que vous pouvons facilement, avec six diodes seulement, neutraliser les champs de polarité opposée. C'est à dire, obtenir seulement 3 champs tournants négatifs, ou 3 champs tournants positifs, en fonction de l'orientation des 6 diodes.
Si cela fonctionne comme je le pense, cela supprimerait les polarités opposées entre les diverses bobines du stator, donc uniquement 3 champs tournants de même polarité, et espacées.
Ainsi, aux extrémités du rotor, nous devrions avoir des champs opposés de même polarité, variables et en alternance, susceptibles de fournir la puissance.
Nous nous approchons alors des descriptions les plus récentes du générateur de Figuera.
Dans l'image, les six diodes en bleu sont positionnées directement entre deux bobines, uniformément réparties.
MichelM
En. Hello Luc,
first, thank you for taking the time to publish the videos of your tests.
So I would like to make a suggestion: it seems to me that we could easily neutralize the fields of opposite polarity with only six diodes. That is, to obtain only 3 negative rotating fields, or 3 positive rotating fields, depending on the orientation of the 6 diodes.
If this works as I think, it would remove the opposite polarities between the various stator coils, so only 3 rotating fields of the same polarity and spaced apart.
Thus, at the rotor ends we should have opposite fields of the same polarity, variable and alternating, capable of providing power.
We are then approaching the most recent descriptions of the Figuera generator.
In the image, the six diodes in blue are positioned directly between two coils, evenly distributed.
MichelM
-
Thank you MichelM for sharing your idea which we will look over and consider.
Regards
Luc
Fr. Merci MichelM pour avoir partagé votre idée que nous allons examiner et considérer.
Cordialement
Luc
-
Nous nous approchons alors des descriptions les plus récentes du générateur de Figuera.
En. Hello Luc,
We are then approaching the most recent descriptions of the Figuera generator.
MichelM
This is my wild idea and only a suggestion . How to solve it technically is a different matter. Not yet considered. :
From post; https://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/msg517907/#msg517907
PIC 1 : "When ONE magnet pole passes by a coil core we get ONE FULL SINUS ! With TWO magnet poles (same polarity N-N or S-S) ==> TWO SINUS"
"Quand UN pôle d'aimant passe par un noyau de bobine nous obtenons UN SINUS COMPLET! Avec DEUX pôles d'aimant (même polarité N-N ou S-S) ==>
DEUX SINUS"
PIC 2 : As Figuera; Only one sort of magnetic pole passing the each end of the fixed output coil.
With this concept the magnetic rotation only have to be 10Hz giving 60 Hz out.
Comme Figuera; Une seule sorte de pôle magnétique passe à chaque extrémité de la bobine de sortie fixe.
Avec ce concept, la rotation magnétique ne doit être que de 10 Hz pour 60 Hz.
P.S. reference: https://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/msg518160/#msg518160
https://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/msg518221/#msg518221
https://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/msg518328/#msg518328
Regards Arne
-
Here is a questions I think everyone can answer here.
Do you ever see overlapped field poles on a DC or AC generator?
So why the heck are we connecting 5/6 coils in series to create our POLE? Hopefully this is more clear and why this direction needs to be resolved. Pierre's stator is nothing more than rotating field poles. As long as you keep the poles opposite from each other on the armature, your fine. So the slot spacing per coil is your POLE width as well as it determines your opposing location on the armature! Another words, you can not create this device with 5 poles. You can do it with 2 or 6....but not 3 or 5 poles.
Hopefully this is making sense.
Jerdee
Hi Jerdee,
The way the fields are mixed isn't by just simple superposition (i.e. addition) of the fields. To have more energy out than spent to make the field it has to become coherent like done in LASER light. That way the waves don't ride through each other like two beams of light crossing but becomes a new single wave representing the addition before doing the squaring (coherent (https://wiki2.org/en/Coherence_(physics)) instead of simple superposition (https://wiki2.org/en/Superposition_principle)). Normally to make the separate waves become a single coherent wave the single waves has to mixed in a nonlinear media. Else the waves just slip apart or ride through each other which is normal superposition or interference. The question then is: Is the core working around the point of magnetic saturation?
My guess is that Pierre's device actually manages to mix or merge the separate fields of each coil into a new coherent field that doesn't slip apart. The ratios of energy then becomes:
Input energy: 12 + 12 + 12 + 12 + 12 + 12 = 6
Output energy: (1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1)2 = 36
Or actually it's 12 coils (six coils in each end) giving the difference in energy levels of 12 times:
Input energy: 12
Output energy: 122 = 144
This is just my guess. The ratio will have to be measured.
Regards
Ole
-
Message from Pierre
bonjour a tous!... imaginé toute les possibilité avec cette méthode et ne vous fier pas a mon dessin en passant que c'est le secret, ce n'est qu'un exemple pour vous aider un peut. il y a de nombreuse possibilité de filer les bobines avec cette image. a vous de voir pour la suite et encore une fois ne penser pas que c'est le secret, il y a vraiment plus que cela. vous avez la rotation mais il y a beaucoup d'autre chose de cacher dans le dz. a vous de voir la suite .
pierre c.
En. Hello everyone!... imagine all the possibilities with this method and do not rely on my drawing thinking it's the secret. This is only an example to help you a little. There's numerous possibilities in wiring the coils with this image. It's up to you to see how it's completed and again don't think this is the secret, there's really a lot more than just this. You have the rotation but there's a lot more hidden things in the dz. It's up to you to envision the rest.
Pierre C.
Text translation in picture: you don't need 72 relays to power all the coils
-
I'm sure Pmgr EE Theory is correct but I'm interested in physical results. So why is it not working out that way in the real physical tests?
Regards
Luc
You are doing your measurements way past the cut-off frequency of the rotor/stator steel. Do a measurement of the output voltage at something like 30-50Hz with the new thinner output rotor coil and see what voltage you get.
PmgR
-
Hi Jerdee,
The way the fields are mixed isn't by just simple superposition (i.e. addition) of the fields. To have more energy out than spent to make the field it has to become coherent like done in LASER light. That way the waves don't ride through each other like two beams of light crossing but becomes a new single wave representing the addition before doing the squaring (coherent (https://wiki2.org/en/Coherence_(physics)) instead of simple superposition (https://wiki2.org/en/Superposition_principle)). Normally to make the separate waves become a single coherent wave the single waves has to mixed in a nonlinear media. Else the waves just slip apart or ride through each other which is normal superposition or interference. The question then is: Is the core working around the point of magnetic saturation?
My guess is that Pierre's device actually manages to mix or merge the separate fields of each coil into a new coherent field that doesn't slip apart. The ratios of energy then becomes:
Input energy: 12 + 12 + 12 + 12 + 12 + 12 = 6
Output energy: (1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1)2 = 36
Or actually it's 12 coils (six coils in each end) giving the difference in energy levels of 12 times:
Input energy: 12
Output energy: 122 = 144
This is just my guess. The ratio will have to be measured.
Regards
Ole
Ole, as a laser physicist, I have to disagree with you. Laser light is indeed coherent, but that doesn't mean that the energy contained in it is more than what was needed to create it.
In coherent optical communication, you can mix a local oscillator with an incoming laser beam to amplify it upon detection. A photodiode which detects light has a absolute value squaring function: |E|^2.
So if you put the incoming beam (Ein) directly on the detector, you measure |Ein|^2. If you mix it with a local oscillator first, you get |Ein + Eloc|^2 which gives |Ein|^2 + |Eloc|^2 + 2 Re{Ein*conj(Eloc)}. In a real application, the last term is of interest as its amplitude is magnified by the power of the local laser, but again, the total energy is never larger than the sum of the energy of the incoming laser and the local oscillator.
PmgR
-
Hi pmgr,
Ole, as a laser physicist, I have to disagree with you. Laser light is indeed coherent, but that doesn't mean that the energy contained in it is more than what was needed to create it.
I don't know from where else the excess energy arrives then. Dr. A. Melnichenko discovered by accident this principle when he melted a microwave guide which is a rectangular copper tube. He sent microwaves from two or was it three transmitters through the wave guide. The power wasn't enough to melt the tube which it did anyway. His explanation to the phenomena was that the beams became coherent which could account for the excess power that ruined the wave guide.
Two of Melnichenko's articles explaining the principle:
Generator of energy on nonlinear inductance: https://translate.google.dk/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fua-hho.do.am%2Fpubl%2Fidei_po_ehnergii%2Fgenerator_ehnergii_na_nelinejnoj_induktivnosti%2F2-1-0-185 (https://translate.google.dk/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fua-hho.do.am%2Fpubl%2Fidei_po_ehnergii%2Fgenerator_ehnergii_na_nelinejnoj_induktivnosti%2F2-1-0-185)
In-phase interference of electromagnetic waves and energy transgeneration: http://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=en&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&tl=en&twu=1&u=http://izob.narod.ru/p0007.html (http://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=en&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&tl=en&twu=1&u=http://izob.narod.ru/p0007.html)
János Vajda has a mathematical treatise on the principle:
VIOLATION OF THE LAW OF ENERGY CONSERVATION IN WAVE FIELDS: https://feprinciples.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/energy_from_wave_fields_1-21.pdf (https://feprinciples.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/energy_from_wave_fields_1-21.pdf)
Try looking at it from an engineer's point of view. If it works even though many books will tell that it doesn't work perhaps the books should be rewritten to fit nature instead of dictating nature to fit the books. Read Ivor Catt's struggle the scientific community to see the difference between scientists and engineers or technicians. Eventually read about 'The Forbidden Equation: i = qc' to see what is wrong in the scientific community: (https://wiki.naturalphilosophy.org/index.php?title=The_Forbidden_Equation:_i_%3D_qc (https://wiki.naturalphilosophy.org/index.php?title=The_Forbidden_Equation:_i_%3D_qc))
It all comes down to removing the properties of space. Space has permittivity and permeability which are physical properties and can be simply measured. Perhaps there is an aeather (electrons and positrons according to W.B. Smith' theory) even though many books discards it?!
Regards
Ole
-
6 Coil Test AC vs DC: https://youtu.be/hrMSWq6iZcE
-
6 Coil Test AC vs DC: https://youtu.be/hrMSWq6iZcE (https://youtu.be/hrMSWq6iZcE)
Luc, can you post a schematic for how you are driving your coils, as well as the propellor connections/code. It's hard to figure out how things are connected and biased, just listening to your explanation.
PmgR
-
Hi Luc
Great video again and great progress too
Numbers now looking real good!
All makes sense and simple now...and why in retrospect hitt the poor rotor winds from all sides
Think of rotor winds as permanent magnet and rotating fields revolve as in rotating generator and then how is best way to do it....
Also more important of course think of rotatng fields as permanent magnets and rotor as it is.....now how could you do the best rotating generator like this?
I would say your best bet with 30 poles in stator is to "mimic" a revolving field of.10 permanent magnets and energize always only two at 180 degrees that are in that "edge" register you found.
Space the revolving fields apart such as only one pole is energized ( actually two at 180) and there is blank pole each side
Idea is to mimic a rotating field of 10 permanent magnets
nsnsnsnsn and the width of permanent magnets is also the same distance as that between them
Soi12mm wide magnets now 12mm ispace in between measuring edge to edge
Now, mimic eletomsonically via Jerdee's expertise this revolving permanent magnet field whirling around that rotor with the 600 turns
So it becomes electromagnet whirling field of course.
I base all this advice on the many Muller generators I have built
These with flat disc rotors stuffed with neo magnets evenly spaced in the flat disc then coils each side
Common design 8 or 16 NS magnets in rotor
And 9 or17 coils each side of rotor
But of course you have a single coil to whirl magnets around
Anyways just think if 12 mm wide magnets have 12mm space between them translate this dz generator mode
I think this will work very good for you
Higher frequencies should make incredible power
-
Luc, can you post a schematic for how you are driving your coils, as well as the propellor connections/code. It's hard to figure out how things are connected and biased, just listening to your explanation.
PmgR
Code might be a bit confusing, as it is all in binary. So posting the code will most likely be more confusing for most.
We are trying to focus on creating the strongest field on the stator windings that has the least amount of cancellation.
H-Bridges are configured this way all the way around in series.
H-bridge 1 beginning of coil 1 to the end of 5
H-bridge 2 beginning of coil 2 to the end of 6.
etc...
The LOOP in laymen terms is this...
REPEAT
NORTH is created on coils 2 through 6 while SOUTH is created on coils 17 through 21
NORTH is created on coils 3 through 7 while SOUTH is created on coils 18 through 22
NORTH is created on coils 4 through 8 while SOUTH is created on coils 19 through 23
SOUTH is created on coils 2 through 6 while NORTH is created on coils 17 through 21
SOUTH is created on coils 3 through 7 while NORTH is created on coils 18 through 22
SOUTH is created on coils 4 through 8 while NORTH is created on coils 19 through 23
This test is explaining our issues of why we are not getting enough flux across the armature.
We need to isolate the poles. This test is to eliminate the other poles as much as possible before separating the series coils arrangement. So only two poles are active at one time in A/C mode.
I don't see how moving forward with 5 coils in series overlapping per pole helps. I believe the test is proving this.
Hope this helps,
Jerdee
-
6 Coil Test AC vs DC: https://youtu.be/hrMSWq6iZcE
Luc,
You must have missed my post on OUR on 2018-04-17 regarding this very topology so I will re-post here-
"Much confusion seems to exist on OU with Pierre's device and it's operation regarding the switching of his 36 serially connected stator coils. The output levels of the builder's attempts thus far are low which indicates there is a flaw in their thinking. So, in an attempt to resolve the problem, I simulated the power transformer feeding the supercap (SC) pack while supplying the running stator without the rotor inserted. The idea was to replicate Pierre's SC loaded output voltage with the known input voltage and current to the power transformer under these conditions. No real magic here but a few parameters had to be assumed such as coupling factor, etc.
Considering the assumed and accepted switching connections by the replicators plus their posted coil dcrs, a relay switched arrangement should present a load in the ~.5-1 ohm range to the SC pack. When these load numbers were used in the sim, the results were way off from Pierre's measurements and I posted this info on OU to no avail. IMO, the assumed switch connections are wrong and some basics are being overlooked that is, the voltage and current waveform generated by passing a PM over a coil. So, this post represents my thoughts on the matter.
Attached is an 18 slot sim for simplification to get the point across. The current measurements for each coil used are offset for clarity. It consists of 2 poles that are physically and electrically opposite from each other namely L1,2,3 and L10,11,12. All other connected coils have zero current and the reason why is apparent if the circuit is studied. This is the key because if we now do average measurements on the voltages and currents, we arrive at a net load resistance in the range that allow the original power transformer sim to work. IOW, not all coils are energized all the time. The switching to move the fields around the stator should be academic from here based on the number of poles desired and the slot pitch.
Any recovery from the inductive switching can now be visualized from the moving electromagnetic field over the stationary loaded rotor similar to a PM passing over coil."
The referenced sim is attached.
Regards,
Pm
-
Code might be a bit confusing, as it is all in binary. So posting the code will most likely be more confusing for most.
We are trying to focus on creating the strongest field on the stator windings that has the least amount of cancellation.
H-Bridges are configured this way all the way around in series.
H-bridge 1 beginning of coil 1 to the end of 5
H-bridge 2 beginning of coil 2 to the end of 6.
etc...
The LOOP in laymen terms is this...
REPEAT
NORTH is created on coils 2 through 6 while SOUTH is created on coils 17 through 21
NORTH is created on coils 3 through 7 while SOUTH is created on coils 18 through 22
NORTH is created on coils 4 through 8 while SOUTH is created on coils 19 through 23
SOUTH is created on coils 2 through 6 while NORTH is created on coils 17 through 21
SOUTH is created on coils 3 through 7 while NORTH is created on coils 18 through 22
SOUTH is created on coils 4 through 8 while NORTH is created on coils 19 through 23
This test is explaining our issues of why we are not getting enough flux across the armature.
We need to isolate the poles. This test is to eliminate the other poles as much as possible before separating the series coils arrangement. So only two poles are active at one time in A/C mode.
I don't see how moving forward with 5 coils in series overlapping per pole helps. I believe the test is proving this.
Hope this helps,
Jerdee
Luc/Jerdee,
What timings are you using and overlap time? This is important as it will effect current draw.
Also, for this configuration, turn up the frequency and see what you get. I predict that the output coil voltage won't increase much more once you go past the stator/rotor max frequency, which is around 50-60Hz. Please see if you can confirms this.
If so, it simply means your rotor is too thick and was collapsing poles in your earlier measurements and your frequency was too high to see any effect with the thinner rotor.
Also repeat your current measurement with the thinner rotor at low frequency and at high frequency. Then you will now what frequency you need to aim for and if you need to make another rotor with an intermediate thickness.
Lastly, see what happens if you extend your single North and South poles in your code above to span half of your rotor, so bias coils 1-15 North, 16-30 South and rotate around.
PmgR
-
What timings are you using and overlap time? This is important as it will effect current draw.
I've found it the easiest to use two "wait" or "pause" commands. So we can always adjust overlap and hold times. You are correct, the more overlap, the more demand. Not good. We've found that most of the overlap is not needed. It's waisted.
Also, for this configuration, turn up the frequency and see what you get. I predict that the output coil voltage won't increase much more once you go past the stator/rotor max frequency, which is around 50-60Hz. Please see if you can confirms this.
Higher freq...provides less current, so you have to input more voltage. Nothing unusual.
Also repeat your current measurement with the thinner rotor at low frequency and at high frequency. Then you will now what frequency you need to aim for and if you need to make another rotor with an intermediate thickness.
Our mains focus at this moment is getting as much of the rotating magnetic field as possible. We are both in agreement that isolation of the pole fields are needed.
Lastly, see what happens if you extend your single North and South poles in your code above to span half of your rotor, so bias coils 1-15 North, 16-30 South and rotate around.
Yes, this makes sense. This requires the slot arrangment to be reconfigured. Not 5 slots, but 15 slots. Also this currently requires 15 times 3 pins from MCU. Sadly we can't do this yet. Our gates came in today. So we have more pinout control from MCU. Otherwise we run out quickly in pin control from MCU. I do not think we need to go to higher pin out from MCU to get this device to work. We are going to be using XOR gates to drop our pin control down by one third. You can run multipled poles in parallel, and save pin count as well.
Isolation of the pole fields is key. If you can't get the flux to "re-connect" in the armature...you have little results. This is how I see it at this point.
Jerdee
-
Luc,
You must have missed my post on OUR on 2018-04-17 regarding this very topology so I will re-post here-
"Much confusion seems to exist on OU with Pierre's device and it's operation regarding the switching of his 36 serially connected stator coils. The output levels of the builder's attempts thus far are low which indicates there is a flaw in their thinking. So, in an attempt to resolve the problem, I simulated the power transformer feeding the supercap (SC) pack while supplying the running stator without the rotor inserted. The idea was to replicate Pierre's SC loaded output voltage with the known input voltage and current to the power transformer under these conditions. No real magic here but a few parameters had to be assumed such as coupling factor, etc.
Considering the assumed and accepted switching connections by the replicators plus their posted coil dcrs, a relay switched arrangement should present a load in the ~.5-1 ohm range to the SC pack. When these load numbers were used in the sim, the results were way off from Pierre's measurements and I posted this info on OU to no avail. IMO, the assumed switch connections are wrong and some basics are being overlooked that is, the voltage and current waveform generated by passing a PM over a coil. So, this post represents my thoughts on the matter.
Attached is an 18 slot sim for simplification to get the point across. The current measurements for each coil used are offset for clarity. It consists of 2 poles that are physically and electrically opposite from each other namely L1,2,3 and L10,11,12. All other connected coils have zero current and the reason why is apparent if the circuit is studied. This is the key because if we now do average measurements on the voltages and currents, we arrive at a net load resistance in the range that allow the original power transformer sim to work. IOW, not all coils are energized all the time. The switching to move the fields around the stator should be academic from here based on the number of poles desired and the slot pitch.
Any recovery from the inductive switching can now be visualized from the moving electromagnetic field over the stationary loaded rotor similar to a PM passing over coil."
The referenced sim is attached.
Regards,
Pm
Thanks for sharing your simulation Partzman
I have not been following the topic at Over Unity Research (OUR) kind of busy with just this topic here.
If anyone is interested, here is the link to the first page: http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=3599.0 (http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=3599.0)
Kind regards
Luc
-
I've found it the easiest to use two "wait" or "pause" commands. So we can always adjust overlap and hold times. You are correct, the more overlap, the more demand. Not good. We've found that most of the overlap is not needed. It's waisted.
Higher freq...provides less current, so you have to input more voltage. Nothing unusual.
This is what I have been saying all along. The iron will cut the frequency off. So everything is following normal EM theory.
Our mains focus at this moment is getting as much of the rotating magnetic field as possible. We are both in agreement that isolation of the pole fields are needed.
This is incorrect. Pole isolation is not required as long as you drive all poles with the same current. Your experiments are further proof that your thick stator is shorting poles and thus reducing the output coil voltage. Your thin rotor is most likely too thin and its reluctance is too high, also limiting output voltage. So go for a rotor thickness somewhere in between and use a laminated rotor.
Yes, this makes sense. This requires the slot arrangment to be reconfigured. Not 5 slots, but 15 slots. Also this currently requires 15 times 3 pins from MCU. Sadly we can't do this yet. Our gates came in today. So we have more pinout control from MCU. Otherwise we run out quickly in pin control from MCU. I do not think we need to go to higher pin out from MCU to get this device to work. We are going to be using XOR gates to drop our pin control down by one third. You can run multipled poles in parallel, and save pin count as well.
You don't need to change anything on the stator. Leave the coilspan as 5 slots as you currently have.
How many pins do you have on your MCU? You should be able to do this with your current arrangement with 30pins only (two bridges are always on; one high side and one low side). For each bridge, simply hook up the high side switch pin to +5V, the low switch pin to GND and connect the enable pins to the Arduino.
Isolation of the pole fields is key. If you can't get the flux to "re-connect" in the armature...you have little results. This is how I see it at this point.
Jerdee
I disagree. If you properly bias all poles with equal current, no pole isolation is required. I have simulated this in FEMM and there is no problem if the pole currents are all equal and properly phased as I have described before. However, with the original schematic Pierre that showed, this is not possible.
PmgR
-
Err will you be doing a hardware kit for this device or where to get the parts in your location ??? :D :D :D :D :D :D
-
36 bobine peuvent être relier avec une autre et vous pouvez isoler chaque bobine avec un relais
En. 36 coils can be connected with another and you can isolate each coil with a relay
Une question pour toi Pierre.
Les 36 bobines de ton DZ fonctionnel, était-elle individuellement isolées?
Cordialement
Luc
En. A question for you Pierre.
The 36 coils of your functional DZ, were they individually isolated?
Regards
Luc
-
Une question pour toi Pierre.
Les 36 bobines de ton DZ fonctionnel, était-elle individuellement isolées?
En. A question for you Pierre.
The 36 coils of your functional DZ, were they individually isolated?
Regards
Luc
Maybe to few wires (36, + some more?) from the stator to manage that?
-- Why then make/ show the fifth DZ film?
-- And this? https://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg522229/#msg522229
Regards Arne
-
First, thanks for your help PmgR
How many pins do you have on your MCU? You should be able to do this with your current arrangement with 30pins only (two bridges are always on; one high side and one low side). For each bridge, simply hook up the high side switch pin to +5V, the low switch pin to GND and connect the enable pins to the Arduino.
Yes, we are thinking in the same direction . We are doing this moving forward. We still need the logic chips to save pin count considerably.
if the pole currents are all equal and properly phased
Yes, without a doubt.
This development requires more indivdual bridge control.
Again, thanks for your help.
Jerdee
-
En. A question for you Pierre.
The 36 coils of your functional DZ, were they individually isolated?
Au tout début j’avais mis toute les bobines en série comme toi, mais je me suis rendu compte par la suite du faible taux de rendement comme toi, et en même temps j'ai voulu sauver des relais pour pouvoir ouvrir et fermer chaque circuit. Alors il y a des bobines en parallèle et en série en même temps, mais chaque bobine est isolée l'une de l'autre. Tu pourrais même varier toute les séquences que tu veux avec le plan que j'ai fourni, 2 pôles, 3 pôles, 30 pôles si tu le désires. Chaque bobine est individuelle mais en série avec les autres. Il est sur que si tu veux avoir un champ maximum tu pourrais opter pour 2 pôles et avec la vitesse d'ouverture des mosfet tu pourras atteindre le 60hz facilement avec un champ beaucoup plus fort que 6 bobines, alors ton efficacité devrait augmenter. Moi, je ne pouvais pas me permettre d'aller plus vite avec des relais, alors imagines ce que 2 pôles en rotation pourraient me donner à la sortie avec un champ 3 fois plus fort ? Il est sur que ce n'est encore là tout le secret, mais cela en fait partie. Une dernière chose, la seul chose que je n'ai pas faite est de ne pas croiser les champs car il s'annulent alors essaie de faire la même chose, cela réduit ton efficacité. De mon coté, j'ai réglé ce problème dans mon nouveau prototype.
pierre c.
En. At the very beginning I had all the coils in series like you but I later realized the low rate of return like you and at the same time I wanted to save relays to be able to open and close each circuit, so there are coils in parallel and in series at the same time but each coil is isolated from one another. You could even vary all the sequences that you want with the plan that I provided, 2 pole, 3 pole, 30 pole if you desire. Each coil is individual but in series with the others. It's certain that if you want to have a maximum field you could opt for 2 pole and with the switching speed of mosfet's you will be able to reach 60hz easily with a much stronger field then 6 coils, so your efficiency should increase. I couldn't afford to go any faster with relays, so imagine what 2 rotating poles could of given me on the output with a field that's 3 times stronger? It's sure this is still not the secret but it's part of it. One last thing, the only thing I didn't do is to not cross the fields because they will cancel. So try to do the same. This reduces your efficiency. I've solved this problem in my new prototype.
Pierre C.
-
En. A question for you Pierre.
The 36 coils of your functional DZ, were they individually isolated?
Regards
Luc
Au tout début j’avais mis toute les bobines en série comme toi, mais je me suis rendu compte par la suite du faible taux de rendement comme toi, et en même temps j'ai voulu sauver des relais pour pouvoir ouvrir et fermer chaque circuit. Alors il y a des bobines en parallèle et en série en même temps, mais chaque bobine est isolée l'une de l'autre. Tu pourrais même varier toute les séquences que tu veux avec le plan que j'ai fourni, 2 pôles, 3 pôles, 30 pôles si tu le désires. Chaque bobine est individuelle mais en série avec les autres. Il est sur que si tu veux avoir un champ maximum tu pourrais opter pour 2 pôles et avec la vitesse d'ouverture des mosfet tu pourras atteindre le 60hz facilement avec un champ beaucoup plus fort que 6 bobines, alors ton efficacité devrait augmenter. Moi, je ne pouvais pas me permettre d'aller plus vite avec des relais, alors imagines ce que 2 pôles en rotation pourraient me donner à la sortie avec un champ 3 fois plus fort ? Il est sur que ce n'est encore là tout le secret, mais cela en fait partie. Une dernière chose, la seul chose que je n'ai pas faite est de ne pas croiser les champs car il s'annulent alors essaie de faire la même chose, cela réduit ton efficacité. De mon coté, j'ai réglé ce problème dans mon nouveau prototype.
pierre c.
En. At the very beginning I had all the coils in series like you but I later realized the low rate of return like you and at the same time I wanted to save relays to be able to open and close each circuit, so there are coils in parallel and in series at the same time but each coil is isolated from one another. You could even vary all the sequences that you want with the plan that I provided, 2 pole, 3 pole, 30 pole if you desire. Each coil is individual but in series with the others. It's certain that if you want to have a maximum field you could opt for 2 pole and with the switching speed of mosfet's you will be able to reach 60hz easily with a much stronger field then 6 coils, so your efficiency should increase. I couldn't afford to go any faster with relays, so imagine what 2 rotating poles could of given me on the output with a field that's 3 times stronger? It's sure this is still not the secret but it's part of it. One last thing, the only thing I didn't do is to not cross the fields because they will cancel. So try to do the same. This reduces your efficiency. I've solved this problem in my new prototype.
Pierre C.
Merci Pierre pour la réponse.
J'essaie de comprendre comment vous avez pu isoler les bobines avec seulement 36 à 38 fils (5 connecteurs à 8 broches) que nous pouvons voir dans votre vidéo?
Pouvez-vous s'il vous plaît expliquer.
Cordialement
Luc
En. Thank you Pierre for the reply.
I'm trying to understand how you were able to isolate the coils with only 36 to 38 wires (5 of 8 pin connectors) we can see in your video?
Can you please explain.
Regards
Luc
-
regarde le plan que j'ai poster tout est la!
-
regarde le plan que j'ai poster tout est la!
Oui, je suis d'accord que tout est dans le plan, mais pour que ce plan fonctionne dans votre démonstration vidéo, vous auriez besoin de 72 fils provenant de votre stator pour que l'isolation fonctionne avec les relais. À moins que vous ayez les relais d'isolation montés sur le stator lui-même qui n'a clairement pas été fait. Alors, comment pouvez-vous isoler 36 bobines avec seulement 36 fils?
Cordialement
Luc
En. Yes, I agree it's all in the plan but for that plan to work in your video demonstration you would of needed 72 wires coming from your stator for the isolation to work with the relays. Unless you had the isolation relays mounted on the stator itself which was clearly not done. So how can you Isolate 36 coils with only 36 wire?
Regards
Luc
-
A toi de voir! Tu a eu beaucoup d'indice que je vous ait laisser Je sait que tu voudrait avoir tout les détail anssi que le plan en détail mais tu devra attendre un peut je ne dévoilera pas tout les petit détail au reste a la planète sans que l'idée ne soit protéger tu le sait bien compte toi chanceux d'avoir les detail que j'ai bien voulue transmettre je voit que les gens ne cherche pas encore dans la bonne direction du fonctionnement d'un générateur regarder en 3d un champ magnétique se déplacer au ralentie et vous trouverez la solution et non pas seulement de façon logique et mecanic il faut visualiser comment se comporte le champ magnétique en déplacement et seulement la vous trouverez la solution alors je vous recommande de réfléchir à ce que je vient d'écrire pour construire quelque chose qui se rapproche le plus possible a un générateur et non pas seulement dans la rotation il y a beaucoup d'autre petit détail important pour que cela fonctionne je te l'avait déjà mentionner la rotation n'est qu'un aspect il y a beaucoup plus comme un moteur d'auto sans piston alors ne soit pas déçu l que ton prototype ne fonctionne pas comme tu le souhaitait ce n'est qu'une étape que tu voulait expérimenter et tu a fait un excellent travail jusqu' à présent quelque fois il faut prendre le temps de s'assoir et de réfléchir à ce que l'on fabrique.
En. Up to you to find!... I gave you a lot of clues. I know that you would like to have all the details and the detailed plans but you will have to wait a bit. I won't reveal all the small detail to the rest to the world without the idea being protected and you know that. Count yourself lucky to have the detail I shared. I see people are not yet looking in the right direction of the operation of a generator. Look how a slow motion 3d magnetic field moves and you will find the solution and not only in a logical and mechanical way but it's necessary to visualize how a moving magnetic field behaves and only then you will find the solution. I recommend you think about what I just wrote to build something that comes as close as possible to a generator and not just in the rotation. There's a lot of other little important detail for it to work I've already told you rotation is only one aspect there is much more. Like a car engine without pistons. So don't be disappointed that your prototype doesn't work like you want. It's only a step you wanted experiment and you have done a great job so far. Sometimes you have to take the time to sit down and think about what you are building.
-
Hi Luc,
I don't intend this to show up in the thread, but do you think it's possible that Pierre is maliciously and intentionally wasting your time and the time of other researchers??? The goal would be to have people chasing their tails to prevent them from working on something that might actually work.
I've been following your work for many years and appreciate it very much. Thank you.
Kevin
-
... do you think it's possible that Pierre is maliciously and intentionally wasting your time and the time of other researchers???
The thought crossed my mind too Luc. Certainly Pierre understands the best form of "protection" he could possibly get is to have several functioning replications built by third parties out there in the wild. Unless he is talking about patent protection, in which case he came to the wrong place to begin with.
Of all the people doing this research, I'd really hate to see you get jerked around Luc. You're the least deserving of this form of treatment.
As I said earlier though, you still have a very viable platform to educate yourself and the rest of us with. Work with what you have, it's all anyone could possibly ask.
-
Oui, je suis d'accord que tout est dans le plan, mais pour que ce plan fonctionne dans votre démonstration vidéo, vous auriez besoin de 72 fils provenant de votre stator pour que l'isolation fonctionne avec les relais. À moins que vous ayez les relais d'isolation montés sur le stator lui-même qui n'a clairement pas été fait. Alors, comment pouvez-vous isoler 36 bobines avec seulement 36 fils?
Cordialement
Luc
En. Yes, I agree it's all in the plan but for that plan to work in your video demonstration you would of needed 72 wires coming from your stator for the isolation to work with the relays. Unless you had the isolation relays mounted on the stator itself which was clearly not done. So how can you Isolate 36 coils with only 36 wire?
Regards
Luc
One possibility to have "relays" at/ inside the stator itself is to hide REED-relay tongues iside the stator, driven by the different magnetic fields there.
I'm convinsed that a working OU genny with virtual rotating/ moving fields is possible to konstruct anyhow.
And I think Pierre deserves "protection" if his apparatus really works.
But I also agree to the thought above about "the chasing tail DZ-game".
Regards Arne
-
AC generators, armature reaction:
When an alternator is running at no-load, there will be no current flowing through the armature winding. The flux produced in the air-gap will be only due to the rotor ampere turns. When the alternator is loaded, the three-phase currents will produce a totaling magnetic field in the air-gap. Consequently, the air-gap flux is changed from the no-load condition.
The effect of armature flux on the flux produced by field ampere turns (i. e., rotor ampere turns) is called armature reaction.
Two things are worth noting about the armature reaction in an alternator.Firstly, the armature flux and the flux produced by rotor ampere-turns rotate at the same speed (synchronous speed) in the same direction and, therefore, the two fluxes are fixed in space relative to each other.
Secondly, the modification of flux in the air-gap due to armature flux depends on the magnitude of stator current and on the power factor of the load. It is the load power factor which determines whether the armature flux distorts, opposes or helps the flux produced by rotor ampere-turns.
Full text:
http://www.studyelectrical.com/2014/09/armature-reaction-in-alternator-ac-generator.htmlL192
[/font]
-
Follow Pierre advice this video can illuminate somehow. Thanks for your excellent work Luc and Pierre and everybody else working in this project and sheering.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQyamjPrw-U
-
One possibility to have "relays" at/ inside the stator itself is to hide REED-relay tongues iside the stator, driven by the different magnetic fields there.
I'm convinsed that a working OU genny with virtual rotating/ moving fields is possible to konstruct anyhow.
And I think Pierre deserves "protection" if his apparatus really works.
But I also agree to the thought above about "the chasing tail DZ-game".
Regards Arne
Pas si vous avez des bobine en parallèle à vous de voir la suite
En. Not if you have coils in parallel. It's up to you to see the rest
-
Tout est dans le cablage a moin d'avoir mon plan il vous seras difficile de comprendre mais vous pouvez aussi vous inspirer de ce j'ai donner comme renseignement pour faire votre version rotation et isolation plus les retour de bobine etc,rien ne vous empêche d'être créatif un peut pour construire un dz basé sur le principe il y a plusieurs facon de couper un champ magnétique le principe reste le même il suffit d'améliorer ce que vous avez fait jusqu'à maintenant et que vous savez les problèmes qu'il y a dans la version de Luc pour ma part je vais continuer de construire ma deuxième version qui est totalement différente de mon premier dz autant l'electronic que ma toute nouvelle bobine un stator construit sur mesure pour le dz beaucoup j'améliore ce qui a moin bien fonctionner et vous devriez faire la même chose s'assoir et prendre le temps de réfléchir un peut que que fois cela peut aider un peut ,moi quand il y a quelque qui ne fonctionne pas je ne me compte pas sur personne je tente de règler mon problème en fesant mes recherche pour régler les difficulté que j'ai prener comme exemple il y a deux ans je ne connaissait pas grand chose au champ magnétique (difficile a croire )mais j'ai étudier le phénomène pour comprendre parceque je voulait construire le dz et depuis ce temps je ne cesse d'apprendre de nouvelle chose alors prener le prototype de Luc comme un apprentissage et aller de l'avant et n'ayez pas peur d'innover.
En. Everything is in the wiring!... unless you have my plan it will be difficult to understand but you can also be inspired by the information I gave to make your own rotating isolated version plus the coil return etc. Nothing is stopping you in being a little creative to build a dz based on the principle. There are many ways to cut a magnetic field, the principle remains the same just improve what you've done so far. You know the problems in Luc's version. On my side I'll continue building my second version which is totally different from my first dz, different electronics, a new coil and a custom built stator. I improved what didn't worked so well and you should do the same thing. Sit down and take the time to think it over, sometimes that can help. Me when something doesn't work I don't rely on anyone. I try to solve my problem by doing research. Take for example two years ago, I didn't know much about magnetic fields (hard to believe) but I studied the phenomenon to understand it because I wanted to build the dz and since then I have been learning new things. So take Luc's prototype as an apprenticeship and go ahead and don't be afraid to innovate.
-
regarder ses petit vidéo cela peut peut-être vous aidez, vieux mais intéressant
En. watch his little videos they may help you? Old but interesting
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZjMARe6APs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZjMARe6APs)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FehUCQKKRwo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FehUCQKKRwo)
-
regarder ses petit vidéo cela peut peut-être vous aidez, vieux mais intéressant
En. watch his little videos they may help you? Old but interesting
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZjMARe6APs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZjMARe6APs)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FehUCQKKRwo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FehUCQKKRwo)
Hi Pierre,
In those videos the focus is on moving magnet but not moving magnetic field. Which is main reason why we have electric current generated and completely missed there.
The problem everyone have here is how you are switching coils and generating power and not loosing it in transformation.
In regards to "protection" - the best protection is to open-source. If you are thinking about patenting it will never happen for your benefit and may endager your life.
As it happened countless times before...
-
Hi Pierre,
In those videos the focus is on moving magnet but not moving magnetic field. Which is main reason why we have electric current generated and completely missed there.
The problem everyone have here is how you are switching coils and generating power and not loosing it in transformation.
In regards to "protection" - the best protection is to open-source. If you are thinking about patenting it will never happen for your benefit and may endager your life.
As it happened countless times before...
Pierre makes a mistake thinking that the Patent Office will guarantee him something. He will still have to fight for it only with the corporations. Patents are naive and for the lobby. He will lose his life for this fight. Pierre should talk with other inventors and not with Patent officials. The longer he loses publicity, the more he loses. Time will show for him and others.
-
Pas si vous avez des bobine en parallèle à vous de voir la suite
En. Not if you have coils in parallel. It's up to you to see the rest
Film no. 5 ??? parallel where?
-
Hi Pierre,
In those videos the focus is on moving magnet but not moving magnetic field. Which is main reason why we have electric current generated and completely missed there.
The problem everyone have here is how you are switching coils and generating power and not loosing it in transformation.
In regards to "protection" - the best protection is to open-source. If you are thinking about patenting it will never happen for your benefit and may endager your life.
As it happened countless times before...
Pierre makes a mistake thinking that the Patent Office will guarantee him something. He will still have to fight for it only with the corporations. Patents are naive and for the lobby. He will lose his life for this fight. Pierre should talk with other inventors and not with Patent officials. The longer he loses publicity, the more he loses. Time will show for him and others.
I know that Pierre is not going to go the Patent route.
Please don't start rumors that will derail the topic. Use your time wisely like trying to think of possible wiring configurations using the drawing Pierre provided. Find what works with only 37 wires to create some isolation, some series and some parallel coil connections.
Regards
Luc
-
Hi Luc,
I don't intend this to show up in the thread, but do you think it's possible that Pierre is maliciously and intentionally wasting your time and the time of other researchers??? The goal would be to have people chasing their tails to prevent them from working on something that might actually work.
I've been following your work for many years and appreciate it very much. Thank you.
Kevin
The way in which Pierre is presenting his info and his work on a second device leaves no doubt in my mind he is being honest here and not trying to fool anyone. However as I have seen over several decades those who find something that really appears to be out of the ordinary (as in self running) by human nature tend to want to hold back some of the details. The thought process they have usually involves wanting to get credit for such a spectacular discovery as well as getting money for it. Unfortunately that plan never seems to work out well for inventors unless they have a big corporation they work for or are part of. I've attached (hopefully) 3 documents that I have translated (with Google) to French that are also uploaded here on overunity.com in the download section (in English). This is something I would suggest Pierre read as it is a good history of how things turn out with inventors who find something important depending on what they do with their find.
-
I know that Pierre is not going to go the Patent route.
Please don't start rumors that will derail the topic. Use your time wisely like trying to think of possible wiring configurations using the drawing Pierre provided. Find what works with only 37 wires to create some isolation, some series and some parallel coil connections.
Regards
Luc
I referred to T-1000 and patent practices. This is out of date seems to be.
3xN + 3xS = 6 coils like 1 star = 4wires
6star * 4 wires = 24 wires
12 wires to between coils
=36 wires
-
I referred to T-1000 and patent practices. This is out of date seems to be.
3xN + 3xS = 6 coils like 1 star = 4wires
6star * 4 wires = 24 wires
12 wires to between coils
=36 wires
Excellent work r2fpl
That is exactly the kind of participation help we need.
Can anyone else think of any other wiring configurations that give isolation using only 36 wires?... please post your ideas and I will try them all and report the results.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
-
Dans cet exemple 36 fils suffisent.
En. In this example, 36 wires is enough
-
Dans cet exemple 36 fils suffisent.
En. In this example, 36 wires is enough
Merci de partager vos idées de câblage cheors
Cordialement
Luc
En. Thanks for sharing your wiring ideas cheors
Regards
Luc
-
Désolé, j'ai fait une erreur, il en faut une cinquantaine.
Sorry, i made a mistake, it takes about 50 wires
-
Can anyone else think of any other wiring configurations that give isolation using only 36 wires?... please post your ideas and I will try them all and report the results.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
I forgot original Piere motor windings. So maybe it not correct. But my example of 36 coils and 6 wires.
But my schematic not shows complete isolation coil from each other, if Piere this mean. It only show, that curent not fly in other coils while in one coil is flying direct curent and BACK EMF curent.
-
Luc/Jerdee,
Bias and rotate your coils as I suggested at the end of one of my previous posts:
https://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg522258/#msg522258
Lastly, see what happens if you extend your single North and South poles in your code above to span half of your rotor, so bias coils 1-15 North, 16-30 South and rotate around.
You do not need to modify your stator for this (leave the current 5 slot coil span). No isolation is required either. All your coils remain in series.
The output waveform will not be a perfect sine, but it should give much better results in terms of the amount of power you can get out of the output coil over a load resistor. Use a load of around 250ohms (adjust it to find optimum power transfer). Frequency should be about 30-50Hz and play with the Vdd bias voltage.
PmgR
-
Hello everyone One of the aspect Pierre show in the video reference from yesterday is the idea the piston he was talking for long time is the unbalance system, at the end show the nature do the rest maybe the idea of 37 connection is the right one. I will star working in that direction. Thanks.
-
We have complete individual H-Bridge control. We can do any number of H-Bridges in series or parallel, any direction individually or as a group. 30 pins from MCU. So the number of combinations for switching can be overwhelming. Stator unmodified, coils are still in series 5 slot.
I’d like to report that when you rotate only TWO H-Bridges, Overlap code, N/S, 180º from each other, we can replicate Pierre’s first scope shot. This is nice to see, but nothing special to report on the output yet. I’ll leave this to Luc if he wants to share.
I believe we need to very much consider the effects of armature reaction. Review Pierre’s third video at 12 minutes. Take note of armature position in stator. 30 seconds later you see armature reaction with iron filings. This distorted field is important. The iron filings show the twisting of the field compared to his armature position. ITS LEADING in the direction of rotation.
Everyone needs to watch this part of the video again. Study it carefully.
https://youtu.be/OpL0joqJmqY?t=10m20s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpL0joqJmqY)
The reaction creates a CANCELLATION on the rotor faces. You have a N/S distorted (twisted) field on one rotor face while the other face is S/N as the rotation continues. If not controlled correctly, you basically de-magnetize the armature. THIS WEAKENS THE MAIN FLUX OUTPUT.
Pierre is imitating the mechanical version of an A/C generator as much as he can with his relays. I don't see any modification on Pierre's rotor iron. There are many ways to reduce armature reaction. For example, shaded poles, using leading and trailing pole tips to generate reluctance on opposite ends of rotor face, as well as interpoles to remove distortion. However, I don't see any one of these being done on his device. I’m left thinking about how we can get the magnetic flux on the armature by ADJUSTING THE NEUTRAL PLANE!
I don’t have this answer yet, but wouldn’t isolating the coils in the ROTATING FIELD CREATE A NEUTRAL PLANE? Is the neutral plane simply NO coils in series?
Hope this is all helpful to others.
Jerdee
-
I forgot original Piere motor windings. So maybe it not correct. But my example of 36 coils and 6 wires.
But my schematic not shows complete isolation coil from each other, if Piere this mean. It only show, that curent not fly in other coils while in one coil is flying direct curent and BACK EMF curent.
Interesting wiring configuration MenofFather
Thanks for sharing
Luc
-
We have complete individual H-Bridge control. We can do any number of H-Bridges in series or parallel, any direction individually or as a group. 30 pins from MCU. So the number of combinations for switching can be overwhelming. Stator unmodified, coils are still in series 5 slot.
I’d like to report that when you rotate only TWO H-Bridges, Overlap code, N/S, 180º from each other, we can replicate Pierre’s first scope shot. This is nice to see, but nothing special to report on the output yet. I’ll leave this to Luc if he wants to share.
Jerdee
Jerdee, can you post a schematic of your H-bridge configuration? If you have 30 full H-bridges and each is connected to a single coil (and all coils are in series like Pierre's original schematic), you would need 60 control lines (30 for Vdd half of bridge and 30 for GND half of bridge) if you want to arbitrarily configure any single coil or any coils in series.
You CAN do it with 30 MCU lines if you change your breadboard wiring for the specific configuration you want.
Anyway, when you talk about rotating only TWO H-bridge above, how many coils did you put in series? Same as your previous experiment?
Have you tried putting 15 coils in series as I described in my previous post? You can do this by rotating one full H-bridge. It will still require 30MCU pins to rotate this one H-bridge over 30 positions.
PmgR
-
Hi everyone
Is that a mistake on the drawing Pierre just put up message 1050?
There are two red arrows circled in yellow, and also to the right of that on bottom of circle he has the small black current flow arrows clashing too.
Seems like one of those red arrows should be blue, pointing in other direction, and the current flow small black arrows corrected.....
I think the "parallel" question is that yes he shows 6 coils in series per pole position, but those six coils will be connected in parallel to the other poles of either N or S poles. (the red arrows indicate current input and direction it comes from and these arrows are not showing the NSNSNS poles to be in series)
It is open question (to me at least) if he connects ALL coils at once, or only energizes the N poles, then the S poles independent..... I would think much better to only energize only the S blue or only the N red poles otherwise you will lose a lot right where the poles meet through canceling.
But I don't know whats going on, since I thought this drawing was for an untested idea he had for a new version...
-
Hi Luc
Just to enter my two cents, here is how I think wiring should be for the rotating field in the stator if 6 pole NSNSNS:
I don't think I need drawing it is pretty simple to describe....
Wind BIFILAR wires throughout the pole slots.
One of the two bifilar wires will be power-wind, the other induced "returned-power" wind...
One of the two wires in the bifilar sends in power one way, the other sends in power the opposite direction to switch polarity of the poles very simple.
Wind this bifilar wire around for example pole #1 then stretch it over to pole #5 (in your case with 30 poles) leave those poles (2 3 4) in between the two energized ones (1 an 5) blank for now - later they will be filled up...
Wind both pf these two poles same direction....now you have established a N or a S pole stretching 5 poles long of length, and its all depending on N or S in which way you send in power to the respective bifilar wind. I think so far easy to understand eh?
So now do same thing at 120 degrees so you establish 3 poles....I would think best to connect all three pole sections in series too
Do all this it again but opposite winding direction, for the remaining 3 poles of the eventual NSNSNS 6 pole rotating field.
Connect ALL the poles for example between 1 and 5 poles to ALL the other N un-wound poles....
Do same thing on all the S poles - that is to connect all those un-wound poles together (I would think in series)
So now you have some very powerful "pickup" winds within each pole whenever energized...
For example on that 1 to 5 pole "structure" of winds, you would have two (1 and 5) being energized, and the un-energized bifilar half becomes an induced pickup wind plus you will have all the power created between those two poles 1 and 5 (2 3 4) becoming also induced pickup winds....so tie the poles together like this, now you have lots of power created to fill the caps whenever you energize the poles.
Also stretch a long length of bifilar for all three N poles, and long length for all three S poles so not so many switches needed to send in power, and to switch polarities....so for three N poles at 120 degrees, you would wind a total of six coils,, and a total of 9 pickup coils (plus the induced half of the bifilar)
For the rotating "crawling motion" of the field, you would have to envision the three poles like this: one on, then two on, then one on (like Pierre describes) except now it is not one pole "segment" at a time miving in rotation, (30 times) but the 6 poles being rotated per total rotation....so now faster rotation needing not such fast switching....I would think having the three N poles not pulsed at same time as the S poles would give better power with less cancelling...
-
in attachment a drawing I did awhile back.
This has H switch to switch polarities of poles, instead think of bifilars winds and sending power in one direction of one half of bifilar, and the other half the other direction to switch polarity.
Also this is to energize all 6 poles at once, but maybe better to do only 3 N and then 3 S....
For "induced pickup winds" you would connect: 2, 12, 22 and 3, 13, 23 and 4, 14, 24 for red N poles
then of course 7, 17, 27 and 8, 18, 28 and 9, 19 and 29 for blue
S poles...
-
Hi everyone
Is that a mistake on the drawing Pierre just put up message 1050?
There are two red arrows circled in yellow, and also to the right of that on bottom of circle he has the small black current flow arrows clashing too.
Seems like one of those red arrows should be blue, pointing in other direction, and the current flow small black arrows corrected.....
I think the "parallel" question is that yes he shows 6 coils in series per pole position, but those six coils will be connected in parallel to the other poles of either N or S poles. (the red arrows indicate current input and direction it comes from and these arrows are not showing the NSNSNS poles to be in series)
It is open question (to me at least) if he connects ALL coils at once, or only energizes the N poles, then the S poles independent..... I would think much better to only energize only the S blue or only the N red poles otherwise you will lose a lot right where the poles meet through canceling.
But I don't know whats going on, since I thought this drawing was for an untested idea he had for a new version...
Yes, that's a mistake. Just follow the arrows and Pierre drew some in the wrong direction.
Anyway, I agree with you that Pierre has six coils in series per pole and then six poles in parallel. If you check his first video and his fifth video, this is also what you will find. In these videos, none of his coils are isolated.
I note that this kind of configuration, although the current direction for all of the 6 poles is correct, this is indeed no good for driving the coils. Simulations show this as well. So it is a big mystery how he got a system like that looped...
PmgR
-
Yes, that's a mistake. Just follow the arrows and Pierre drew some in the wrong direction.
Anyway, I agree with you that Pierre has six coils in series per pole and then six poles in parallel. If you check his first video and his fifth video, this is also what you will find. In these videos, none of his coils are isolated.
I note that this kind of configuration, although the current direction for all of the 6 poles is correct, this is indeed no good for driving the coils. Simulations show this as well. So it is a big mystery how he got a system like that looped...
PmgR
Not to me. And I suspect... not to you, really, either.
-
If someone is missing pins, propose to use MCP23017
It is controlled by i2C. Everyone has 16 output.
There is a library for this so the service is easy.
mcp1.digitalWrite (0 ... 16, HIGH);
mcp1..8 * 16 = max 128 output :)
-
In these videos, none of his coils are isolated.
PmgR
Question, if you opened (switched) one location around the 36 or 30 series coils would that give a result of coil Isolation?
See bottom switch in my drawing.
Regards
Luc
-
hi everyone
this is drawing just did showing my bifilar idea how to pulse the stator winds...
I did not do the windings between the energized winds shown but you get the idea how those will all hook up with reds to reds and blues to blues..... however it will be is how they will hook for best "mdoced pickup" output maybe combo of series and parallel
-
Question, if you opened (switched) one location around the 36 or 30 series coils would that give a result of coil Isolation?
See bottom switch in my drawing.
Regards
Luc
No, that doesn't work as you need to rotate the field, so the switch needs to rotate/move as well every time you rotate/move a coil. So it would require a switch like that for every single coil.
PmgR
-
En:
Pierre,
Do we need to think of the three Norths and three Souths as ONLY 3X the FIELD STRENGTH?
I've been thinking about how to create TWO POLE system with rotation of thee times the FIELD STRENGTH. I’m beginning to understand the importance of creating variation and intensity of the rotational field with extra wires on the stator. 36 to 12 wide for you, while 30 to 10 wide for us. Did you solve by creating a TWO pole system with 3 times the field strength?
Very thankful for your help.
Jerdee
Fr. Pierre,
Avons-nous besoin de penser aux trois Nord et aux trois Sud comme SEULEMENT 3X LA FORCE DU CHAMP?
J'ai réfléchi à la façon de créer un système à DEUX PÔLES avec la rotation de thee fois le FIELD STRENGTH. Je commence à comprendre l'importance de créer la variation et l'intensité du champ de rotation avec des fils supplémentaires sur le stator. 36 à 12 de large pour vous, alors que 30 à 10 de large pour nous. Avez-vous résolu en créant un système à deux pôles à partir de 3 fois l'intensité du champ?
Très reconnaissant pour votre aide.
Jerdee
-
Vous pouvez faire seulement un nord et un sud a 10 de large votre champ seras augmenter et oui la variation du champ a une importance
En. You can have only one north and one south of 10 wide, your field will increase and yes the variation of the field is of importance
-
Vous pouvez faire seulement un nord et un sud a 10 de large votre champ seras augmenter et oui la variation du champ a une importance
Hi Pierre,
Do you have any scope screnshot saved from the output coil which you could share with us? Would be interesting to see how the output waves look like.
Thanks!
-
Pierre,
Merci. J'apprends toujours, mais je pense que je commence à comprendre l'importance de l'isolement tout en gardant toutes les bobines en série. Je visualise deux pôles plus grands générés après l'isolement des forces de champ 3X en rotation. C'est votre variation et votre intensité. C'est une embalance brillante et un jeu de chiffres. Je ne vois pas le besoin de plus de Mosfets maintenant, au moins à ce stade. Tout est dans le câblage. Encore à apprendre.
Merci beaucoup pour votre réponse rapide.
Jerdee
En
Pierre,
Thanks. Still learning but think I'm beginning to understand the importance of isolation while keeping all coils in series. I'm visualizing two larger poles generated after isolation of 3X field strengths in rotation. This is your variation and intensity. It's a brilliant embalance and a numbers game . I don't see a need for more Mosfets now, at least at this point. It's all in the wiring. Still learning.
Thank you very much for your quick response.
Jerdee
-
Hi Pierre,
Do you have any scope screnshot saved from the output coil which you could share with us? Would be interesting to see how the output waves look like.
Thanks!
That was shared at the beginning of the topic but here it is again.
There is nothing else available.
Regards
Luc
-
In Reply # 52 of this thread, Luc gives the ORIGINAL code sketch that Pierre said he used in the original apparatus. Here it is again, just as presented in that post, without any alterations:
/*
Blink This example code is in the public domain.
modified 8 May 2014
by Scott Fitzgerald
*/
// the setup function runs once when you press reset or power the board
void setup() {
// initialize digital pin 13 as an output.
pinMode(1, OUTPUT);
pinMode(2, OUTPUT);
pinMode(3, OUTPUT);
pinMode(4, OUTPUT);
pinMode(5, OUTPUT);
pinMode(6, OUTPUT);
pinMode(7,OUTPUT);
pinMode(8, OUTPUT);
pinMode(9, OUTPUT);
pinMode(10, OUTPUT);
pinMode(11, OUTPUT);
pinMode(12, OUTPUT);
pinMode(13, OUTPUT);
pinMode(14,OUTPUT);
pinMode(15, OUTPUT);
pinMode(16, OUTPUT);
pinMode(17, OUTPUT);
pinMode(18, OUTPUT);
pinMode(19, OUTPUT);
pinMode(20, OUTPUT);
pinMode(21, OUTPUT);
pinMode(22, OUTPUT);
pinMode(23,OUTPUT);
pinMode(24, OUTPUT);
pinMode(25, OUTPUT);
pinMode(26, OUTPUT);
pinMode(27, OUTPUT);
pinMode(28, OUTPUT);
pinMode(29, OUTPUT);
pinMode(30,OUTPUT);
pinMode(31, OUTPUT);
pinMode(32, OUTPUT);
pinMode(33, OUTPUT);
pinMode(34, OUTPUT);
pinMode(35,OUTPUT);
pinMode(36, OUTPUT);
pinMode(37, OUTPUT);
}
int x = 0;
// the loop function runs over and over again forever
void loop(){
int y= analogRead(0); // transforme x en une valeur de 0 à 20 (millisecondes)
x= map(y,0,1000 ,1,100);
digitalWrite(1,HIGH), digitalWrite(13,HIGH), digitalWrite(25,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(2,HIGH), digitalWrite(14,HIGH), digitalWrite(26,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(1,LOW), digitalWrite(13,LOW), digitalWrite(25,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(3,HIGH), digitalWrite(15,HIGH), digitalWrite(27,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(2,LOW), digitalWrite(14,LOW), digitalWrite(26,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(4,HIGH), digitalWrite(16,HIGH), digitalWrite(28,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(3,LOW), digitalWrite(15,LOW), digitalWrite(27,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(5,HIGH), digitalWrite(17,HIGH), digitalWrite(29,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(4,LOW), digitalWrite(16,LOW), digitalWrite(28,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(6,HIGH), digitalWrite(18,HIGH), digitalWrite(30,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(5,LOW), digitalWrite(17,LOW), digitalWrite(29,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(7,HIGH), digitalWrite(19,HIGH), digitalWrite(31,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(6,LOW), digitalWrite(18,LOW), digitalWrite(30,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(8,HIGH), digitalWrite(20,HIGH), digitalWrite(32,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(7,LOW), digitalWrite(19,LOW), digitalWrite(31,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(9,HIGH), digitalWrite(21,HIGH), digitalWrite(33,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(8,LOW), digitalWrite(20,LOW), digitalWrite(32,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(10,HIGH), digitalWrite(22,HIGH), digitalWrite(34,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(9,LOW), digitalWrite(21,LOW), digitalWrite(33,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(11,HIGH), digitalWrite(23,HIGH), digitalWrite(35,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(10,LOW), digitalWrite(22,LOW), digitalWrite(34,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(12,HIGH), digitalWrite(24,HIGH), digitalWrite(36,HIGH); // turn the LED on (HIGH is the voltage level)
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(11,LOW), digitalWrite(23,LOW), digitalWrite(35,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
digitalWrite(12,LOW), digitalWrite(24,LOW), digitalWrite(36,LOW); // turn the LED off by making the voltage LOW
delay(x); // wait for a second
}
Now... count the number of delay(x) statements between turning ON a coil and turning that same coil OFF. You will note an irregularity or "Bug" that causes a difference in timing for some groups of coils. THIS IS IMPORTANT.
For example, pins 11, 23 and 35 are turned on, then THREE delay periods go by before these coils are turned off again. But pins 12, 24 and 36 are turned on, then only TWO delay periods go by before these coils are turned off again.
This "glitch" also occurs with the group 1,13,25 which also only gets TWO delay periods of on-time.
Is it deliberate, something Pierre used on purpose? If so, are the current "replicators" also putting in this timing "glitch" in their versions of the programming?
Is it a "bug", a mistake, something Pierre didn't intend? If so... doesn't this glitch screw up the smooth and even transitions that make the "rotary" magnetic field?
I have asked this quite significant question several times and I don't think it has ever been answered. Others, notably pmgr, have also picked up on this timing anomaly. Some of us have written sketches, or modified this sketch, to eliminate the "bug" or "feature" if that's what it is.
By the way, that "scope" shot above is from what I consider to be a toy, a thing with such low bandwidth and with such a low resolution screen that it is truly a pity that it is the only thing Pierre has to work with. A real oscilloscope, even a cheap Hantek USB scope, would be much better.
-
From my experience, the relays hang up and there is a high probability that it was the same with Pierre.
When all work, it is rather certain that one did not work or a few.
The difference in the Arduino code may result from the lack of correct placement last
command line. You can not see it at once.
worked on new relays? I doubt
uses low currents so that the relays do not block? no
problem in the code? does not matter
-
problem in the code? does not matter
Well... I agree that the code problem doesn't matter to the final outcome. :'(
You can not see it at once.
Anybody with the least little bit of Arduino (or C++ or even BASIC) programming experience can see it right away, simply by counting how long each output stays on. It should even show up on "oscilloscope" traces.
-
That was shared at the beginning of the topic but here it is again.
There is nothing else available.
Regards
Luc
Thanks Luc,
In that scope shot the coil switching is shown on ramp-up in positive and ramp-down on negative cycle. One thing I am not sure about - the coming back to neutral point do not have same spike steps. So my question is - what was happening on that part, was there any capacitor in circuit? If it was and the power generation cut-off was happening that would slope with explain weak noise when going back to neutral point.
Maybe Pierre could elaborate on this?
Cheers!
-
Thanks Luc,
In that scope shot the coil switching is shown on ramp-up in positive and ramp-down on negative cycle. One thing I am not sure about - the coming back to neutral point do not have same spike steps. So my question is - what was happening on that part, was there any capacitor in circuit? If it was and the power generation cut-off was happening that would slope with explain weak noise when going back to neutral point.
Maybe Pierre could elaborate on this?
Cheers!
I can elaborate on that.
The toy "scope" does not have the bandwidth or the screen resolution to properly display spikes and squarewave transitions. Had Pierre only shown a single cycle or perhaps a half cycle, you would be able to see a little better what is happening. But spikes are disappearing and/or varying in amplitude and the rectangular pulses are not of constant duration on the screen. Some of the variation in duration MAY be caused by the timing irregularity I have pointed out, IF indeed Pierre used that code to make that scopeshot. Apparent variations in pulse timing can also be due to the low screen and ADC resolution of the "scope" even if the pulses are actually quite regular.
You will get nowhere by overinterpreting a bad display of bad data.
There are ways to work around the limitations of the toy instrument. But without the real cooperation of the person operating the "scope" and the apparatus, it's not going to happen.
-
Pierre,
Hope you are doing well and progress is coming along. I’ve given more thought. You show 6 poles on original stator drawings yet your scope shot shows single phase output.
I’ve recently found a nice video that explains interesting qualities. The presenter breaks down the control for each phase to get single phase output. There are many qualities about this video that are similar to your device.
Watch especially at the 4:24 area.
https://youtu.be/ZAY5JInyHXY (https://youtu.be/ZAY5JInyHXY)
I’m building a foundation on learning AC generator basics with only three phases to control. I know this video is directed towards DC brushless motors, but the presenter shows generator action by applying positive to all three phases at the same time.
This method of control is much simpler.
-You don’t need current in all three phases at the same time. Only two and they are shared.
-You have isolation of each phase. Only one phase is off at a time in rotation.
While the other two phases are opposite polarities.
-You tie all ends of your three phases together on the stator. This is the neutral point.
-Current can now be shared between different phases at the same time. You’ll increase inductance.
I’m seeing a lot of similarities. But again, I’m taking time to learn as much as I can in research at this moment on three phase control.
Jerdee
Fr.
Pierre,
J'espère que vous allez bien et que le progrès avance. J'ai donné plus de réflexion. Vous montrez 6 pôles sur le dessin du stator originaux mais votre scope montre une sortie monophasée.
J'ai récemment trouvé une belle vidéo qui explique des qualités intéressantes. Le présentateur décompose le contrôle de chaque phase pour obtenir une sortie monophasée. Il existe de nombreuses qualités similaires à votre appareil sur cette vidéo.
Regardez surtout à 4:24.
https://youtu.be/ZAY5JInyHXY (https://youtu.be/ZAY5JInyHXY)
Je construis une base sur l'apprentissage des bases du générateur AC avec seulement trois phases à contrôler. Je sais que cette vidéo est dirigée vers les moteurs sans balais à courant continu, mais le présentateur montre l'action du générateur en appliquant positive aux trois phases en même temps.
Cette méthode de contrôle est beaucoup plus simple.
-Vous n'avez pas besoin de courant dans les trois phases en même temps. Seulement deux et ils sont partagés.
-Vous avez l'isolement de chaque phase. Une seule phase est désactivée à la fois en rotation.
Alors que les deux autres phases sont des polarités opposées.
-Vous attachez toutes les extrémités de vos trois phases ensemble sur le stator. C'est le point neutre.
-Current peut maintenant être partagé entre différentes phases en même temps. Vous augmenterez l'inductance.
Je vois beaucoup de similitudes. Mais encore une fois, je prends le temps d'apprendre autant que possible en recherche en ce moment sur le contrôle en trois phases.
Jerdee
-
Je regarde ça se soir et je vous refonnerez des nouvelles
En. I will look at it tonight and then give you an update,
-
En.
Thanks Pierre,
I know you are busy. Just processing research that is very interesting and seams to follows your work, at least at the moment it is very similar.
The method shown allows ONE out of the THREE phases OFF at any one point in time. Each OFF position rotates through all phases. This is the coils RETURN. Or the inductive kick back.
The stator has TWO opposite polarity phases at once, while one phase is off. TWO powered phases is better than ONE. This generates a much stronger magnetic field and transfer of flux to the armature.
Still learning.
Jerdee
____________________
Fr.
Merci Pierre,
Je sais que tu es occupé. Il suffit de traiter la recherche qui est très intéressante et qui suit votre travail, du moins pour le moment, c'est très similaire.
La méthode montrée permet à l'UN des TROIS phases d'être OFF à n'importe quel moment. Chaque position OFF tourne à travers toutes les phases. C'est le retour des bobines. Ou le coup de retour inductif.
Le stator a DEUX phases de polarité opposées à la fois, tandis qu'une phase est OFF. Deux phases ON valent mieux qu'une. Ceci génère un champ magnétique beaucoup plus fort et un transfert du flux aux rotor.
Encore à apprendre.
Jerdee
-
Bonsoir jerdee! Oui ils serait mieux d'avoir un triphasere sauf que le lien que vous avez envoyer parle d'un moteur avec un aimant rotatif bien sûr que vous pouvez faire du courant comme cela sauf que mon principe est inverse c'est le champ du stator qui tourne le fait que j'ai mit 6 champ tournant était simplement pour avoir une fréquence plus élevée parceque les relais ne m'aurait pas donner une fréquence assez élevée en mettant 6 champ tournant j'ai multiplier par 3 la fréquence des relais avoir eu des mosfet comme Luc j'aurait pue me permettre seulement 2 pole et j'aurait pue avoir facilement la fréquence désirée et des résultats probablement supérieur à ce que j'ai obtenue car le champ aurait été 3 fois plus fort que 6 champ
En. Good evening jerdee! Yes. it would be better to have a tri-phase, except the link you posted is about a motor with a rotating magnet. Of course you can make the current like that, except my principle is the reverse. It's the field of the stator that rotate. The 6 rotating fields was just to have a higher frequency because the relays would not give me a high enough frequency. By having 6 rotating fields it multiplies the relay frequency by 3. If I would of had some mosfet's like Luc I could of used only 2 poles and could of easily had the desired frequency and probably better results than I obtained because the field would have been 3 times stronger then 6 fields.
-
Finally got back to the starting point. New bridge boards all working. 5 coil 30slot stator.
25V into super cap bank from current limited switched mode DC supply. Bridge boards connected to this rail via 16A circuit breaker.
Adjusted clock for largest output, using the pot control method.
230V 100W bulb used as load.
60uF cap cleans up and maximizes output waveform.
Rotor covers 6 slots and has original generator 2 x 115V windings (in series)
L192
-
Well done L192. Back to testing again. In case you will need sync with mains... http://www.emergingtechs.org/p/zer.html
-
I should also mention that a test using coils 1-16 (2 poles) resulted in an asymmetric waveform , with less output than the 6 pole arrangement.
This configuration did produce a very large rotational torque which required extra wedging measures to stop the rotor from turning. You would think the A/Turns developed should have resulted in very large induction.
As a random thought, I am wondering if the expected flux reversals are instead flux level variations. Time to put the flux probe in the stator -rotor air gap and confirm what is actually happening.See attached.
Flux appears to bi-polar, as center line on the scope is zero flux.
L192
-
Thanks Pierre,
Yes I’m beginning to understand much better now. A magnet has two poles, which I prefer to call a pole pair. For a generator to work, you must always have each pole (the north and south) 180º apart.
By increasing pole pairs, you can DECREASE your frequency needed to rotate as well as your number of required relays.
60 * freq. / 3 Pole Pairs
Can also be represented as:
2 poles * 60 * freq. / 6 Poles
At 3x freq. You can combine 3 norths into one group, and three souths into one group of coils. This is how I understand your latest posted image.
Referring to my image for each coil group. Tie all same numbered wires together. So 1’s together, 2’s together…etc..
For a 6 pole system (3x freq), you have a 36 stator with a 6 coil span.
For a 30 stator we have 5 coil span to maintain 6 poles (3x freq).
If we convert our system to a 1 pole pair system, you are right, we have a MUCH stronger magnetic field. For a 36 stator, this requires a 18 coil span, while 30 stator requires a 15 coil span for each coil! :) We would need 30 coils at 15 coil span (width). This requires 30 H-Bridges. While on a 36 stator, this requires 36 H-Bridges.
By increasing frequency and poles you decrease your relays/h-bridges but at the risk of lowering your pole strength. That is the lesson I'm learning.
Much appreciate your help. Quite the numbers game as I have mentioned.
Jerdee
Fr. Merci Pierre,
Oui, je commence à mieux comprendre maintenant. Un aimant a deux pôles, que je préfère appeler une paire de pôles. Pour qu'un générateur fonctionne, vous devez toujours avoir chaque pôle (le nord et le sud) à 180º l'un de l'autre.
En augmentant les paires de pôles, vous pouvez DIMINUER votre fréquence nécessaire à la rotation ainsi que votre nombre de relais requis.
60 * fréquence / 3 paires de poteaux
Peut également être représenté comme:
2 pôles * 60 * freq. / 6 pôles
À 3x freq. Vous pouvez combiner 3 nord en un groupe et trois sud en un groupe de spires. C'est ainsi que je comprends votre dernière image postée.
Se référant à mon image pour chaque groupe de bobines. Attachez tous les mêmes fils numérotés ensemble. Donc 1 ensemble, 2 ensemble ... etc.
Pour un système à 6 pôles (3x freq), vous avez un stator de 36 avec une portée de 6 bobines.
Pour un stator de 30 nous avons 5 bobine d'espace pour maintenir 6 pôles (3x freq).
Si nous convertissons notre système en un système à une paire de pôles, vous avez raison, nous avons un champ magnétique BEAUCOUP plus fort. Pour un stator de 36, ceci nécessite une portée de 18 bobines, tandis que 30 stators nécessitent une portée de 15 bobines pour chaque bobine! :) Nous aurions besoin de 30 bobines à 15 bobine d'espace (largeur). Cela nécessite 30 H-ponts. Alors que sur un 36 stator, cela nécessite 36 H-ponts.
En augmentant la fréquence et les pôles, vous diminuez vos relais / ponts h, mais vous risquez de réduire la force de vos pôles. C'est la leçon que j'apprends.
J'apprécie beaucoup votre aide. Tout le jeu des nombres comme je l'ai mentionné.
Jerdee
-
Finally got back to the starting point. New bridge boards all working. 5 coil 30slot stator.
25V into super cap bank from current limited switched mode DC supply. Bridge boards connected to this rail via 16A circuit breaker.
Adjusted clock for largest output, using the pot control method.
230V 100W bulb used as load.
60uF cap cleans up and maximizes output waveform.
Rotor covers 6 slots and has original generator 2 x 115V windings (in series)
L192
You don't elaborate, but going by the filenames of the scopeshots you provided, I see an average INPUT POWER of 432 watts and an average OUTPUT POWER (presumably using the 100W bulb as load) of 6.15 watts.
Is that right?
Hopefully, everybody is beginning to understand much better now.
-
I should also mention that a test using coils 1-16 (2 poles) resulted in an asymmetric waveform , with less output than the 6 pole arrangement.
This configuration did produce a very large rotational torque which required extra wedging measures to stop the rotor from turning. You would think the A/Turns developed should have resulted in very large induction.
As a random thought, I am wondering if the expected flux reversals are instead flux level variations. Time to put the flux probe in the stator -rotor air gap and confirm what is actually happening.See attached.
Flux appears to bi-polar, as center line on the scope is zero flux.
L192
Nicely done. For those not familiar with ratiometric Hall probes we might say that this will give a signal that goes from 0V to 5V, with 2.5 V being the "zero flux" baseline, and lower voltages indicate flux in one direction and higher voltages in the other direction. So just as you say the gap sensor is indicating a sinusoidally varying flux, just as intended.
However.... could you not also achieve this exact same effect with only two stator coils, on opposite ends of the rotor, with two H-bridges and PWM? You probably couldn't get to 60Hz this way using relays but you certainly could with electronic switching.
And I'll bet it would be a lot more efficient than the full version, too.
-
Nicely done. For those not familiar with ratiometric Hall probes we might say that this will give a signal that goes from 0V to 5V, with 2.5 V being the "zero flux" baseline, and lower voltages indicate flux in one direction and higher voltages in the other direction. So just as you say the gap sensor is indicating a sinusoidally varying flux, just as intended.
However.... could you not also achieve this exact same effect with only two stator coils, on opposite ends of the rotor, with two H-bridges and PWM? You probably couldn't get to 60Hz this way using relays but you certainly could with electronic switching.
And I'll bet it would be a lot more efficient than the full version, too.
Only 1 coil + H-BRIDGE
old video: https://youtu.be/bE1ilIot8tU
-
Only 1 coil + H-BRIDGE
old video: https://youtu.be/bE1ilIot8tU (https://youtu.be/bE1ilIot8tU)
Yes, 1 coil produces a much higher output however, it is just flux linkage as per a transformer.
L192
-
You don't elaborate, but going by the filenames of the scopeshots you provided, I see an average INPUT POWER of 432 watts and an average OUTPUT POWER (presumably using the 100W bulb as load) of 6.15 watts.
Is that right?
Hopefully, everybody is beginning to understand much better now.
Yes that is correct.
L192
-
You don't elaborate, but going by the filenames of the scopeshots you provided, I see an average INPUT POWER of 432 watts and an average OUTPUT POWER (presumably using the 100W bulb as load) of 6.15 watts.
Is that right?
Hopefully, everybody is beginning to understand much better now.
https://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/msg518537/#msg518537
-
Nicely done. For those not familiar with ratiometric Hall probes we might say that this will give a signal that goes from 0V to 5V, with 2.5 V being the "zero flux" baseline, and lower voltages indicate flux in one direction and higher voltages in the other direction. So just as you say the gap sensor is indicating a sinusoidally varying flux, just as intended.
However.... could you not also achieve this exact same effect with only two stator coils, on opposite ends of the rotor, with two H-bridges and PWM? You probably couldn't get to 60Hz this way using relays but you certainly could with electronic switching.
And I'll bet it would be a lot more efficient than the full version, too.
Attached are two output scope shots using coils 1-16 so two poles rotating in 30 steps.This is the asymmetric waveform I mentioned.
Notice that at the higher clock rate the current reduces compared to the 6 pole scheme clocked at a much lower rate.
This will be a problem for the higher clock rates required to achieve 50/60Hz. The pulse period is not long enough to achieve maximum current with only 25V. Higher voltages would allow a faster rise time.
In the 6 pole version, each of the 5 series coil groups is providing 35T x 5 coils x 20A =3500 A/Turns, so x 2 between poles =7000 A/Turns. That is a lot of potential flux, which is obviously not being developed due to overlapped coils of opposite polarity.
Irrespective of a missing element (secret), it is difficult to see how the original relay configuration could have developed such output power, with the flux wastage present in this configuration.
L192
-
Yes, 1 coil produces a much higher output however, it is just flux linkage as per a transformer.
L192
A lot depends on the correct work frequency! therefore, combining the coils will also have the same relationship.
-
However.... could you not also achieve this exact same effect with only two stator coils, on opposite ends of the rotor, with two H-bridges and PWM?
Interesting question.
My understanding (or lack thereof) is that the aim is to move (rotate in this instance) the flux lines to "cut" the armature coils, i.e. move the strongest part of the flux through and across as much of the coil as possible.
A two coil configuration would appear to cut in only two spots. If my understanding is indeed correct, then it implies that resolution of the reproduction of the moving flux is crucial, i.e. the higher the resolution, the more movement can be simulated.
Makes me wonder if Nyquist frequency would apply here? i.e. 50Hz would ideally be achieved with 100 coils.
-
What did Pierre mean by the secret element? give your types
I can say that slot filling can be a ferrite powder to increase the inductance of the coil, and it can also be a ferrite magnet powder or it does not mean anything and it is a rubber in the spray.
There is something else else but I am waiting for your opinions.
-
What did Pierre mean by the secret element? give your types
I can say that slot filling can be a ferrite powder to increase the inductance of the coil, and it can also be a ferrite magnet powder or it does not mean anything and it is a rubber in the spray.
There is something else else but I am waiting for your opinions.
No element means feature in this instance, not substance.
I don't know what critical feature is missing.
L192
-
En. ....except the link you posted is about a motor with a rotating magnet. Of course you can make the current like that, except my principle is the reverse. It's the field of the stator that rotate....
And the magnet is stationary???? Is there any case for a magnet inside the fixed rotor coil's core???
-
No element means feature in this instance, not substance.
I don't know what critical feature is missing.
L192
It may be helpful but not critical.
ok. Look first video at 6:30 Do you see something that you have not seen before? because it's not very visible?
-
And the magnet is stationary? ??? Is there any case for a magnet inside the fixed rotor coil's core???
Traditionally we rotate magnet on rotor for creating rotating magnetic field. In Pierre's sentence it was about giving this task to stator electromagnets for doing same job.
Almost like in induciton motor but with switching coils on paralel electromagnets.
And for example, if you can have multiple |electromagnet|electromagnet|electromagnet|electromagnet| (where "|" is core extension to output core) style coils with all of them linking to one output core with coil, the 3D position of N/S poles changes every time you activate 1 then 2 electromagnets at once.
-
Look first video at 6:30 Do you see something that you have not seen before? because it's not very visible?
There is a camera pause (or video edit) that happens between 6:37 and 6:38
-
Thanks T1000.
I don't believe either that this is the missing link. I just mentioned it as the guys above talk about a possible missing element. I am more with L192 opinion.
-
There is a camera pause (or video edit) that happens between 6:37 and 6.38
Sorry, from 6:30-7:10, What have I noticed here?
-
It may be helpful but not critical.
ok. Look first video at 6:30 Do you see something that you have not seen before? because it's not very visible?
No, why don't you just say what it is?
L192
-
yes r2fpl it would be more productive. At exactly 06.30 Pierre's nose is getting in to the picture. Until 7.10, i didn't notice anything newer than before.
By the way. Do you know what this small square thing is? Looks like it is connected across the output. Is it a small bridge for the meter?
-
yes r2fpl it would be more productive. At exactly 06.30 Pierre's nose is getting in to the picture. Until 7.10, i didn't notice anything newer than before.
By the way. Do you know what this small square thing is? Looks like it is connected across the output. Is it a small bridge for the meter?
That's the current monitor toroid for the V/A meter.
L192
-
I wanted someone to see what I noticed to know if this is happening.
Some do not see the moment of insertion? zoom video and tell what you see.
-
I wanted someone to see what I noticed to know if this is happening.
Some do not see the moment of insertion? zoom video and tell what you see.
I don't see anything of significance, so why don't you enlighten us, there is no need to test our powers of observation.
L192
-
At 7:42
It's a tore
-
6:45 when placing the rotor the left side is dragged to the stator. You can see it later once again. Why ?
-
6:45 when placing the rotor the left side is dragged to the stator. You can see it later once again. Why ?
All I see is the rotor picked up and then pushed into the stator.
Where is the dragging?
L192
-
All I see is the rotor picked up and then pushed into the stator.
Where is the dragging?
L192
Maybe you mean what the rotor has trailing behind, which is the line out sockets and the wired in V/A meter?
L192
-
Coil span matches rotor width!!! :)
-
see: https://youtu.be/H61PojGVS4I
-
see: https://youtu.be/H61PojGVS4I (https://youtu.be/H61PojGVS4I)
I see his left thumb against the rotor, what else are we supposed to see?
L192
-
I see his left thumb against the rotor, what else are we supposed to see?
L192
You really do not see the rotor attraction to the stator? maybe this is an illusion.
-
You really do not see the rotor attraction to the stator? maybe this is an illusion.
It is more to do with weight not attraction. Between minute 6 and 7 there is no constant attraction to stator when Pierrie was fitting output core into stator in few attempts.
-
It is more to do with weight not attraction. Between minute 6 and 7 there is no constant attraction to stator when Pierrie was fitting output core into stator in few attempts.
So I ask Pierre if there is a pernament magnet in the rotor or stator?
-
You really do not see the rotor attraction to the stator? maybe this is an illusion.
Doesn't look like attraction to me.
Anyhow I took the PM's out of my rotor as they caused distortion to the waveform.
L192
-
Doesn't look like attraction to me.
Anyhow I took the PM's out of my rotor as they caused distortion to the waveform.
L192
I did not notice the difference with PM and no PM so maybe there is no PM. Maybe.
...
picture: no comment
-
Doesn't look like attraction to me.
Anyhow I took the PM's out of my rotor as they caused distortion to the waveform.
L192
I don't see attraction either. Just see that it's wound as wide as possible and as snug as possible.
-
I can see white wire wobble a bit :P
-
I did not see this.
Although 10A pulses were being returned to the cap bank via the recovery diodes, most of the current to drive the relays was coming from the line supply. So the resistor stayed cold throughout operation. The voltage on the cap bank did not elevate much above the DC supply on the 400V 150uF cap. I just could not clock the relays fast enough to achieve a higher output.
Regards
L192
So actually what I was seeing was not recovery but the 10A pulses were just the lower resistance path through the recovery diodes to recharge the caps from the DC supply, as PmgR explained.
With the half bridges you can see there is very little recovery current back into the cap bank. This is not surprising as no coils really turn off.
Even the last coil that has a current reversal during the progression of the waveform does not develop any recovery current, contrary to what some have speculated.
The only time you do see recovery current is when all coils are turned off (assuming you allow that in the control code).
L192
-
It is not easy to repeat the first time because you have to adjust.
You must find the answer that you are missing in what you did. It is not easy to understand immediately. "Think straight and you will find". I agree with these words. It is a cliché but it is. Do not look for mA search A. The diodes have two functions I think that you already know. When the effect appears, they come to life. Everything will be the same.
It's hard to think about it with what you have on the table because there is too much going on there. Even I do not know how to do it right now. You need a lot of work to continue joining the whole.
I apologize for not showing you the video, but if I showed you, you would know what to do. Do not take offense at me.
It's good that you write about what you do. Maybe you will come by yourself and maybe someone will tell you more. Jardee says that maybe a few people already know. Possible. Certainly there are those who do not write and do.
If you do not find it yourself, Pierre has promised us that he will show and say how it works and how to do it. If more people would be interested in this, it would be stated.
Lenz, I do not think so.
So by now you should be able to show some O.U. results, without showing the specific setup, hence keeping the secret you have discovered.
L192
-
What is this wire?
L192
-
Thanks :)
Here is another video demo focused on the coil return (collapsing field & collecting diodes) which many have been wondering how much power is actually returned from the coils discharges.
I can confirm at the low frequency Pierre was working at, it looks to be less then 10%. So if the diodes return is a big part of the effect we are not getting much from our low inductance 35 turns coils at low frequencies. However, the higher the frequency the more efficient and around 400Hz the scopes (in vs out) current probes measure the coil return to be about 80% of the input power but the output is much less.
Link to video: https://youtu.be/IaWbGIsAT14 (https://youtu.be/IaWbGIsAT14)
Hi Gotoluc,
My setup is almost identical to yours except for more rotor coil turns. No cap on output.
The cap bank is being charged from the power supply and the half bridges are supplied by and recover to the cap bank.
I show virtually no recovery current at any frequency and nor would I expect to, as no coil never really turns off.
At higher frequency, DC input current decreases and output voltage/current also decreases.
This is when running continuous overlap with no off period.
L192
-
while we're asking about wires; whats THIS wire?
Video 1
-
Hi Gotoluc,
See attached test running at 20Hz.
With no coils off, there is no actual recovery current i.e. the waveform stays above the yellow side marker (zero amps).
With all coils off at end of sequence note the current recovery as the spike goes below the zero amps marker.
Unless all the coils turn off in sequence there is not much overall recovery.
I am not sure how you got your result?
Regards
L192
-
while we're asking about wires; whats THIS wire?
Video 1
A good question however, the one I pointed out appears to be connected to the AC input to the FWBR, whereas the other mystery wire is not clear at all.
L192
-
En:
Pierre,
You have mentioned current variation and intensity is needed across the coils. Now that I am beginning to understand coil groupings, the groupings allow more effeciency and less crossing of the fields. They also allow OFF's to have coil return. Again, this is ONLY a rotating magnetic field, nothing more.
I'm now thinking harder about "current variation". I'm left thinking about combining multiple groupings of poles at specific times during rotation to increase inductance? I'm still learning, but combining multiple groups of same poles together in a very specific way while in rotation allow for a variation in inductance. It has to be at the right time to work, time it. But this variation during rotation creates a pumping of inductance as the field rotates.
Hope I am making sense and you are doing well.
Jerdee
Fr.
Pierre,
Vous avez mentionné la variation de courant et l'intensité est nécessaire à travers les bobines. Maintenant que je commence à comprendre les regroupements de bobines, les regroupements permettent plus d'efficacité et moins de franchissement des champs. Ils permettent également à OFF d'avoir le retour de la bobine. Encore une fois, ce n'est qu'un champ magnétique tournant, rien de plus.
Je pense maintenant plus à propos de la "variation actuelle". Je pense à combiner plusieurs groupes de pôles à des moments précis pendant la rotation pour augmenter l'inductance? Je suis encore en train d'apprendre, mais combiner plusieurs groupes de mêmes pôles de manière très spécifique en rotation permet une variation d'inductance. Il doit être au bon moment pour travailler, le temps. Mais cette variation pendant la rotation crée un pompage de l'inductance lorsque le champ tourne.
J'espère que j'ai du sens et que vous allez bien.
Jerdee
-
Oui C'est un ensemble plusieurs facteurs et même moi je suis entrain d'apprendre à améliorer mon premier prototype le but étendant d'améliorer le champ magnétique en plus de tout le reste et je le répète encore la rotation n'est qu' un facteur c'est comme un recette de gâteau il faut avoir les bon ingrédient sinon ce ne seras pas bon
En.
Yes, It's a set of several factors and even me I'm still learning to improve from my first prototype. The goal is extending to improve the magnetic field in addition to everything else.
I repeat, the rotation is only one aspect. Like a cake recipe, you have to have the right ingredient otherwise it will not be good
-
Merci Pierre.
Je comprends. Il y a beaucoup de petites modifications pour bien faire les choses. :)
Pour les autres...
J'espère que j'aide. Consultez l'image pour comprendre la rotation du pôle magnétique dans les groupes.
Jerdee
_____________________
Thanks Pierre.
I understand. It is a lot of little tweaks to get it right. :)
For others...
I hope I'm helping. Review image to understand the magnetic pole rotation in groupings.
Jerdee
-
Hi all,
Just a quick thought after some nights dream. Can that be done on large tape wound toroid?
For example:
1) 4 output coils + 8 driving coils next to each other as first layer and with the length of 20% from output coils.
2) 4 driving coils on the second layer and the starting offset of 20% from the begining of output coils and same length as on first layer.
3) 4 driving coils on the second layer and the starting offset of 40% from the begining of output coils and same length as on first layer.
4) 4 driving coils on the second layer and the starting offset of 60% from the begining of output coils and same length as on first layer.
5) 4 driving coils on the second layer and the starting offset of 80% from the begining of output coils and same length as on first layer.
Each driving coil then can be connected in series for same offset from 4 coils.
Then start switching them in same way in 1-2-1 offset rotation setup.
And there can be more layers with lower offset distance if needed.
Thoughts? Ideas?
Cheers!
-
Plus vos champ sont raprocher et plus vous avez des bobines il seras plus efficace pour simuler le déplacement d'une aimant alors si vous champ sont trop distancer entre chaque pole vous n'aurez pas une bonne simulation d'un déplacement idéalement mais je sais que ce n'est pas possible ce serait de le déplacer de 1 à 2 degrés a la fois comme ça il y aurai un déplacement plus fluide.a coup de 20degrer cela ne seras pas aussi fluide et par conséquence pas aussi efficace. Pierre c.
En. The closer your fields are and the more coils you have the more efficiently you will simulate the movement of a magnet. So if your fields have too much distance between each pole you won't have a good simulation of an ideal displacement. I know it's not possible to move 1 or 2 degrees at a time for a more fluid movement, so with 20 degree jumps it's far from fluid and therefore not as efficient.
Pierre C.
-
"Not possible 1 or 2 degrees" ??
Or "is possible" ???
Mistake or typo?
-
Or "is possible" ???
It most certainly is if you are using analog sine waves as your driving source, regardless of the number of poles.
Recall what Eric Dollard said about 3-phase, it acts just like a mechanical drive shaft.
-
"Not possible 1 or 2 degrees" ??
Or "is possible" ???
Mistake or typo?
Not possible. A 36 slot stator has 10deg accuracy. A 2deg accuracy would require 180slots!
PmgR
-
"A 36 slot stator has 10deg accuracy. A 2deg accuracy would require 180slots!" Surely you mean RESOLUTION; accuracy is not the same as resolution.
-
"A 36 slot stator has 10deg accuracy. A 2deg accuracy would require 180slots!" Surely you mean RESOLUTION; accuracy is not the same as resolution.
True, but Pierre C was referring to "distance" which equates to resolution in that context.
-
PmgR,
In the early days of home built wind generators one technique was to epoxy coils on the outside of a motor lamination stack. This was held stationary inside of a truck brake drum filled with magnets which the blades spun. The point being that any number of coils could be placed on the laminations giving any degree of accuracy. A wound steel toroid could be made the same way with the coils on the inside for this project.
Garry
-
To everyone
First, I would like to wish a Happy Fathers day to all.
Next, the free lab space I have access to had a deadline of this July 1st. I was hopping to have something interesting to demonstrate before then which would of changed this limit but it looks like it would easily take another month or more to explore, experiment other wiring and switching options and time is running out since I'm faced to deal with so many things to leave for that date. So I have to use the next two weeks to work only on getting myself ready to leave.
I will continue moderate and translate for Pierre but that's all I can do for the next 2 to 3 weeks.
Don't know where I'll be going from here but I have had a few invitations which I will explore while living out of my van.
As for the prototype I built, I don't think I'll be bringing it with me since the owner of the lab has invested around $400. in it to buy the 40 Amp H-Bridges and 600v 50A Diodes.
All I can bring with me is the first 30 switches and Arduino that was donated by Partzman.
It's unfortunate the timing is as such since I have many more ideas that need to be experimented with.
I'll resume the research once I find a free place to work on what interests me.
However, the problem with free spaces is the owners expect a certain amount of your time to work on their interests, so it's difficult to keep all this in balanced.
We'll see what the future brings.
Regards
Luc
-
Le mieux serait de 1 à 2 degrés mais je sait que ce n'est pas possible c'est juste pour vous dire que plus est petit votre déplacement meilleur sera la résolution a coup de 50 degrés a la fois vous n'aurez pas un bon rendement si vous simuler un déplacement il faut que entre chaque bobine avoir le plus petit degrés que possible alors si vous prenez un moteur déjà bobiner vous deplacerez votre champ de beaucoup trop de degrés a la fois vous aurez du mal a obtenir quelque chose de fonctionnelles
En. The best would be 1 to 2 degrees but I know that's not possible. I wrote it to inform you that the smaller your displacement the better the resolution will be 50 degrees at a time you will not give a good performance. If you simulate a magnet movement, ideally you would want the smallest degree change between each coil. So if you take an already wound motor you move the fields too many degrees at a time. So you will have difficulty obtain something functional
-
Pierre,
Can you tell if there is a permanent magnet in the device? The amplifier in this way the magnetic field?
-
Non il n'y a aucune aimant permanent le but étant de déplacer un champ magnétique cela aurait été impossible avec des aimant permanente sans avoir un mouvement mecanic le but est justement d'enlever le mouvement mecanic. Pierre c.
En. No, there's no permanent magnet. The goal is to move a magnetic field. It would be impossible with permanent magnet without having a mechanical movement. The goal is to remove the mechanical movement.
Pierre C.
-
Non il n'y a aucune aimant permanent le but étant de déplacer un champ magnétique cela aurait été impossible avec des aimant permanente sans avoir un mouvement mecanic le but est justement d'enlever le mouvement mecanic. Pierre c.
En. No, there's no permanent magnet. The goal is to move a magnetic field. It would be impossible with permanent magnet without having a mechanical movement. The goal is to remove the mechanical movement.
Pierre C.
Thank you for your answer.
Is this similar to this ?
-
Je ne comprend pas votre le principe de votre animation on dirait un transformateur qui flip d'un côté a l'autre cela n'a rien à voir avec le dz générateur qui est de répliquer le déplacement d'un champ magnétique votre animation ne fait que un flip de gauche a droite?
En. I don't understand the principle of your animation. It looks like a transformer that flip from side to the other. This has nothing to do with the DZ generator which replicates the movement of a magnetic field. Your animation does only a flip from left to right?
-
The image in the attachment shows magnet in middle with control coils flipping its closed loop flux from one side to another.
https://youtu.be/no50_5iSr2Y?t=6m42s
I also worked on this idea for few months in my experiments.
The problem this design have is the speed on how magnetic flux changes from one side loop to another. Which is the speed of magnetic domains rotation. The resulting change of flux is too fast to induce any proper current in output coils due very narrow resulting pulses. Which is causing output coils to be in same design as in radio frequency switching. And in practice this type of switching is good for generating nanosecond pulses but not best for power generation.
-
I now understand why 6 fields were initially chosen. Yes, frequency and relay count are important, however there is also another MAJOR reason. It all has to do with learning how a magnet changes in intensity as it rotates in a generator.
When dz generator is done in 2 poles (18:1 ratio) instead of 6 fields (6:1 ratio), you have less crossing of the fields and more resolution.
Stop to think about how a magnet approaches a coil in a generator. It’s not only rotating, but changing intensity as it rotates. Without change in intensity you do not have generator, just a rotating field.
When you vary the intensity of the stator coils as it rotates, you are simulating a magnet’s intensity and variation. Except you don’t need a gas engine.
Now that I have shown you, look at the scope shot and learn to understand where the fields are stronger and weaker. This is not because of the rotor!
There is NO hidden magnet, wires, or any any other crazy magical vortex or theory.
Engineer to treat your stator windings like a rotating magnet and you will be on the right track.
Jerdee
__________
Fr.
Je comprends maintenant pourquoi 6 champs ont été initialement choisis. Oui, la fréquence et le nombre de relais sont importants, mais il y a aussi une autre raison MAJEURE. Tout cela a à voir avec l'apprentissage de la façon dont un aimant change d'intensité lorsqu'il tourne dans un générateur.
Quand le générateur dz est fait en 2 pôles (ratio 18: 1) au lieu de 6 champs (rapport 6: 1), vous avez moins de croisement des champs et plus de résolution.
Arrêtez de penser à la façon dont un aimant s'approche d'une bobine dans un générateur. Ce n'est pas seulement en tournant, mais en changeant l'intensité pendant la rotation. Sans changement d'intensité, vous n'avez pas de générateur, juste un champ tournant.
Lorsque vous faites varier l'intensité des bobines du stator pendant la rotation, vous simulez l'intensité et la variation d'un aimant. Sauf que vous n'avez pas besoin d'un moteur à essence.
Maintenant que je vous ai montré, regardez le plan de tir et apprenez à comprendre où les champs sont plus forts et plus faibles. Ce n'est pas à cause du rotor!
Il n'y a AUCUN aimant caché, fils, ou tout autre vortex ou théorie magique fou.
Ingénieur pour traiter vos enroulements de stator comme un aimant tournant et vous serez sur la bonne voie.
Jerdee
-
I posted an applet some time back showing a vector animation of how the very same in achieved in an induction motor.
I would suggest the switches move the waveform every 20ms (50Hz) 16ms (60Hz) and PWM is applied to a series MOSFET supply the DC rail. The PWM should produce a half sine and is synced to the start of the 20ms period. This will provide amplitude variation of the wave form (sine) from 0V to DC rail max. Every 20ms the whole waveform moves on. The relays or MOSFET switches would only be swiching at a low rate. The PWM is filtered to produce an unbroken half sine. Therefore a pulsating and traveling wave is produced. Not the missing pistons but the missing piston rings.
L192
-
The variation of the magnet field is nothing more than the production of pure sine by changing for each field coil. It is the variability of the magnet and it is 60Hz ?
Is there anything else?
-
The variation of the magnet field is nothing more than the production of pure sine by changing for each field coil. It is the variability of the magnet and it is 60Hz.
Is there anything else?
Maybe the direction of the "flux-lines" ??
Regards Arne
-
In a mechanical generator, you have momentum and twisting of the magnetic fields (opposed fields are generated, armature reaction) This is not increments or steps in momentum, armature reaction, and field intensity. These parameters do not like to be incremented/decremented.
To simulate momentum, you use overlap in the code to never break the fields rotation. Again, its not perfect, there is room for improvement here. I don’t see PWM on each stator coil as the answer, you do not want to shut off the field in rotation. Hold it as it goes around. The answer lies in the wire. If you change the wire as it rotates, and change it in a VERY dramatic way as it rotates (stronger the intensity), you will have something.
I have also shown in my post why the code is not the same through loop. It is not a glitch. When you learn variation, intensity, and momentum of the magnetic field through the wire only, the code now has purpose.
All while this is going on, the opposed generated field from the intensity is always reflected back and captured. You now see why 72 diodes were used instead of 36. I believe there is a better way. I’m not sure on best method moving forward at the moment, but active rectification on coil pairs makes sense to me, at least at this moment.
Remember that the load as generating its own opposed fields for more recovery.
Can anyone of you recommend a proper method for ACTIVE A/C rectification? When coil is North, you recover differently than when coil is in south. The stronger your simulated magnetic field, and load, the stronger your recovery needs to be as well. There are new chips on the market for active rectification, but something tells me there is a simpler method. So if anyone has experience in this area. It would be nice to see help.
Jerdee
________
Fr.
Dans un générateur mécanique, vous avez un momentum et une torsion des champs magnétiques (des champs opposés sont générés, une réaction d'induit) Ce ne sont pas des incréments ou des pas dans l'impulsion, la réaction d'induit et l'intensité du champ. Ces paramètres n'aiment pas être incrémentés / décrémentés.
Pour simuler l'élan, vous utilisez le chevauchement dans le code pour ne jamais casser la rotation des champs. Encore une fois, ce n'est pas parfait, il y a place à amélioration ici. Je ne vois pas PWM sur chaque bobine de stator comme la réponse, vous ne voulez pas fermer le champ en rotation. Tenez-le comme il va autour. La réponse réside dans le fil. Si vous changez le fil pendant qu'il tourne, et le changez d'une manière TRÈS dramatique pendant qu'il tourne (plus fort l'intensité), vous aurez quelque chose.
J'ai également montré dans mon post pourquoi le code n'est pas le même à travers la boucle. Ce n'est pas un problème. Lorsque vous apprenez la variation, l'intensité et l'élan du champ magnétique à travers le fil seulement, le code a maintenant un but.
Pendant tout ce temps, le champ généré opposé de l'intensité est toujours réfléchi et capturé. Vous voyez maintenant pourquoi 72 diodes ont été utilisées au lieu de 36. Je crois qu'il y a un meilleur moyen. Je ne suis pas sûr de la meilleure méthode pour l'instant, mais la rectification active sur les paires de bobines est logique pour moi, du moins en ce moment.
Rappelez-vous que la charge génère ses propres champs opposés pour plus de récupération.
Quelqu'un d'entre vous peut-il recommander une méthode appropriée pour la rectification ACTIVE A / C? Lorsque la bobine est au nord, vous récupérez différemment que lorsque la bobine est au sud. Plus votre champ magnétique simulé et votre charge sont forts, plus votre récupération doit être forte. Il y a de nouvelles puces sur le marché pour la rectification active, mais quelque chose me dit qu'il existe une méthode plus simple. Donc, si quelqu'un a de l'expérience dans ce domaine. Ce serait bien de voir de l'aide.
Jerdee
-
I posted an applet some time back showing a vector animation of how the very same in achieved in an induction motor.
I would suggest the switches move the waveform every 20ms (50Hz) 16ms (60Hz) and PWM is applied to a series MOSFET supply the DC rail. The PWM should produce a half sine and is synced to the start of the 20ms period. This will provide amplitude variation of the wave form (sine) from 0V to DC rail max. Every 20ms the whole waveform moves on. The relays or MOSFET switches would only be swiching at a low rate. The PWM is filtered to produce an unbroken half sine. Therefore a pulsating and traveling wave is produced. Not the missing pistons but the missing piston rings.
L192
Nice thought. Maybe?
How would you recover the field with your idea? The DC rail is your recovery, wouldn't that affect your filtering? How would you keep voltage constant?
There is room for improvement for sure.
Jerdee
-
I don’t see PWM on each stator coil as the answer, you do not want to shut off the field in rotation.
You can control the power of the H bridge through PWM. Do you have other reasons ?
-
You can control the power of the H bridge through PWM. Do you have other reasons ?
No I think are several methods to accomplish this. You may be able to use the bridge enable lines .I was thinking of a single switch between the cap bank and the boards. The supply caps on each board acting as a filter with external diodes recovering to the cap bank. Needs some thought.
Isolate the switch with diode to ensure no recovery back through the MOSFET body diode.
L192
-
You can control the power of the H bridge through PWM. Do you have other reasons ?
The answer is in where the strongest position of each magnet pole is when you introduce paralel same pole magnets. With single magnet it is middle of the magnet diameter. With 2 magnets is on junction position between magnets. Same happen with coils. As soon you do that there is "movement" of magnetic pole. And if you point magnetic pole towards core of the coil it is not same when magnetic pole is matching middle of the coil core and where it "moves" a bit the the side. With air core coils it is also same relative position to the coil wire. If the magnetic field movement happen to cross wire and also is in middle of change polarity from one to another there is induction in the wire. This is required for power generation.
If you just weaken or strengthen the magnetic field density in PWM the resulting change of flux is like in any transformer only.
-
Hi all
From my experience rotating permanent magnets sweeping past coils show very strong magnetic force at the leading edge ( front) and at the magnets trailing edge ( back)
This is where the power is ....at the edges of the magnet.
Also there is no power produced at all if the coil does not have resistive load....and now Lenz law appears too, and it now might take 8 or 10 times more power to be rotating the magnet past than what the coil produces in power...depends on the resistive load a lot. And Airgap and magnet strength size and speed of rotation decide how bad Lenz law braking effect will be.
One way to prevent Lenz law is don't apply direct resistive load to coils instead fill caps-only then have 2nd stage where only caps hit the load for power. Cap size and resistance of load important plus frequency and speed of filling and discharging caps is important
Another way to prevent Lenz law is to not rotate the permanent magnets but rotate a field of electromagnets which is the dz generator more or less.
Hope.some.of this helps a little bit in thinking DZ generator how it works how to simulate sweeping permanent magnets electronically.
One other thing it is possible to chop narrow pulses of the generator coils and fill caps at sinewave peaks
....why fill caps at sinewave decension period... caps will not fill up anymore than what is at peak...
Also the coil can be briefly shorted at peak with fwbr ac side across coil and the dc side of fwbr filling caps....now caps fill much faster and will go x20 or x50 more voltage
...release caps to load by themselves in two stage type output
-
No I think are several methods to accomplish this. You may be able to use the bridge enable lines .I was thinking of a single switch between the cap bank and the boards. The supply caps on each board acting as a filter with external diodes recovering to the cap bank. Needs some thought.
Isolate the switch with diode to ensure no recovery back through the MOSFET body diode.
L192
You can use two additional discreet MOSFETs (one on high side input and one on low side ground connection) with the body diode in reverse direction. So on high side the drain of one of these FETs would be connected to all the drains (Vdd inputs) of the high side H-bridges. On the low side the source of the other FET would be connected to all the sources of the low side H-bridges (GND/sense connection). In that way you have two body diodes in reverse all the time which will prevent any recovery through the body diodes.
PmgR
-
You can use two additional discreet MOSFETs (one on high side input and one on low side ground connection) with the body diode in reverse direction. So on high side the drain of one of these FETs would be connected to all the drains (Vdd inputs) of the high side H-bridges. On the low side the source of the other FET would be connected to all the sources of the low side H-bridges (GND/sense connection). In that way you have two body diodes in reverse all the time which will prevent any recovery through the body diodes.
PmgR
Yes that would work.
Generally.. everybody has different ideas but they should address the fact that Pierre produced a 60Hz sine. He did not do this by switching relays at a high rate as we know this is not possible, so think on how did he accomplish this. I have suggested one way so can anybody think of another?
L192
-
Another way to get to 60Hz:
Pierre's switching frequency of each relay is about 3.75Hz. Consider mixing this signal with itself, it will generate sum and difference frequencies, or 0Hz (DC) and 7.5Hz. Repeat this and eventually you get up to 60Hz: 7.5Hz signal mixed with itself gives 15Hz signal, mix that with itself and it will give 30Hz, mix that with itself and it will give 60Hz (16th harmonic of 3.75Hz)
Now you are thinking what is doing the mixing? Well, read this link:
https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/technical-articles/how-to-multiply-RF-signals-without-a-multiplier-the-switching-mixer/ (https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/technical-articles/how-to-multiply-RF-signals-without-a-multiplier-the-switching-mixer/)
and you will find out that the switches (and all their harmonics) are doing the mixing.
PmgR
-
pmgr
https://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/msg517648/#msg517648
-
Hi all
From my experience rotating permanent magnets sweeping past coils show very strong magnetic force at the leading edge ( front) and at the magnets trailing edge ( back)
This is where the power is ....at the edges of the magnet.
Also there is no power produced at all if the coil does not have resistive load....and now Lenz law appears too, and it now might take 8 or 10 times more power to be rotating the magnet past than what the coil produces in power...depends on the resistive load a lot. And Airgap and magnet strength size and speed of rotation decide how bad Lenz law braking effect will be.
One way to prevent Lenz law is don't apply direct resistive load to coils instead fill caps-only then have 2nd stage where only caps hit the load for power. Cap size and resistance of load important plus frequency and speed of filling and discharging caps is important
Another way to prevent Lenz law is to not rotate the permanent magnets but rotate a field of electromagnets which is the dz generator more or less.
Hope.some.of this helps a little bit in thinking DZ generator how it works how to simulate sweeping permanent magnets electronically.
One other thing it is possible to chop narrow pulses of the generator coils and fill caps at sinewave peaks
....why fill caps at sinewave decension period... caps will not fill up anymore than what is at peak...
Also the coil can be briefly shorted at peak with fwbr ac side across coil and the dc side of fwbr filling caps....now caps fill much faster and will go x20 or x50 more voltage
...release caps to load by themselves in two stage type output
Bravo konehead tu a vue juste tout est la il suffit seulement de répliquer ce que tu mentionne et ce n'est pas si évident à faire mais c'est fesable la preuve est mon premier prototype qui a fonctionner momentanément avant de bruler plusieur relais mais il a fonctionner il suffit de répliquer ce que tu mentionne de façon plus efficace que le premier dz et surtout de façon à ce qu'il puisse résister à long terme et Bingo le tour va être jouer après cela le plus dure va arriver c'est à dire de se battre avec les multinational et les gouvernement qui n'aimerons vraiment pas la perspective de perdre le monopole de l'énergie vous savez sans doute que l'économie mondial est baser sur l'énergie alors j'ai un peut peure de voir les conséquence que cela peut engendrée mais je sait que une telle invention pourras aussi avoir de bon côté élimination de la pollution, central nucléaire, automobile ,du courant pour chaque maison ,aérospatial etc en fait seul l'avenir nous dira ce qui attend le dz générateur. Pierre c.
En. Congratulations konehead, you've just visualized everything! only need to replicate what you mention and it's not so easy to do but it's doable. The proof is my first prototype that ran momentarily before burning several relays but it to worked. Just replicate what you mention in a more efficient way than my first dz. Especially so that it can withstand long run times and Bingo you'll have it. After that, the hardest thing that will happen is to fight the multinationals and governments who really won't like the prospective of losing the energy monopoly. You probably know that the global economy is based on energy. So I fear a little in seeing the consequences this can create but I know that such an invention has a good side, like eliminating pollution, electric nuclear reactors, petrol cars, the electrical grid, wind generators etc. In fact, only the future will tell what awaits the DZ generator. Pierre c.
-
Doug,
How many people here recognize the significance of connecting a loaded full-wave bridge rectifier to an energized (magnetically induced) coil?
When you do this, you change the inductance, but not at the frequency subjected to the inductor, instead at twice the frequency (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e9/Rectification.svg/650px-Rectification.svg.png). And not only that particular inductor, but the ones in proximity to it too. Mean anything yet?
If not, study parametric resonance (http://butikov.faculty.ifmo.ru/ParamSquare.pdf).
Then look at some examples:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgZNd8JA5dQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6j860XSP2fU
There be diodes in them there hills...
-
Doug,
How many people here recognize the significance of connecting a loaded full-wave bridge rectifier to an energized (magnetically induced) coil?
When you do this, you change the inductance, but not at the frequency subjected to the inductor, instead at twice the frequency (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e9/Rectification.svg/650px-Rectification.svg.png). And not only that particular inductor, but the ones in proximity to it too. Mean anything yet?
If not, study parametric resonance (http://butikov.faculty.ifmo.ru/ParamSquare.pdf).
Then look at some examples:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgZNd8JA5dQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgZNd8JA5dQ)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6j860XSP2fU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6j860XSP2fU)
There be diodes in them there hills...
Dog-One,
I am well aware of parametric oscillation. You can look at some of my older posts a few years back. In this particular thread I have mentioned many times that inductance is governed by d(LI)/dt (and not by LdI/dt) and that a power source can be obtained when the inductance L is varied over time.
Why don't you explain how the diodes play into this setup (of course besides the well-known fact that a FWB generates a half wave with double the frequency after rectification with the FWB, assuming no cap).
PmgR
-
pmgr,
You're probably the one that first turned me on to Dr. Butikov's work. So I did some testing and yes, there's power gain to be had using his mechanism. Not sure yet it's exponential gain per cycle, but certainly enough to cover losses if implemented properly. I have more testing still yet to do, but what I've learned so far is that you can indeed fight active switching until you arrive at something pretty sophisticated as Paul Babcock has done, or do things another way, a more simple way, like using a FWBR. Let it do the critical timing needed for parametric resonance while you focus on setting up the correct base resonance.
What it all boils down to is this: There may be more than one way to achieve OverUnity, but whatever solution one picks, adding parametric resonance to the design is bound to be beneficial; maybe even compulsory. So we need to look at how this phenomena can be implemented or how it can be manifested in this particular DZ Gen.
What I'm seeing with the DZ Gen are conditions where multiple coils are active and these coils are in close proximity while being active. Every coil has some self resonant frequency due to the factor it's more than a pure inductor, it has internal capacitance as well. What this means is every coil is a self contained LC tank circuit or resonator. What we know about first order parametric resonance is that a change in inductance at peak amplitude followed by a restoring change back to normal at the zero crossing, twice per cycle, it going to setup the conditions where an amplitude gain is possible. In the DZ Gen we are by design trying to push/pull a magnetic field around a series of coils in a loop with the goal of simulating a rotating magnetic field. But something else is going on here we aren't paying close attention to. These coils are resonators. Yes, we are using relatively low frequencies for switching them on and off, but each coil clearly rings when we open the switch that energized it. The scope-shots are all through this thread to prove it. So then we try to capture this "recovery" energy and recirculate it. And how do we do that? We rectify it. In the process of rectifying this switch-open recovery we do something else, most are completely unaware of. We induce a harmonic back into the coil. This harmonic just happens to be the exact harmonic necessary for setting up the conditions for parametric resonance, or I should say, it can be.
Suppose when we switch off, we actually switch over to a FWBR whose output is shorted. This would create the maximum effect of changing the coil's inductance inline with the parametric conditions. We don't have to do this though. We have some choices here. We can connect the output of the FWBR to the power rail or to a resistor, but when we do this, we create a phase change in the harmonic we induce back into the coil. This video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajycdvKyCEw) will describe what I mean. This phase change can be all over the map; in fact it can be exactly backwards of what is needed for a parametric resonance gain, making it an actual loss in the system. Yes, you an do this, you can use parametric dampening to suck energy right out of the system. So what we need to do is find the proper component to connect to the FWBR, so that the phase is exactly as needed to obtain the full capability of parametric resonance and get the most gain from the coils as possible while we switch them around the stator core. We also need to capture any gains we can get and keep them in the system, either by directly strengthening the magnetic field, or by strengthening the energy available in the power rail so that it can be switched back into the system. It's these gains we use to power the load. Within the system itself we want consumption, because the gains are proportional to the energy being pushed around within the system--the more energy sloshing around, the higher the gains.
Unfortunately, I don't have a working system to demonstrate, so it's likely many of my words will blow away in the wind. What I do have is a direction and some supported mechanisms to get there. Hopefully soon I'll have some techniques figured out that will guide one to the solution. In the meantime, everyone keep up the great work and if something begins to look too complex, build a small test case on your bench and poke at it until you understand it. Then you can move on to bigger and better things.
-
Hi dog one
Ok fwbr a.c. legs across coil
Dc side of fwbr into cap ( such as big caps already pre charged) as in DZ gen
Now two approaches:
Have switch on one of the a.c. legs of fwbr that connects the recovery to caps
Time this switch to have delay time approx 5 degrees retarded
Works like an echo..i call this "active"recovery circuit
"passive" if no switch.on a.c. leg of fwbr.
Delay time longer if low frequency
delay time less if higher frequency...tune delay time to system as it operates.
Power in recovery output now huge as no reflection back to primary plus I will guess actual backemf forces coheree with flyback spikes energy all comes out same direction in dc from fwbr this the lamebrain theory but this really works.
2nd approach is shorting induced or pulsed inductor at peak...
If pulsed this means close switch that shorts out coil just before saturation point.
If induced such as sweeping magnet past coil then close switch to short inductor very briefly at sinewave peak period.
Have fwbr a.c. legs across inductor and dc side to cap only
Discharge cap by itself to load for power....
I suspect DZ generator in its crawling rotation of A AB B sort of
Coil energizing sequence perhaps causes A peak shorting type of event when one coil moves "over" the adjacent coil if polarities reversed maybe does not need to be reversed and get effect from constant movement and two coils being energized at once and remember power in magnets is at the edges and so leading edge has reversed polarity as to trailing edge same with electromagnets maybe overlap of leading "top" edge over trailing "bottom" edge of rotation causes brief coil shorting event if rotation speed and iming is right and so then voltage in super caps rockets up like crazy...maybe backemf inherent forces manifest in coherence too don't know.
Murder of Eugene Mallove vonvinced me 15 years ago dark forces will kill to protect their power with no problem to them to do so
they don't care they don't have to.
-
With parametric resonance and ways to make nuclear reactor from the core while there is simple alternator function going on... That is what I am calling overthinking.
Guys, again, grab magnet, move over coil , see what parameters change is creating current on wire. Then make same with coils. Simplicity have to be here not overcomplication.
Cheers!
-
Hi :)
I am in the process of building my switches and i just received my main switching components (IGBTs).
https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/irg4pc50u.pdf?fileId=5546d462533600a401535644832d22f2
Datasheet mentions that this IGBT is optimized for high operating frequencies 8-40 kHz in hard switching, >200 kHz in resonant mode.
Does that mean that i will have problems if i operate it at lower frequencies in the order of 100-1000Hz?
-
Hi :)
Datasheet mentions that this IGBT is optimized for high operating frequencies 8-40 kHz in hard switching, >200 kHz in resonant mode.
Does that mean that i will have problems if i operate it at lower frequencies in the order of 100-1000Hz?
No. Lower frenquency=less loses.
-
Thanks Menof
Good to see you ;)
-
In a mechanical generator, you have momentum and twisting of the magnetic fields (opposed fields are generated, armature reaction) This is not increments or steps in momentum, armature reaction, and field intensity. These parameters do not like to be incremented/decremented.
To simulate momentum, you use overlap in the code to never break the fields rotation. Again, its not perfect, there is room for improvement here. I don’t see PWM on each stator coil as the answer, you do not want to shut off the field in rotation. Hold it as it goes around. The answer lies in the wire. If you change the wire as it rotates, and change it in a VERY dramatic way as it rotates (stronger the intensity), you will have something.
I have also shown in my post why the code is not the same through loop. It is not a glitch. When you learn variation, intensity, and momentum of the magnetic field through the wire only, the code now has purpose.
All while this is going on, the opposed generated field from the intensity is always reflected back and captured. You now see why 72 diodes were used instead of 36. I believe there is a better way. I’m not sure on best method moving forward at the moment, but active rectification on coil pairs makes sense to me, at least at this moment.
Remember that the load as generating its own opposed fields for more recovery.
Can anyone of you recommend a proper method for ACTIVE A/C rectification? When coil is North, you recover differently than when coil is in south. The stronger your simulated magnetic field, and load, the stronger your recovery needs to be as well. There are new chips on the market for active rectification, but something tells me there is a simpler method. So if anyone has experience in this area. It would be nice to see help.
Jerdee
________
Fr.
Dans un générateur mécanique, vous avez un momentum et une torsion des champs magnétiques (des champs opposés sont générés, une réaction d'induit) Ce ne sont pas des incréments ou des pas dans l'impulsion, la réaction d'induit et l'intensité du champ. Ces paramètres n'aiment pas être incrémentés / décrémentés.
Pour simuler l'élan, vous utilisez le chevauchement dans le code pour ne jamais casser la rotation des champs. Encore une fois, ce n'est pas parfait, il y a place à amélioration ici. Je ne vois pas PWM sur chaque bobine de stator comme la réponse, vous ne voulez pas fermer le champ en rotation. Tenez-le comme il va autour. La réponse réside dans le fil. Si vous changez le fil pendant qu'il tourne, et le changez d'une manière TRÈS dramatique pendant qu'il tourne (plus fort l'intensité), vous aurez quelque chose.
J'ai également montré dans mon post pourquoi le code n'est pas le même à travers la boucle. Ce n'est pas un problème. Lorsque vous apprenez la variation, l'intensité et l'élan du champ magnétique à travers le fil seulement, le code a maintenant un but.
Pendant tout ce temps, le champ généré opposé de l'intensité est toujours réfléchi et capturé. Vous voyez maintenant pourquoi 72 diodes ont été utilisées au lieu de 36. Je crois qu'il y a un meilleur moyen. Je ne suis pas sûr de la meilleure méthode pour l'instant, mais la rectification active sur les paires de bobines est logique pour moi, du moins en ce moment.
Rappelez-vous que la charge génère ses propres champs opposés pour plus de récupération.
Quelqu'un d'entre vous peut-il recommander une méthode appropriée pour la rectification ACTIVE A / C? Lorsque la bobine est au nord, vous récupérez différemment que lorsque la bobine est au sud. Plus votre champ magnétique simulé et votre charge sont forts, plus votre récupération doit être forte. Il y a de nouvelles puces sur le marché pour la rectification active, mais quelque chose me dit qu'il existe une méthode plus simple. Donc, si quelqu'un a de l'expérience dans ce domaine. Ce serait bien de voir de l'aide.
Jerdee
Unless I turn coils off completely I see very little recovery in fact it is only seen into the small caps on the bridge boards not back into the cap bank. Turn coils off so no coils are on then you see 20 % or so recovered into the cap bank. Changing the rotor load makes hardly any difference to recovery only to DC input current.
L192
-
Hi dog one
Ok fwbr a.c. legs across coil
Dc side of fwbr into cap ( such as big caps already pre charged) as in DZ gen
Now two approaches:
Have switch on one of the a.c. legs of fwbr that connects the recovery to caps
Time this switch to have delay time approx 5 degrees retarded
Works like an echo..i call this "active"recovery circuit
"passive" if no switch.on a.c. leg of fwbr.
Delay time longer if low frequency
delay time less if higher frequency...tune delay time to system as it operates.
Power in recovery output now huge as no reflection back to primary plus I will guess actual backemf forces coheree with flyback spikes energy all comes out same direction in dc from fwbr this the lamebrain theory but this really works.
2nd approach is shorting induced or pulsed inductor at peak...
If pulsed this means close switch that shorts out coil just before saturation point.
If induced such as sweeping magnet past coil then close switch to short inductor very briefly at sinewave peak period.
Have fwbr a.c. legs across inductor and dc side to cap only
Discharge cap by itself to load for power....
I suspect DZ generator in its crawling rotation of A AB B sort of
Coil energizing sequence perhaps causes A peak shorting type of event when one coil moves "over" the adjacent coil if polarities reversed maybe does not need to be reversed and get effect from constant movement and two coils being energized at once and remember power in magnets is at the edges and so leading edge has reversed polarity as to trailing edge same with electromagnets maybe overlap of leading "top" edge over trailing "bottom" edge of rotation causes brief coil shorting event if rotation speed and iming is right and so then voltage in super caps rockets up like crazy...maybe backemf inherent forces manifest in coherence too don't know.
Murder of Eugene Mallove vonvinced me 15 years ago dark forces will kill to protect their power with no problem to them to do so
they don't care they don't have to.
Very interesting but how would you accomplish this with the hardware that Pierre was using?
L192
-
With parametric resonance and ways to make nuclear reactor from the core while there is simple alternator function going on... That is what I am calling overthinking.
Guys, again, grab magnet, move over coil , see what parameters change is creating current on wire. Then make same with coils. Simplicity have to be here not overcomplication.
Cheers!
What about offering the simple solution yourself?
Jerdee has said the same thing but I see nothing concrete from either of you!
L192
-
The answer is in where the strongest position of each magnet pole is when you introduce paralel same pole magnets. With single magnet it is middle of the magnet diameter. With 2 magnets is on junction position between magnets. Same happen with coils. As soon you do that there is "movement" of magnetic pole. And if you point magnetic pole towards core of the coil it is not same when magnetic pole is matching middle of the coil core and where it "moves" a bit the the side. With air core coils it is also same relative position to the coil wire. If the magnetic field movement happen to cross wire and also is in middle of change polarity from one to another there is induction in the wire. This is required for power generation.
If you just weaken or strengthen the magnetic field density in PWM the resulting change of flux is like in any transformer only.
Yes you would have a pulsating wave and a traveling wave. Both would flux link as the flux through the rotor does not cut the rotor windings at 90degs. In a generator the static flux from the rotor splits into two paths around the stator and cuts the stator windings at the point of entry into the stator. As the rotor rotated different wires are cut.
There is no equivalent to this using switched coils on the stator as they just produced discrete stepped flux that gives the appearance of movement when looking at rotational force I.e the rotating magnet in place of the rotor but there is no physical movement of flux through space just a series of discrete fluxes at different angles relative to the center of the stator. logically putting coils directly in line with the path of this switched flux would not result in flux cutting just flux linkage.
L192
-
L192, look at the field groupings that I’ve shown. DON’T cross your fields!!! This is why you have no recovery!!! The wiring of your stator needs to be different. Your fields are all locked up with no recovery. Also, use the coil groupings to create the leading/trailing edge of a magnet. This is were I’m going in the research.
@ Konehead, I like your thinking on using switch on a.c. leg of FWBR. I believe you use solid state relays for this. Am I correct? The body diode on our H-bridges will possibly be a problem still. We are using the IBT-2 boards. For a 6 field rotation system. I want to keep it down to 20 H-bridges with the field groupings. This would require 20 MORE switches for the SSR. Keeping MCU pin count down will be tricky. Can you recommend a good SSR? We need the switch to be bidirectional. I have a very high quality bi-directional switch that we can use, however, not 20 of them, and will cost more to build. Hopefully I'm thinking in the right direction. Correct me if I'm wrong.
As for the leading/trailing edge of the magnet. Konehead!!!!You are bang on! BRAVO!!!! If you combine coil groupings in a very specific way you can simulate a leading/trailing edge of a magnet. Run SAME field groups in parallel with SAME OFFSETS to create your leading/trailing edge of a magnet. As the rotation changes from N to S or vs…you still have the leading/trailing edge combination of field groups. Use the field groupings in parallel to create the stronger leading/trailing edge of a magnet.
This is for sure the right direction.
Jerdee
-
L192, look at the field groupings that I’ve shown. DON’T cross your fields!!! This is why you have no recovery!!! The wiring of your stator needs to be different. Your fields are all locked up with no recovery. Also, use the coil groupings to create the leading/trailing edge of a magnet. This is were I’m going in the research.
@ Konehead, I like your thinking on using switch on a.c. leg of FWBR. I believe you use solid state relays for this. Am I correct? The body diode on our H-bridges will possibly be a problem still. We are using the IBT-2 boards. For a 6 field rotation system. I want to keep it down to 20 H-bridges with the field groupings. This would require 20 MORE switches for the SSR. But I'm thinking you can turn all 20 SSR on at the same time. Keep the MCU pin count down. Can you recommend a good SSR? We need the switch to be bidirectional. I have a very high quality bi-directional switch that we can use, however, not 20 of them, and will cost more to build. Hopefully I'm thinking in the right direction. Correct me if I'm wrong.
As for the leading/trailing edge of the magnet. Konehead!!!!You are bang on! BRAVO!!!! If you combine coil groupings in a very specific way you can simulate a leading/trailing edge of a magnet. Run SAME field groups in parallel with SAME OFFSETS to create your leading/trailing edge of a magnet. As the rotation changes from N to S or vs…you still have the leading/trailing edge combination of field groups. Use the field groupings in parallel to create the stronger leading/trailing edge of a magnet.
This is for sure the right direction.
Jerdee
Well my coil scheme is the 5 coil version of the 6 coil version that Pierre described and used. Sure there are overlapping fields N and S just like Pierre had. He never showed us any recovery waveforms but the only way you see appreciable recovery with this scheme is if you turn coils off completely which he shows at the end of his code sequence. I am not so fast to step away from this as Pierre mentioned there is still a missing element. I have seen little effort to find out what this is and now you are wanting to proceed down a developmental path to improve on his original design which nobody yet understands.
L192
-
There is no equivalent to this using switched coils on the stator as they just produced discrete stepped flux that gives the appearance of movement when looking at rotational force I.e the rotating magnet in place of the rotor but there is no physical movement of flux through space just a series of discrete fluxes at different angles relative to the center of the stator. logically putting coils directly in line with the path of this switched flux would not result in flux cutting just flux linkage.
All coils must be have magnetic flux path over same output core just on different angles to the center like the moving magnet usually does. And in case of moving magnet there is flux cutting on the wire in transition from one magnetic pole to another. Also if magnetic pole positon changes position too fast there will be almost no current on the output coil. And when switching from one coil to another you need smoth power down in previous coil and power up in current coil which will slow down magnetic pole position change. One of possible solutions for that is to have capacitor across each coil for this purpose. And have all coils also connected with 3 plate capacitor (2 capacitors in series with center tap) from the power source. Then you can make coil power transition smooth as possible from one coil to another. And obviously it is a bit different approach than everyone are doing Pierre's case.
P.S> Pierre's 3 phase aligment have 1 strong and 1 weak pole facing output core. Which makes perfect sense when you want to have single North or Souh pole going across whole coil. Then changing smothly as possible to opposite pole.
-
All coils must be have magnetic flux path over same output core just on different angles to the center like the moving magnet usually does. And in case of moving magnet there is flux cutting on the wire in transition from one magnetic pole to another.
T-1000 again, as L192 has already mentioned multiple times, there is no flux cutting. Why don't you take another look at the FEMM simulations I did for this device:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVARO4DH8uU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVARO4DH8uU)
All the flux is contained inside of the stator and rotor and the only position where it crosses the air is in the gap between the rotor and the stator. It's a discrete flux cutting scheme.
PmgR
-
.
-
This is just the controller to simulate the magnet "passing" in front the coil.
I will rewind one of the stators that I have.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCReDKa6Fn8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCReDKa6Fn8)
Let's to see the results..
If this were true it would show up in a FEMM simulation.
L192
-
hi Jerdee
For the switched a.c. leg it needs to be bidirectional mosfest for example since it is switvhing ac leg.
Perhaps you could do the delay switching of recovery.over on the dc side.of fwbr now.bidirectional not needed just use single mosfet.
Maybe Pierre does some sort of delayed "echo" recovery circuit through his computer code nobody has picked up on it yet I dont know
SSRs always slow especially heavy amp type but so it is slow just adjust timing to compensate.
The Chinese company Gold makes good SSRs.cheap...460v 40a rated for 16 bucks...20 amp ones about 12 bucks
You can dig out internal mosfet in them and put in your own bidirectional mosfets maybe put 4 in parallel cluster one side another 4 in cluster other side now very low resistance
Can't really beat brush commutators for low resistance switching .
Pierres relays similar as mechanical switching to them so ultra low resistance too...for peak coil shorting very low resistance in switching is required could be reason for success of DZ generator if it does have some sort of coil shorting effect when fields rotate and overlap for a bit of time....
What some people see as cancelling perhaps can be seen as short circuiting of coil and it creates not "nothing at all" but instead hyper ringing effect and this why his caps fill so fast
probably it is something important to mimic permanent magnet field not as N or S blob of magnetism but instead N edge and S edges sweeping across coil one edge leading the other trailing...think of it like small hurricane spinning over coil and sweeping past coil too at same time to make power...
Fact you need resistive load on coil for it to make power might be key as if there is no Lenz law then the power normally sucked into Lenz law braking action can perhaps coheree with output into caps instead and reinforce not kill it.
-
Here is a drawing of the diodes in action that Pierre drew on the back board in one of his videos. You should see why we have to shut off the field in rotation now. Keep the code the same using overlap mode. This also explains why you do not want the coils in series. You want to isolate the field(s) and you can run them in parallel.
-
For the switched a.c. leg it needs to be bidirectional mosfest for example since it is switching ac leg.
I understand the concept of echo, but not fully understanding why you would want to delay the recovery quite yet. It’s not sinking in for me quite yet.
Again, I have nice quality bi-directional FET boards that will do the exact switching we need for one ac leg, however, this will get costly. I would need many of these built. SSR’s was a thought, but can see how they will be too slow.
Perhaps you could do the delay switching of recovery.over on the dc side.of fwbr now.bidirectional not needed just use single mosfet.
Thanks. I think it might be best to do it with two instead on the d.c. side. I like the idea of replacing two of the diodes from FWBR DC side to mosfets instead. A bit cheaper and easier to control. I like your idea and direction with this. You don’t have to deal with dual switching of the DC side, only one polarity uses the normal diodes, but the other polarity requires both FETS to be triggered simultaneously. Active recovery in one direction, not both, and only requires one pin from MCU. Just trying to think about utilizing recovery for both polarities as much as possible when switching ac.
Here is another thought. You could even setup logic gates to trigger FETs in FWBR to be ON in the correct polarity. This would require no more MCU pins. Each field group would have it’s own dedicated logic gate to prevent extra pins from MCU to trigger the FWBR FETs. They only turn on when the field is off and in the correct polarity. You don’t need MCU control for this to happen.
Jerdee
-
I suggest we stick to discussing Pierre's original setup and find out how that setup was possible to work.
1. It had a 4ohm resistor between cap bank and FWB.
2. Relays were driven from FWB, not cap bank (dangerous if the cap bank is low on voltage as it will try to fill the caps through the relays and recovery diodes and will burn the relays)
3. He had 6 poles, NSNSNS, all biased in parallel, no poles in series
4. Original code had everything off at end of every loop
All replications trying to reproduce this setup have failed so far.... question is why.
PmgR
-
Here is another thought. You could even setup logic gates to trigger FETs in FWBR to be ON in the correct polarity.
It's called a synchronous or active rectifier (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_rectification) and is a method to get past the normal diode drop allowing access to much more current. Here's a part you may want to experiment with:
http://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/4320fb.pdf
What I was getting at, it seems you found with the "Diodes In Action". That resonance between the base sine wave and the peaks I believe is your parametric resonance; that's a real gain you can take advantage of. If you have this happening in every coil (resonator), those gains add up pretty quick.
-
Here is a drawing of the diodes in action that Pierre drew on the back board in one of his videos. You should see why we have to shut off the field in rotation now. Keep the code the same using overlap mode. This also explains why you do not want the coils in series. You want to isolate the field(s) and you can run them in parallel.
All very well but Pierre achieved this with his coils in series.
L192
-
HI all
Something is going on we don't know about and have not clued in yet in fact Pierre himself is not sure "how" it works so well - it just does and a fact is a fact...
Jerdee - the delayed timing of when to complete the recovery circuit does "something good" as it goes in this ABCD sequence:
A: only DC pulse to inductor
B: pulse to inductor continues, but now diode recovery connects to load of caps...
C: pulse to inductor turns OFF but diode recovery is still connected (perhaps this allows actual inherent backemf to exit and strengthen power of recovery output is my theory)
D: Diode recovery connection turns off
Something goes on here...like mentioned I think it allows inherent backemf forces to exit inductor instead of lurking and causing backed-up problems it will do "within inductor"
Also you know how if you connect your usual backemf/recoil recovery diode to direct resistive load it just kills the primary DC pulse and amps go up like crazy at primary (so you should fill cap only to prevent this)
Well with this delayed-recovery connection scheme now you can connect recovery diode to loads or very big cap plus in motors, it makes rpms go up dramatic and draw go down.....this when you find just the right timing and delay...There might be something like this going on in DZ generator from the field rotation delaying the recovery to caps via overlapping (but I don't know)
It is a big mystery to me how there can be backemrf/recoil recovery at all if the rotating field does not ever "turn off" ....but then how can you rotate it without turning off coils at some point as the rotation occurs?? Big mystery to me makes no sense....
PMGR:
I agree, lets try and replicate what Pierre did before we go off in assorted directions and hopeless tangents...but problem is its not working, no one is even close to 1600W output....something is going wrong that is for sure could be understanding of the rotation of fields to be like permanent magnet sweep... could be Pierre explaining stuff we get it wrong what he means...he is already building new design so maybe this is clue where we should all be going too but sure would be nice if everything was logical connect this to that do it like this nuts and bolts but it is not is the problem.
Maybe the lack of lenz law (which you get very strong when sweeping permanent magnets) is causing thinking to be backwards how it should go - as resistive load usually kills rotation of permanent magnets, but without lenz braking action, now what and how should everything go and be?
Sorry I don't know but just put in my two cents what I know about generator coils and recovery circuits maybe something I write will click with someone like Jerdee doing the code and we will all prosper from discovery related to my experience...
I am hoping the peak coil shorting stuff happens "all on its own" via the rotation of the field and the overlap period of two coils maybe the coils short go into hyper ring and fill caps like crazy and no one knows including Pierre this is going on and is why his caps fill so quick...
Personally how I think it works is like this:
NSNSNS poles rotating
Each pole spans 6 slots
Slot one winds LHR around first laminate segment, on the 6th laminate segment you wind RHR now an electromagnet is created, with opposite poles at ends, like it should be.
IN BETWEEN (laminate segments 2 3 4 5) now have windings around them and all these become INDUCED PICKUP WINDS and this is where all the "extra power" comes from...
"perhaps" these pickup winds are short-circuited at their peak periods to really blast caps up high and fast either naturally via field rotation doing this, or switched....
Perhaps the energized winds also induce into the rotor, along with the energized segments at both ends and these fields "cohere" and really blast the locked rotor with some good induction...
All this "I don't know" of course...
Also does not make sense exactly how the fields rotate electronically but like permanent magnets would, (seems to be the goal) and does seem to me like someone mentioned recently, it is more of a "linking" of fields what everyone is doing and thinking right now not so much a good simulation of a permanent magnet sweep (but again I don't know sorry)
-
Hi PMRG
REading your last post again, you say there are 6 poles, NSNSNS and they are in parallel....
So am thinking, what are the poles? are they 6 laminate segments per pole in 36 pole stator, and each of those six laminate segments is wound same direction for example NNNNNN within the length of pole for example the N pole of the NSNSNS poles?
I would guess this not the case, and those 6 laminate poles are actually wound NXXXXS or SXXXXN with the Xs representing induced pickup winds....
The adjacent poles would now have N N or S S adjacent polarities, which some say will create cancelling, but maybe this creates a shorted-condition upon field rotation and not a cancellation effect because of the rotation???? Just for that fleeting moment there is overlapping in the A AB B type of movement Pierre mentions. Just thinking sorry!
-
Thinking about the magnetic flux at the end of the magnet and the coils, one would conclude that it could be such a move. Why power the central coils of the rotor.
We would have 2 coils always off and maybe they are the pickups.
-
There is overlap of each N/S pole which creates cancellation and so we know that squeezing 6 poles into either 36 or 30 slot stators is not optimal.
Optimization is the path that Pierre is taking now and his comments relate to his current development and not the first.
Expect no assistance from Pierre in replication, he has no interest in this.
Pierre's more recent posts approving of diverse theories and other configurations are more of a distraction from the replication effort.
L192
-
Konehead,
The way Pierre had his poles/coils configured and biased is as follows:
6 poles each consisting of 6 coils in series. All poles in series (so 36 coils in series together with coil 36 connecting back to coil 1).
He put +Vdd on coil 1, 13, 25 and GND on coil 7, 19, 31. So this effectively puts each pole N/S (consisting of 6 coils in series) in parrallel with the other poles.
This leads to the 6 poles N S N S N S (or nnnnnn ssssss nnnnnn ssssss nnnnnn ssssss) where capital N/S represents a pole and small n/s are the individual coils)
PmgR
-
Pierre montre le champ magnétique avec de la limaiile de fer.
Je me demande pourquoi les particules de poudre de fer tournent à la fois sur elle-mêmes (à la vitesse de commutation des relais: quelques hertz) et très lentement autour du stator en plusieurs dizaines de secondes.
Il semblerait qu'il y a 2 champs très différents !
Pouvez-vous expliquer ce comportement ?
Pierre shows the magnetic field with iron limaiile.
I wonder why the particles of iron powder turn both on themselves (at the switching speed of the relays: a few hertz) and very slowly around the stator in several tens of seconds.
It seems that there are 2 very different fields!
Can you explain this behavior?
-
[quote author = cheors link = topic = # 17653.msg522769 msg522769 date = 1529511237]
Peter shows the magnetic field with iron limaiile.
I wonder why the iron powder particles rotate at the time on her own (the relay switching speed: a few hertz) and very slowly around the stator by several tens of seconds.
It seems that there are 2 very different fields!
Can you explain this behavior?
Peter shows the magnetic field with iron limaiile.
I wonder why the particles of iron powder Both turn it Themselves (at the switching speed of the relays: a few hertz) and very slowly around the stator in Several tens of seconds.
It Seems That There are 2 very different fields!
Can you explain this behavior?
[/quote]
Well my thought is the waveform switching speed is only 16ms however, waveform amplitude varies from 0 to 100% at 60Hz.
L192
-
Pour moi, cela n'explique pas le déplacement lent des particules autour du stator.
For me it doesn't explain the slow particles displacement around the stator.
-
" and very slowly around the stator "
???
-
D'où vient ce 60 Hz?
- pas du déplacement lent des particules (1/10 -1/50 Hz)?
- Pas de la rotation rapide des particules (4-5 Hz)?
- pas de l'ondulation du pont de diodes (120Hz) (si elle existe)?
Qu'est-ce que le fréquencemètre mesure précisément?
Where does this 60 Hz come from ?
- not from the slow particle displacement (1/10 -1/50 Hz) ?
- not from the fast particle rotation (4-5 Hz) ?
- not from the FWB ripple (120Hz) (if it exists) ?
What the frequencemeter is really measuring ?
-
D'où vient ce 60 Hz?
- pas du déplacement lent des particules (1/10 -1/50 Hz)?
- Pas de la rotation rapide des particules (4-5 Hz)?
- pas de l'ondulation du pont de diodes (120Hz) (si elle existe)?
Qu'est-ce que le fréquencemètre mesure précisément?
Where does this 60 Hz come from ?
- not from the slow particle displacement (1/10 -1/50 Hz) ?
- not from the fast particle rotation (4-5 Hz) ?
- not from the FWB ripple (120Hz) (if it exists) ?
What the frequencemeter is really measuring ?
Exactly the correct questions to be asking.
L192
-
Hi Cheors
Probably the iron filings cling to the strong and overlapping harmonics and friction of glass and particles play part in what you see.
You would not expect those iron filings to all latch to field rotation and whirl around in solid ball at 60hz anyways
-
Hi Cheors
Probably the iron filings cling to the strong and overlapping harmonics and friction of glass and particles play part in what you see.
You would not expect those iron filings to all latch to field rotation and whirl around in solid ball at 60hz anyways
When you see the magnet spinner placed in the stator it behaves like the rotor in a reluctance motor stepping with the poles as they rotate at a low rate.
L192
-
Adding to this design if possible, very good work I see here. The addition of magnetic field(s) to the bottom and top of a coil will cause a compression and just like gunpowder it can be directed to do greater things. Are these schematics in the site library?
Video posts look well done.
Been a long time, good seeing so many old timers.
-
Hi L192
The video clip of magnet spinner itnside stator doesn't cast too much doubt to me at least as 6 poles should rotate around 1350 rpm approx and camera distorts how it looks too so not any definitive proof concerning that video segment showing slower than advertised rotation.
What does cast doubt is fact Pierre is not open source, keeps important secrets, and does not encourage or support accurate replications rather encourages people to do their own thing while he himself is doing his own thing with new design.
Maybe this is just the way it should be and will be and will lead to much better more powerful more reliable designs and prototypes of revolving field generators.
-
Hi L192
The video clip of magnet spinner itnside stator doesn't cast too much doubt to me at least as 6 poles should rotate around 1350 rpm approx and camera distorts how it looks too so not any definitive proof concerning that video segment showing slower than advertised rotation.
What does cast doubt is fact Pierre is not open source, keeps important secrets, and does not encourage or support accurate replications rather encourages people to do their own thing while he himself is doing his own thing with new design.
Maybe this is just the way it should be and will be and will lead to much better more powerful more reliable designs and prototypes of revolving field generators.
I don't believe Pierre knows himself why his first prototype worked (this is also what he initially stated; he was looking to the community for help). Not knowing that, it will be a random guess what the outcome of a new prototype will be. What are the chances of hitting the jackpot twice (unless the machine is rigged).... the most scientific and safe thing to do is to rebuild his first machine and figure out why it works (if it really did), then make improvements one step at a time. Many people advised him this, including myself, yet he is choosing to go a different way.
PmgR
-
Bonjour pmgr , oui il est vrai qu 'au début de mes test du dz je je comprenait pas tout sauf que avec un peut de recule et de réflexion je croit que j'ai réussi à pas mal comprendre ce que j'ai construit c'est pour cela que je me suis investie dans un nouveau prototype oui il y a des chose qui n'on pas fonctionner dans mon premier dz mais elle seront améliorer dans la deuxième version et si vous penser que j'ai tricher et bien reflechisser au nombre d'heure et d'argent que cela prend a faire
et demander vous quel serait mon but de dépenser autant d'énergie et de l'argent sur un autre prototype le fait de ne pas dévoiler tout mes secret est le fait que meme si j'aimerais que ce soit open source rien ne peut empecher quiconque ex:une multi national qui on beaucoup de moyen de prendre mon idée et de se l'approprier il y a beaucoup de gens mal intentionner sur la planette alor tant que mon deuxieme prototype ne seras pas terminé testé, confirmer et proteger je vais m'abstenir de tout devoiler mes secret mais je me garde l'option de vous guider dans la bonne direction parfois dite vous que tout ce que je vous lai ecrit était pour vous diriger dans la bonne direction a vous de vous en servir ou pas de mon côté je sait exatement ou je vais et je comprend ce que je fait , le plus que je peut faire pour l'instant est de vous encourager a faire vos experience mais pas plus pour l'intant . Pierre c.
En. Hello pmgr, yes it's true that at the beginning of my DZ tests I did not understand everything, except with a bit of retreat and reflection I think I managed to understand a lot of what I built. That's why I invested in a new prototype. Yes, there are things that don't work in my first dz but I will improve them in the second version . If you think that I cheated, then think carefully of the number of hours and money it takes to build this and ask yourself what would be the point of spending so much time and money on building another prototype?
The fact that I don't reveal all my secret is the fact that even if I would like to open source it, nothing would prevent anyone like a multi national that has a lot of resources to take my idea and claim ownership. There's also many ill intended people in the world. So until my second prototype isn't finished, tested, confirm and protected, I'm going to refrain from revealing all my secrets but I'll keep the option of guiding you in the right direction. Maybe ask yourself if all I wrote was to direct you in the right direction?... it's up to you to use it or not. On my side I know exactly where I'm going and I understand what I do. The most I can do for now is to encourage you to do your experiments but nothing more at this time.
Pierre C.
-
Pierre, please answer: What is responsible for the fact that there is more energy?
-
I don't believe Pierre knows himself why his first prototype worked (this is also what he initially stated; he was looking to the community for help).
Even if he stated this, as a builder i know that there is not even a small chance for that. Pierre knows very well how and why his prototype works. There is no doubt from my part. There is no lack or accidental discoveries on this athlete. Especially when looking at mega-builds like the DZ gen.
-
Hi Jeg
I disagree and think that Pierre did not fully understand how his first DZ generator in videos worked and why it worked so well. He asked for help to understand it better. So give him that in return for making it public demonstration on youtube.
-
yes it has things that I did not understand at the beginning but now I find by myself the answers to my question when I tell you that you have to take the time to take a break and think about it and that's it
-
Hi Jeg
I disagree and think that Pierre did not fully understand how his first DZ generator in videos worked and why it worked so well. He asked for help to understand it better. So give him that in return for making it public demonstration on youtube.
Dear konehead,
even if i answered before reading Pierre's answer, as you see he stated:
"...vous de vous en servir ou pas de mon côté je sait exatement ou je vais et je comprend ce que je fait , .."
which means: ..
"..you use it or not on my side I know exactly where I'm going and I understand what I'm doing,.."
Pierre is a great engineer who knows his device better than what we do, or than what we would like to believe.
Regards
-
Pierre, you certainly did other tests before DZ. What prompted you to a large version, what experiment?
You give us tips but you do not say what is the effect. Are they coils on short circuit?
-
Il n'y a pa de magie ou de résonance ou tout autre chose c'est simplement une aimant qui passe devant une bobine sauf qu'il faut juste replique cette idee corectement la rotation n'est qu'un aspect cherchez dans cettte direction et vous produirer un surplus d'energie
En. There is no magic or resonance or anything else. It's just a magnet that passes in front of a coil, except that you have to replicate this idea properly. Rotation is only one aspect. Look in that direction and you will produce a surplus of energy
-
Il n'y a pa de magie ou de résonance ou tout autre chose c'est simplement une aimant qui passe devant une bobine sauf qu'il faut juste replique cette idee corectement la rotation n'est qu'un aspect cherchez dans cettte direction et vous produirer un surplus d'energie
En. There is no magic or resonance or anything else. It's just a magnet that passes in front of a coil, except that you have to replicate this idea properly. Rotation is only one aspect. Look in that direction and you will produce a surplus of energy
Yep, and I keep repeating myself here about same thing but with coils overlapping it is a bit challenge to everyone for doing that in solid state...
Cheers!
-
Hello Pierre,
Been taking more time to learn about coil return. I believe I have been making it too complicated. This is human nature unfortunately.
Your cap bank is both your source and your return for your coils. I understand that coil return is only one aspect to your design. I understand that you want to recover in both polarities of each field.
When all of your diodes are going to positive cap bank, this leads me think you are using diodes very similar to a “Center tapped full wave rectifier” mode. Fields can be combined, to allow for a center tap and send all diodes back to positive of your cap. You will recovery both polarities in this arrangement. Is this a good direction of thinking?
Thank you for your guidance.
Jerdee
______________________________
Bonjour Pierre,
J'ai pris plus de temps pour en savoir plus sur le retour de la bobine. Je crois que je l'ai rendu trop compliqué. C'est la nature humaine malheureusement.
Votre banque de condensateur est à la fois votre source et votre retour pour vos bobines. Je comprends que le retour de bobine n'est qu'un aspect de votre conception. Je comprends que vous voulez récupérer dans les deux polarités de chaque champ.
Lorsque toutes vos diodes vont aux positif des condensateurs, cela m'amène à penser que vous utilisez des diodes très similaires à un mode "Rectifier à ondes pleines centrées". Les champs peuvent être combinés, pour permettre un tapotement central et renvoyer toutes les diodes au positif de vos condensateur. Vous récupérerez les deux polarités dans cet arrangement.
Est-ce une bonne direction à prendre?
Merci pour vos conseils.
Jerdee
-
Yep, and I keep repreating myself here about same thing but with coils overlapping it is a bit challenge to everyone for doing that in solid state...
Cheers!
T-100, just for test my plan is to build one like that, using 100 volts dc to pulse the coils ( 29 awg wire ). To get the "moving magnet", I will not overlap the coils physically, but in the sequencer.
The sequencer is in the video.
https://youtu.be/nCReDKa6Fn8 (https://youtu.be/nCReDKa6Fn8)
What do you think?
-
A placeholder to mark this special time.
1. With Luc departing... who will be carrying on the definitive work? Jerdee? Where, how, who funds the project?
2. Where does the 60.5 Hz come from? I know, and so do some of you. You've all PROVEN several times over that it cannot be coming from the "DZ Generator" itself. And I'm telling you once again: It is coming from the Quebec electrical grid!
3. What is the moral position of someone who +actually+ has, or had "before the relays burned out" something that could literally save the world, save starving and dying children EVERY DAY.... but who can't be arsed to rebuild the "working" unit and show it to someone who matters, like a UNIVERSITY RESEARCH DEPARTMENT, and instead keeps teasing this community with his dribbles and drops of nothingburger grease.... This is a rhetorical question emphasizing that NOBODY with a heart or conscience would withhold those "secrets".
4. Therefore.... well, some of us can "do the math". You are fluffing the ego of a hoaxer.
Let me remind you that your hero Pierre has published several other videos of "self runners" that were not as he claimed, and once the public attention started getting heavy, he REMOVED those videos and the associated claims. Why? Because they were too easy to prove to be hoaxes. You lot have completely abdicated your critical thinking facilities. Not only is there absolutely no conventional theoretical justification to expect "OU" from such a contraption, you are blindly accepting a YOU TUBE video that makes extraordinary claims, without the least bit of an attempt at independent verification of the YOU TUBE VIDEO claims.
-
Pierre's translation a few posts back:
Il n'y a pa de magie ou de résonance ou tout autre chose c'est simplement une aimant qui passe devant une bobine sauf qu'il faut juste replique cette idee corectement la rotation n'est qu'un aspect cherchez dans cettte direction et vous produirer un surplus d'energie
En. There is no magic or resonance or anything else. It's just a magnet that passes in front of a coil, except that you have to replicate this idea properly. Rotation is only one aspect. Look in that direction and you will produce a surplus of energy
-
Il n'y a pa de magie ou de résonance ou tout autre chose c'est simplement une aimant qui passe devant une bobine sauf qu'il faut juste replique cette idee corectement la rotation n'est qu'un aspect cherchez dans cettte direction et vous produirer un surplus d'energie
En. There is no magic or resonance or anything else. It's just a magnet that passes in front of a coil, except that you have to replicate this idea properly. Rotation is only one aspect. Look in that direction and you will produce a surplus of energy
Thank you for your answer Pierre,
If you can answer: Is this secret a way of accomplishing or rather just a part of the recipe?
Fr. Merci pour votre réponse Pierre,
Si vous pouvez répondre: Est-ce le secret d'accomplir ou plutôt juste une partie de la recette?
-
To Pierre and TinselKoala , all
Tinsel I'm agree with the most from you but the below puzzling me.
Quote: "Where does the 60.5 Hz come from? I know, and so do some of you. It is coming from the Quebec electrical grid!"
Of course Pierres freq-meter is probably not so accurate but the grid in my country mostly is accurate to below + - 0,1Hz. Pierres meter reads a deviation of 0.5 to 0.7 Hz !!
So I put a direct question to Pierre many of us want an explanation to:
How did you achieve 60 Hz from your very slow? magnetic rotation around the stator?
Regards Arne
Pour Pierre et TinselKoala, tous
Tinsel je suis d'accord avec le plus de vous mais le dessous me déroutant.
Citation: «D'où viennent les 60,5 Hz? Je sais, et certains d'entre vous aussi, ça vient du réseau électrique québécois!
Bien sûr, le Freq-mètre de Pierres n'est probablement pas aussi précis mais la grille de mon pays est la plupart du temps précise à moins de + - 0,1Hz. Le compteur Pierres lit une déviation de 0,5 à 0,7 Hz !!
Donc, j'ai posé une question directe à Pierre, beaucoup d'entre nous veulent une explication à:
Comment avez-vous atteint 60 Hz à partir de votre très lente rotation magnétique autour du stator?
Cordialement Arne
-
0.5 to 0.7 is about one percent of the basic 60 Hz value. What are the accuracy specifications of the multimeter Pierre used?
I have a FLUKE 87-iii DMM, which still has a NIST-traceable calibration sticker on it. The accuracy Specification for this high-quality DMM, for Frequency at 60 Hz, is +/- 0.7 percent.
So a Fluke reading that was 0.7 percent high, of a true 60Hz signal, would be 60.42 Hz. And this would still satisfy the Specifications and the NIST-traceable calibration. Pierre's meter, perhaps of somewhat lesser quality (I don't know the model) showing 60.5 Hz.... could very well be reading an actual 60.00 Hz signal.
So I have no trouble at all believing that Pierre's "60.5 Hz" is actually indicating the 60 Hz line frequency, within the limits of accuracy of his meter. Unless proven otherwise, of course.
We have lost the opportunity now, since the unit is no longer operating, of seeing a comparison of the meter reading when we _know_ it is connected to the mains, and the meter reading when it is looking at the "output" of the device. But maybe Pierre will at least condescend to show a measurement of the mains frequency using that meter.
-
To Pierre and TinselKoala , all
Tinsel I'm agree with the most from you but the below puzzling me.
Quote: "Where does the 60.5 Hz come from? I know, and so do some of you. It is coming from the Quebec electrical grid!"
Of course Pierres freq-meter is probably not so accurate but the grid in my country mostly is accurate to below + - 0,1Hz. Pierres meter reads a deviation of 0.5 to 0.7 Hz !!
So I put a direct question to Pierre many of us want an explanation to:
How did you achieve 60 Hz from your very slow? magnetic rotation around the stator?
Regards Arne
Pour Pierre et TinselKoala, tous
Tinsel je suis d'accord avec le plus de vous mais le dessous me déroutant.
Citation: «D'où viennent les 60,5 Hz? Je sais, et certains d'entre vous aussi, ça vient du réseau électrique québécois!
Bien sûr, le Freq-mètre de Pierres n'est probablement pas aussi précis mais la grille de mon pays est la plupart du temps précise à moins de + - 0,1Hz. Le compteur Pierres lit une déviation de 0,5 à 0,7 Hz !!
Donc, j'ai posé une question directe à Pierre, beaucoup d'entre nous veulent une explication à:
Comment avez-vous atteint 60 Hz à partir de votre très lente rotation magnétique autour du stator?
Cordialement Arne
Guys, the cheap frequency meter has already been addressed in the first topic. Pierre admitted it's a cheap meter and may not be reading the correct frequency. So lets not start this over again please. Unfortunately he did not connect it in the grid to see it's real accuracy using a clean 60Hz sine wave.
There's nothing more that will be given. We each decide to try building on our own. Pierre has forced no one, in fact I remember him saying we should not build yet as it's not working to his liking. So let's stop criticize Perre for the choice we made and respect his choices of not going public at this time. Lets give him the 2 to 4 months and see what he comes back with.. But if you alienate him, do you think he will come back?
Regards
Luc
-
What difference does it make if he "comes back" or not? What useful information has he given, since the "relays burned up"?
There's nothing more that will be given.
And what about you, Luc? Are you ever "coming back"?
-
Okay. Let's leave the Hz accuracy.
But
So I put a direct question to Pierre many of us want an explanation to:
How did you achieve 60 Hz from your very slow? magnetic rotation around the stator?
Donc, j'ai posé une question directe à Pierre, beaucoup d'entre nous veulent une explication à:
Comment avez-vous atteint 60 Hz à partir de votre très lente rotation magnétique autour du stator?
Regards Arne
-
What difference does it make if he "comes back" or not? What useful information has he given, since the "relays burned up"?
The difference here is you have nothing invested and only doubts to offer even if you're not 100% sure.
So prove to us (without a doubt) how he was able to power the microwave oven from the uncoupled center coil.
We are reasonable individuals and will listen to a good presentation. However, you know that's not what you've been offering.
And what about you, Luc? Are you ever "coming back"?
I'm still here aren't I ?... I may change location but that doesn't mean I'm giving up. I still love doing research and still have a few more years to go before I pack it in.
Regards
Luc
-
Okay. Let's leave the Hz accuracy.
But
So I put a direct question to Pierre many of us want an explanation to:
How did you achieve 60 Hz from your very slow? magnetic rotation around the stator?
Donc, j'ai posé une question directe à Pierre, beaucoup d'entre nous veulent une explication à:
Comment avez-vous atteint 60 Hz à partir de votre très lente rotation magnétique autour du stator?
Regards Arne
Pierre has just written that he will not give more information until he demonstrates his new device and knows he is protected. Do you seriously think more questions is going to help???
Any more post of this kind from you or anyone else asking for more details will be deleted. Mostly if you have not shown us a built test device.
If you think it is a fake, then provide your indisputable proof.
If you can't then shut up and let's see what comes of it.
Regards
Luc
-
Luc, now you are completely backwards. It is up to the CLAIMANT to provide PROOF that his claims are true. It is NOT the responsibility of the critics like me to provide "proof" that the extraordinary claims, presented without adequate evidence, aren't true!
However, if I had access to Pierre's laboratory and the machine, I am CERTAIN that I could show you that it does NOT work as claimed, and I am just as sure that I could find the "trick" that allows it to _appear_ to run a MW oven and itself.
But nobody will ever have that access. Why not? I know why, and in some deep part of your kind soul that I know is there.... you do too.
So prove to us (without a doubt) how he was able to power the microwave oven from the uncoupled center coil.
Now you are just being silly. Obviously he did NOT power it with the "uncoupled center coil". Even you should know this, as no combination of the wiring schemes and the Arduino code that was presented will result in a 60.5 Hz output from this coil.
-
Luc
Questions forbidden!!
This forum is only dedicated to believers. Or?
And many besides me have put many questions here.
My builds are small and I have showed some of them.
Regards Arne
-
Bonjour a tous,vous voulez savoir comment j'ai fait du 60hz et bien regarder sur la video ou l'arduino il y a un potentiometre installer a droite et bien ce potentiometre servait a ajuster la vitesse de mes relais je me suis baser sur cela avec le frequence meter pour ajuster ma frequence mais comme je l'avait deja mentionner au debut du premier post que je n'etait pas sure de ma lecture a cause des nombreux parasite que j'avait observer avec mon osiloscope jouet comme certaine personne l'on apeller avec cette apareil ma frequence était encore plus élever à 155hz alors j'ai bien vue qu'il y avait un problème en réalité vue ma piètre qualité de mes instrument pour la fréquence il est fort probable que je n'avait pas 60hz mais quand j'ai ajuster le pot je me suis ajuster sur le seul instrument que j'avait car je n'avait rien d'autre a quoi me fier .
En. Hello everyone, you want to know how I achieved 60hz? well watch the video there's a potentiometer installed on the arduino on the right. This potentiometer was used to adjust the speed of my relays. I used it to adjust the frequency using my frequency meter but as I've already mentioned at the beginning of the first topic that I wasn't sure of my reading because of the peak noise seen my TOY (like someone called it) oscilloscope. With this device my frequency was even higher at 155hz, so I realized there was a reality problem with my poor quality instrument. So more then likely the frequency was not 60hz. However, when I adjusted the pot I used the only instrument I had because I had nothing else to trust.
-
The difference here is you have nothing invested and only doubts to offer even if you're not 100% sure.
So prove to us (without a doubt) how he was able to power the microwave oven from the uncoupled center coil.
We are reasonable individuals and will listen to a good presentation. However, you know that's not what you've been offering.
On the contrary. I analyzed the original claimed Arduino code and showed that it does not produce an even switching of all outputs and was written by someone with only rudimentary knowledge of Arduino programming. I tested the code to show that it ran on the Mega. I have examined the rest of the available material closely, and you know I have a _great deal_ of experience in these matters. I have been "offering" you my valuable time and opinions, and I have been "offering" you the right way to go about examining this set of claims. I have "offered" time and money savings, which you have refused and even scorned. In contrast to being "reasonable individuals" you Luc and some of the rest of the people here have gone "all in" for something that you only _hope_ is real but cannot possibly be so, and for which there are many many reasons to believe it is NOT real. This is not the way "reasonable" people approach such matters.
-
Bonjour a tous,vous voulez savoir comment j'ai fait du 60hz et bien regarder sur la video ou l'arduino il y a un potentiometre installer a droite et bien ce potentiometre servait a ajuster la vitesse de mes relais je me suis baser sur cela avec le frequence meter pour ajuster ma frequence mais comme je l'avait deja mentionner au debut du premier post que je n'etait pas sure de ma lecture a cause des nombreux parasite que j'avait observer avec mon osiloscope jouet comme certaine personne l'on apeller avec cette apareil ma frequence était encore plus élever à 155hz alors j'ai bien vue qu'il y avait un problème en réalité vue ma piètre qualité de mes instrument pour la fréquence il est fort probable que je n'avait pas 60hz mais quand j'ai ajuster le pot je me suis ajuster sur le seul instrument que j'avait car je n'avait rien d'autre a quoi me fier .
En. Hello everyone, you want to know how I achieved 60hz? well watch the video there's a potentiometer installed on the arduino on the right. This potentiometer was used to adjust the speed of my relays. I used it to adjust the frequency using my frequency meter but as I've already mentioned at the beginning of the first topic that I wasn't sure of my reading because of the peak noise seen my TOY (like someone called it) oscilloscope. With this device my frequency was even higher at 155hz, so I realized there was a reality problem with my poor quality instrument. So more then likely the frequency was not 60hz. However, when I adjusted the pot I used the only instrument I had because I had nothing else to trust.
So from that it appears that you could have shown it operating at other frequencies depending on the pot setting. But you didn't. Why not?
-
TinselKoala:
I will give you an example: Do you know Kapanadze? you know. Did you find the answer there whether it is true or false? you know it's a scam? probably not. So why do you doubt the Pierre device when for over 10 years you do not know how the Kapanadze device works.
Maybe the device is just as very difficult to reach and easy as you already know.
-
Thank you Pierre.
So your apparatus works obviously as a big frequency multiplier driving your MV-oven on parasites/ overtones.
Merci Pierre.
Donc, votre appareil fonctionne de toute évidence comme un multiplicateur de fréquence élevé conduisant votre four MV sur les parasites / harmoniques.
Cordialement Arne
-
Pierre, if you wish to answer these guys that is your choice. However, one question will lead to another and then another. Then more will come and will justify what they ask for is normal. In no time pages useless justifications will fill up what was a clean and well maintained topic and then all will be diluted.
Over the years I have seen so many inventors get frustrated and to never come back.
It's your choice, I just want to warn you of the possible outcome
Regards
Luc
Fr. Pierre, si tu veux répondre à ces gars-là, c'est ton choix. Cependant, une question mènera à une autre et ensuite à une autre. Ensuite, plus viendra et justifier ce qu'ils demandent est normal. En un rien de temps, les justifications inutiles rempliront ce qui était un sujet propre et bien entretenu et tout sera dilué.
Au fil des ans, j'ai vu tant d'inventeurs frustrés et ne jamais revenir.
C'est ton choix, je veux juste t'avertir du résultat possible
Cordialement
Luc
-
Merci Luc de ton conseil!
-
Luc
Questions forbidden!!
No, questions are not forbidden.
The problem is you are asking a question that has already been asked and answered which wastes the Inventors time and mine to write this. See in Bold below
Bonjour a tous,vous voulez savoir comment j'ai fait du 60hz et bien regarder sur la video ou l'arduino il y a un potentiometre installer a droite et bien ce potentiometre servait a ajuster la vitesse de mes relais je me suis baser sur cela avec le frequence meter pour ajuster ma frequence mais comme je l'avait deja mentionner au debut du premier post que je n'etait pas sure de ma lecture a cause des nombreux parasite que j'avait observer avec mon osiloscope jouet comme certaine personne l'on apeller avec cette apareil ma frequence était encore plus élever à 155hz alors j'ai bien vue qu'il y avait un problème en réalité vue ma piètre qualité de mes instrument pour la fréquence il est fort probable que je n'avait pas 60hz mais quand j'ai ajuster le pot je me suis ajuster sur le seul instrument que j'avait car je n'avait rien d'autre a quoi me fier .
En. Hello everyone, you want to know how I achieved 60hz? well watch the video there's a potentiometer installed on the arduino on the right. This potentiometer was used to adjust the speed of my relays. I used it to adjust the frequency using my frequency meter but as I've already mentioned at the beginning of the first topic that I wasn't sure of my reading because of the peak noise seen my TOY (like someone called it) oscilloscope. With this device my frequency was even higher at 155hz, so I realized there was a reality problem with my poor quality instrument. So more then likely the frequency was not 60hz. However, when I adjusted the pot I used the only instrument I had because I had nothing else to trust.
This forum is only dedicated to believers. Or?
And many besides me have put many questions here.
My builds are small and I have showed some of them.
Regards Arne
So, as you can see you're complaining about something that you did not do and now others have to read this useless information and know you disturbed the inventor for nothing with an old question answered months ago.
That is the reality.
Regards
Luc
-
Pierre il est vraiment agaçant de nous avoir "aguiché" avec ton DZ générateur, de savoir que tu surveilles le forum, que tu veux nous aider, mais pas vraiment, que tu veux protéger ton invention mais on dirait que tu aimerais bien que nous trouvions les secrets que tu caches, ..
Bref difficile de comprendre ce qu'il faut faire.
Comme tu participes au forum, il est normal que nous posions des questions pour essayer d'avancer nous aussi (désolé Luc).
Je ne vois que 2 solutions :
1/ Pierre tu ne réponds plus, ne perds plus ton temps ici et donc construis plus vite ton 2ème appareil que nous attendons impatiemment.
2/ Tu réponds complètement et dévoiles tes secrets. Nous sommes probablement des centaines ici prêts à t'écouter, à répliquer ta technique, en rendant ainsi ta découverte Open source.
Je ne vois pas comment dans ce cas quelqu'un ensuite pourrait déposer un brevet.
Tous les membres du forum seraient des témoins de l'antériorité, de la paternité de ton DZ.
Bien sûr je préférerais le 2/, mais je respecte ton choix.
Bien cordialement.
-
On the contrary. I analyzed the original claimed Arduino code and showed that it does not produce an even switching of all outputs and was written by someone with only rudimentary knowledge of Arduino programming. I tested the code to show that it ran on the Mega. I have examined the rest of the available material closely, and you know I have a _great deal_ of experience in these matters. I have been "offering" you my valuable time and opinions, and I have been "offering" you the right way to go about examining this set of claims. I have "offered" time and money savings, which you have refused and even scorned. In contrast to being "reasonable individuals" you Luc and some of the rest of the people here have gone "all in" for something that you only _hope_ is real but cannot possibly be so, and for which there are many many reasons to believe it is NOT real. This is not the way "reasonable" people approach such matters.
Here, you're trying to show your support and you did do these things but it has a twist to it.
You were looking for flaws to be able to discredit the possibility of this device working as claimed.
However, all you could find is a small glitch in the Arduino program which may not even be a glitch and could of been part of another program sequence removed.
So even though you cannot provide evidence of a fake you decide it's not possible and it cannot work, right?
That may be your science practices but you shoving it down our throats is not your business to do and on top of that without proof. Provide the proof and we will consider it and reward you for it.
Regards
Luc
-
So from that it appears that you could have shown it operating at other frequencies depending on the pot setting. But you didn't. Why not?
You know why!... so why don't you show us where the wire to the 60Hz grid is connected and help us stop this waste of time and money.
Regards
Luc
-
Over the years I have seen so many inventors get frustrated and to never come back.
And how many of those "inventors" actually had the overunity, free energy devices that they claimed to have?
How many _real_ researchers with a real scientific background and valid experience have left, because of the nonsense they often encounter here?
-
TinselKoala:
I will give you an example: Do you know Kapanadze? you know. Did you find the answer there whether it is true or false? you know it's a scam? probably not. So why do you doubt the Pierre device when for over 10 years you do not know how the Kapanadze device works.
Maybe the device is just as very difficult to reach and easy as you already know.
Once again, it is the responsibility of the CLAIMANT to provide uncontestable PROOF that his claims are true.
If you think the Kapa devices are real, can you explain why the Russian military hasn't confiscated them, locked Kapa up in some secret laboratory, and gone on to invade all of Georgia (again)?
All you people who believe in "suppression" have a really hard time squaring up the fact that Kapa hasn't been suppressed, yet you believe he has solved the problem. How many kids in Georgia are going to sleep hungry tonight, I wonder?
-
And how many of those "inventors" actually had the overunity, free energy devices that they claimed to have?
How many _real_ researchers with a real scientific background and valid experience have left, because of the nonsense they often encounter here?
Chances are none of them had a real overunity device. But we'll never know with them gone! right?
Is that what you want to happen here again?
Use your time to find how it was faked. That would be considered a contribution.
Okay, last post about this discussion. Back on topic or get deleted.
Regards
Luc
-
Hi Luc
Can you block tinselkoala and delete his.posts too would be good idea as well. He thinks he is last word the judge and executioner his condescending insults and willingness to engage you or Pierre in endless arguments is going to ruin all that is good and productive here.
-
T-100, just for test my plan is to build one like that, using 100 volts dc to pulse the coils ( 29 awg wire ). To get the "moving magnet", I will not overlap the coils physically, but in the sequencer.
The sequencer is in the video.
https://youtu.be/nCReDKa6Fn8 (https://youtu.be/nCReDKa6Fn8)
What do you think?
Something like that. For a test I would just do on selenoid with switching coils in each layer to achieve moving magnet simulation like in picture attached.
Cheers!
-
Hi Luc
Can you block tinselkoala and delete his.posts too would be good idea as well. He thinks he is last word the judge and executioner his condescending insults and willingness to engage you or Pierre in endless arguments is going to ruin all that is good and productive here.
Hi Doug,
My moderator privileges are limited. I can't block anyone or put them under moderation. The only thing I can do is delete or edit posts in 3 different categories including this one.
Today I already deleted 3 or 4 of TinselKoala's posts that were not needed and or appropriate to the topic. I think the rest is fine since it sets the tone that we are open minded and if anyone else wants to challenge the device as a fake they better present their proof of how they came to the conclusion.
I'm quite sure the disturbances will stop as I have yet to see anything that proves deliberate deception.
Regards
Luc
-
Giving Pierre the benefit of doubt .. It is pointless asking Pierre to explain the 60Hz, as the explanation would reveal his secret.
I don't think we have exhausted the search for the missing element that results in 60Hz operation yet, so I am reluctant to call this a fraud.
On the other hand... The extra wire I pointed out on the AC side of the FWBR, that seems to go under the FWBR, still needs explanation.
Obviously this effort is not for anybody that doesn't have the time and money to invest.
I see nothing wrong with scientific analysis or substantiated challenge to theories put forward on this thread.
L192
-
Giving Pierre the benefit of doubt .. It is pointless asking Pierre to explain the 60Hz, as the explanation would reveal his secret.
I don't think we have exhausted the search for the missing element that results in 60Hz operation yet, so I am reluctant to call this a fraud.
On the other hand... The extra wire I pointed out on the AC side of the FWBR, that seems to go under the FWBR, still needs explanation.
Obviously this effort is not for anybody that doesn't have the time and money to invest.
I see nothing wrong with scientific analysis or substantiated challenge to theories put forward on this thread.
L192
Here is your piece of wire. Where's the trick with him? I can not see him in other films.
First video.
-
Here is your piece of wire. Where's the trick with him? I can not see him in other films.
I had not seen that view before. Yes it looks like a loose piece of wire.So I guess that takes care of that question.
L192
-
Something like that. For a test I would just do on selenoid with switching coils in each layer to achieve moving magnet simulation like in picture attached.
Cheers!
I do not understand why spin the field?
The same can be obtained by changing the intensity of the field. So we do not change the polarization only the intensity of the field as in the movement of the magnet. Two coils as in the drawing will suffice. The current is never switched off but only increased and decreased. Is there any profit then?
-
Hi all
My friend Gary Porter just tested his version of DZ generator, and like everyone else so far he got measly voltage and power out of the locked rotor windings.
He thinks why this is so. Is because the rotating field windings do not cut through the locked rotor windings as they should at
90 degrees. Something to think about and correct somehow.
R2flp:
That is really good idea the two coils each end varying their intensity in place of field rotation.
Perhaps have one end coil be much stronger than the other, and then flip it have other end much stronger...
Have one pushing through while other pulls and try to get the pulsed flux to travel full length through fixed coil in middle.
Also perhaps just energize end coils just at rim and edge of fixed middle coil create a sort of tube of alternating flux that.moves back and forth around the fixed middle coil...
Anyways really good idea..maybe Pierre is doing something like this each step of rotation too...
To all:
Perhaps a simulation of Lenz law forces is needed in the pulsing scheme....some sort of resistance to the flow.of rotation because without resistive load in rotating generators you will make zero power and so that is what people get so far...maybe this Lenz law simulation could be brief bucking event after every step or every pulse not sure just thinking whatever this could be
Could be the polaritynoverlap of the steps in rotation could be pulse polarity reversal could be both or something else
-
Here is your piece of wire. Where's the trick with him? I can not see him in other films.
First video.
tu ne peut pas le voir car c'est juste un morceau de plomb pour souder mes circuit que j'ai due oublier sur la table et qui c'est ramasser a cette endroit
En. you can not see it because it's just a piece of solder wire I use for soldering my circuit that I forgot to pickup on the table.
-
Bonjour à tous,
j'ai passé beaucoup de temps sur ce projet sans aucun résultat positif!ma conclusion est en toute logique ,une conviction que le DZ Gen n'a pas la preuve de son fonctionnement .
plus précisément il n'y a simplement pas de relation entre la source (voltage dans les Super cap) et le voltage afficher sur le V/A de sortie qui reste constant à 139V alors que la tension d'entrée varie entre 19,2V à 24,2V (dv=5V) .
cordialement Mosha.
EN:Hello everyone, I spent a lot of time on this project without any positive result! my conclusion is logically, a belief that the DZ Gen does not have proof of its operation. more precisely there is simply no relationship between the source (voltage in the super cap) and the voltage display on the V / A output which remains constant at 139V while the input voltage varies between 19.2V to 24.2V (dv = 5V).
-
Bonjour à tous,
j'ai passé beaucoup de temps sur ce projet sans aucun résultat positif!ma conclusion est en toute logique ,une conviction que le DZ Gen n'a pas la preuve de son fonctionnement .
plus précisément il n'y a simplement pas de relation entre la source (voltage dans les Super cap) et le voltage afficher sur le V/A de sortie qui reste constant à 139V alors que la tension d'entrée varie entre 19,2V à 24,2V (dv=5V) .
cordialement Mosha.
EN:Hello everyone, I spent a lot of time on this project without any positive result! my conclusion is logically, a belief that the DZ Gen does not have proof of its operation. more precisely there is simply no relationship between the source (voltage in the super cap) and the voltage display on the V / A output which remains constant at 139V while the input voltage varies between 19.2V to 24.2V (dv = 5V).
Maybe you need more time. I also spend a lot of time and money, but I know that once you learn it will be easy and you will wonder why others have a problem with it. As with everything in life.
A great mystery where this power comes from. What does he do. It seems that it has a big relationship as it is not the only one with back-emf.
When the coils are always on, there is no back-emf, this is a good direction. So change the intensity and maybe it will not be back-emf. I do not know, I have not tried it yet. Maybe someone would do a simulation in FEMM.
-
Maybe you need more time. I also spend a lot of time and money, but I know that once you learn it will be easy and you will wonder why others have a problem with it. As with everything in life.
A great mystery where this power comes from. What does he do. It seems that it has a big relationship as it is not the only one with back-emf.
When the coils are always on, there is no back-emf, this is a good direction. So change the intensity and maybe it will not be back-emf. I do not know, I have not tried it yet. Maybe someone would do a simulation in FEMM.
j'ai oublier de préciser que le générateur est non charger pour les tensions dont je donne un exemple ,il n'est donc pas question de back=emf dans ce cas ci .cordilement Mosha.
EN:I forgot to specify that the generator is not loaded for the voltages which I give an example, so there is no question of back = emf in this case.
-
Hi all
My friend Gary Porter just tested his version of DZ generator, and like everyone else so far he got measly voltage and power out of the locked rotor windings.
He thinks why this is so. Is because the rotating field windings do not cut through the locked rotor windings as they should at
90 degrees. Something to think about and correct somehow.
R2flp:
That is really good idea the two coils each end varying their intensity in place of field rotation.
Perhaps have one end coil be much stronger than the other, and then flip it have other end much stronger...
Have one pushing through while other pulls and try to get the pulsed flux to travel full length through fixed coil in middle.
Also perhaps just energize end coils just at rim and edge of fixed middle coil create a sort of tube of alternating flux that.moves back and forth around the fixed middle coil...
Anyways really good idea..maybe Pierre is doing something like this each step of rotation too...
To all:
Perhaps a simulation of Lenz law forces is needed in the pulsing scheme....some sort of resistance to the flow.of rotation because without resistive load in rotating generators you will make zero power and so that is what people get so far...maybe this Lenz law simulation could be brief bucking event after every step or every pulse not sure just thinking whatever this could be
Could be the polaritynoverlap of the steps in rotation could be pulse polarity reversal could be both or something else
That's flux cutting he is talking about. which is not possible with this geometry. Discretely switched fluxes do not move through space and so they can only flux link.
L192
-
That's flux cutting he is talking about. which is not possible with this geometry. Discretely switched fluxes do no move through space and so they can only flux link.
L192
Indeed, this device is a flux linking device, not a flux cutting device. The only way you could possibly turn it into a flux cutting device is if there is no iron in the output coil, which is clearly not the case as Pierre has stated in his videos that the output coil is wound on a iron laminate core.
PmgR
-
Hi All
Here is email I just got from Gary Porter, and a couple drawings too:
"I figured out what he did and it matches with his pulsed sawtooth and BEMF spikes. The attached pic shows one circuit of the 36. I need 72 FET 36 for GND and 36 for power. Your right the odd coils are versed polarity to get South poles. So their are 36 coils I found that with my stator slots I can have a max of 34 17ga wires so two coils at 17turns each will just fit the slots. I'm about half way thru inserting the 36 coils man it is a pain I have to put one wire in the slot at a time and near the end I have to push them down into the slot with wood.
I'll have to redsign the PCB into two boards one as a controller and 9 others each having 8 FETs. The Arduino 2560 has 54 digital outputs so I'll have to use 36 of them twice to get 72. so each pin connects to two buffers each have an enable line.. Pierre did this on his control board look at his top left and you'll see two FET by themselves. These provide a ground path each of his 36 relay groups. He uses 72 diodes to gather BEMF positive spikes only that's why his waveform has so much negative noise after each relay is opened.
I want the sawtooth with noise to pass into a 1:1 transformer cap on primary for 60 hz resonance. this should clean up the signal."
-
Focus on creating strong magnetic forces at specific points in the rotating field. This is the variation and intensity. The stronger this field changes is as it rotates, the STRONGER the opposing field (armature output) is created! Remember the variation and intensity is very important. I believe there are additional coils in parallel at the same time at specific locations. Look at scope shot. He shows groupings in his 5th video. :) Look for it, you’ll see it, look at the pencil drawings. Pierre erased them in arcs, then placed them with lines over the top of slots. The lines show specific locations. Look carefully. The lines are parallel with specific fields! This has to be important!
When creating the rotational field, you can do this several ways. But the fact is you have to think in step action as the fields rotate and we know Pierre did it with 6 poles in rotation. Each 6 pole is a step action and an isolated group. However, the coils are in parallel at specific points with others to increase intensity and variation. You DECREASE inductance and increase CURRENT because of this. Inductance is changing in rotation!!!! This is VERY important.
In the beginning, Pierre had all of his coils in series, and had very little return. He knew this and had the same problems we are learning about. He later placed them in series and parallel and each group is isolated. Pierre even states in his own words, to not cross the fields, they will cancel and reduces your efficiency.
Read these posts carefully again.
https://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg522316/#msg522316 (https://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg522316/#msg522316)
https://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg522283/#msg522283 (https://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg522283/#msg522283)
Hope this helps,
Jerdee
-
Jerdee, why don't you spell out how it should be wired up; the way you write your emails, you make it appear that you know more than all of us...
You DECREASE inductance and increase CURRENT because of this. Inductance is changing in rotation!!!! This is VERY important. Jerdee
Anyway, I have pointed out many times that the inductance changes as you go around the stator. I have even posted plots of it; this is why I asked Luc to measure the inductance going around the rotor at the very start of this thread. I have attached his measurements again for your reference.
I have also pointed out many times that this is a way to create additional energy in the system through d(LI)/dt (and not L*dI/dt as we are taught in school). It is called parametric variation. Partzman has brought this up as well. Nothing new, this principle is over 80 years old. However in most cases, it takes more energy to vary the inductance, than what the system produces due to the variation. And yes, if you decrease inductance, current will increase as the system will try to keep the flux constant: flux= L*I
PmgR
-
An alternative wiring possibility I have not seen mentioned yet. Arduino program driven identical to Pierre's.
A superconducting coil stores flux by shorting the coil leads. Surely shorting sections of the stator assembly would do a good job at keeping the flux inside the core as well?
-
Hi Reiyuki
Any inductor with core or with aircore too, will go into a hyper ringing AC event upon a switch short-circuiting the coil leads together briefly.
The hyper ringing will fill up capacitors x20 or x50 in voltage via fwbr AC legs over coil and DC side to cap.
The switched short should be very brief pulse width and occur at sinewave peak period in an induced generator coil induced by sweeping magnet while with a pulsed dc coil, the switched short should happen just before saturation occurs.
Switching needs to be very low resistance and with ability to switch AC and to sustain the hyper ringing through switching during switch closure so for solid state bidirectionally connected paralled mosfets with also a very fast additional diode from source to drain on each paralleled mosfet cluster will worl well.
Resistive load is applied to the cap discharge event only, and caps must first fill by themselves with no resistive load across them during filling process...
I don't know about superconducting coils being shorted or the cores storing energy but I would assume cores must be very fast acting low hysterisis type
-
Hi everyone
I just discovered Pierre sent me personal message way back on March 18 and did not know this until last night.
He was saying his wave form resembles a sinewave scope photo I posted of also a 60hz sinewave and this was created by a nsns rotor of 4 big neodymium magnets sweeping past a big fat air cored generator coil st rpms of 1800rpm which creates the squarish looking 60hz sinewave sinewave
with this basic sinewave I could power just about anything that runs on 60hz AC from grid.
Anyways what I did was timed a short circuit of that fat aircoed coil with a simple brush - copper commuttor and this short circuit of coil timed to happen in middle of the sinewave peak period.
And you can see clearly in scope photo at bottom page in link just what happens and I call this A.C. hyper ringing....it fills up caps like crazy is its advantage.
Anyways this got me thinking "maybe" what is going on is that those noisy mechanical relays Pierre used are so slow to open and maybe sticking closed a bit of time too, so instead of a reversal of polarity in pulsing as is desired, it instead creates a brief shorted out condition to the inductor, ubtil the relays finallyl wedge themselves open, and this without knowledge of Pierre and so this is the mystery-power Pierre finds and videos show....
A bit far fetched but possible.....here is link to page Pierre wrote to me about look at scope photo at bottom of page
https://sites.google.com/site/alternativeworldenergy/shorting-coils-circuits (https://sites.google.com/site/alternativeworldenergy/shorting-coils-circuits)
...
.
-
Hi everyone
I just discovered Pierre sent me personal message way back on March 18 and did not know this until last night.
He was saying his wave form resembles a sinewave scope photo I posted of also a 60hz sinewave and this was created by a nsns rotor of 4 big neodymium magnets sweeping past a big fat air cored generator coil st rpms of 1800rpm which creates the squarish looking 60hz sinewave sinewave
with this basic sinewave I could power just about anything that runs on 60hz AC from grid.
Anyways what I did was timed a short circuit of that fat aircoed coil with a simple brush - copper commuttor and this short circuit of coil timed to happen in middle of the sinewave peak period.
And you can see clearly in scope photo at bottom page in link just what happens and I call this A.C. hyper ringing....it fills up caps like crazy is its advantage.
Anyways this got me thinking "maybe" what is going on is that those noisy mechanical relays Pierre used are so slow to open and maybe sticking closed a bit of time too, so instead of a reversal of polarity in pulsing as is desired, it instead creates a brief shorted out condition to the inductor, ubtil the relays finallyl wedge themselves open, and this without knowledge of Pierre and so this is the mystery-power Pierre finds and videos show....
A bit far fetched but possible.....here is link to page Pierre wrote to me about look at scope photo at bottom of page
https://sites.google.com/site/alternativeworldenergy/shorting-coils-circuits (https://sites.google.com/site/alternativeworldenergy/shorting-coils-circuits)
...
.
Below are shots of Pierre's diag. and a scope shot of a "Harbor frieght", 900 watt , 2 cycle Gen.
It appears that there is some "Coil-shorting" happening there on the 900 watt gen.
Doug, do you see what's going on here .... does this apply ?
-
Anyways what I did was timed a short circuit of that fat aircoed coil with a simple brush - copper commuttor and this short circuit of coil timed to happen in middle of the sinewave peak period.
And you can see clearly in scope photo at bottom page in link just what happens and I call this A.C. hyper ringing....it fills up caps like crazy is its advantage.
If anyone remember Ismael Aviso car https://peswiki.com/directory:ismael-aviso-self-charging-electric-car that was exactly about same thing. You can do many fancy things around coil shorting but in general it deviates from general AC generator function...
-
I see exactly what is going on in those scope shots. You have a high frequency (probably odd harmonic) carrier with a low frequency parametric resonance as the modulation. Once parametric resonance grows, it almost completely dwarfs the carrier frequency.
Below are some snaps I generated at the 21st harmonic.
Whatever you do though guys, don't think about this for even a minute because I'm full of shit. ;)
-
...
Anyways this got me thinking "maybe" what is going on is that those noisy mechanical relays Pierre used are so slow to open and maybe sticking closed a bit of time too, so instead of a reversal of polarity in pulsing as is desired, it instead creates a brief shorted out condition to the inductor, ubtil the relays finallyl wedge themselves open, and this without knowledge of Pierre and so this is the mystery-power Pierre finds and videos show....
A bit far fetched but possible.....here is link to page Pierre wrote to me about look at scope photo at bottom of page
https://sites.google.com/site/alternativeworldenergy/shorting-coils-circuits (https://sites.google.com/site/alternativeworldenergy/shorting-coils-circuits)
...
Hi Kone,
This is very possible if the relay modules have a diode across each relay coil for protecting a transistor output. This will slow down the demagnetization of the coil as only the resistance of the coil in series with the resistance of the forward biased diode is dissipating the energy. For fast release of a relay a resistive snubber has to be used. The resistance has to be high enough to generate a flyback peak voltage a little below the max allowed voltage that the transistor can take. This gives the fastest demagnetization of the magnetic circuit (of the relay) and thus the fastest release of the armature. The slow release could be the secret for mixing the fields in a coherent way in the stator of the DZ generator. As long as a coil is shorted it acts as a permanent magnet. At least this is true if the short is of very low resistance.
Regards
Ole
-
Hi Ole
It must be ultra low resistance to those mechanical relays and ultra low resistance is required for filling up caps very fast and very high with a coil that is first induced by sweeping magnet, or Pierre's case. coils pulsed with DC, then inadvertently shorted because of the sticking or just very slow mechanical relays.
Coherence of the stator fields you mention to me would be rectifying of all the "trapped" and induced fields between the NS or SN pair of pulsed and energized fields at each edge of one of the 6 poles...such as in example laminate segment #1 would be RHR while laminate segment #6 would be LHR, and so this establishes a N and S electromagnet for that pole.
Now those wrapped but un-pulsed laminate segments between
#1 and #6 become induced pickup winds, all rectified so power created all combined to flow into common capacitor bank...so there is the coherence...
Also I believe "if" those simultaneous pulsed DC fields (#1 and #6) do have a brief short applied to them, the hyper ringing created would also be inducing this hyper ringing condition into those fields between too
(#2 #3 #4 #5)
so there is some more coherence going on too and this in a hyper ringing state...
-
Hi T-1000
Ismael would do 5 very quick shorts in succesion during the peak period (just before saturation of the coil) to the pulsed DC inductors in his MEG reactor that powered his electric car.
First short initiates the ringing and the remaining 4 shorts are timed to occur at the peaks of the ringing peaks created!
Now you get exponential power increase for purpose of filling up cap very fast and very high.
This has some relevance to DZ generator since the rotating stator fields are.pulsed DC, and if there is a brief shorted condition in them, the AC hyper-ringing created will also be.induced into the fixed rotor coil.
-
Hi Stargate
The harbor freight 900w generator scope pboto looks like worn out brushes and bad connection througout!
The drawing by Pierre looks too smooth of peaks in middle.of wave to be what happens with peak coil shorting but maybe his little scope displays it like that.
Could be like dog-one describes and and is parametric resonance (whatever that is exactly)
-
I have pointed out many times that the inductance changes as you go around the stator.
That is true. Except if the point is to create a minimum inductance when in full registration and maximum inductance when we are far from full reg. This would justify Jerdee's opinion, and also would minimize the losses.
Not to speak about the coil shorting technique. Dog-one said everything in one line.
-
une petite question pour Pierre ,
Comment étes-vous arrivée à stabiliser la tension de sortie à 139V malgré une fluctuation de 5V sur l'entrée?merci d'avance .
cordialement Mosha
-
Let's talk about a piston in an engine for a moment. Suppose when the piston is accelerating downward we decrease the mass by 90%. Then when the piston is nearly bottomed out, we return the mass to it's original amount. Do that on every stroke, both upwards and downwards, twice per cycle. Pretty soon that motor will accelerate into oblivion. That's your parametric resonance. A tough act to do mechanically in an engine, but...
We can do a very similar thing with a pair of inductors. Short one of them to decrease the inductance, then open the short when we have reached the peak.
Now let's think a minute. When we short, we create a current surge in one of the inductors. What does this do? It juices up the magnetic field in a particular polarity. So what happens to a neighboring coil? Inductance on the output side is the production of an EMF based on the change (derivative) of the current on the input side. So in the DZ Gen, we need to think about rotating transformers circulating the stator core. You have big current in one winding and big voltage in the other. Every cycle we step around the core, current pushing/lagging voltage (don't get that backwards, because we want the EMF to add to the CEMF), building on top of the previous cycle. If your rotation is such that the induced voltage is opposing the change in current, you're sunk. Go the other direction. Move those little transformers in a manner that is productive.
-
Just out of interest, I took this shot of the input current while I still had the relays working.
It used a set of relays to reverse the DC rail, so every other pulse changed polarity.
Output was insignificant,as you might expect.
L192
-
Hi All
Here is email I just got from Gary Porter, and a couple drawings too:
"I figured out what he did and it matches with his pulsed sawtooth and BEMF spikes. The attached pic shows one circuit of the 36. I need 72 FET 36 for GND and 36 for power. Your right the odd coils are versed polarity to get South poles. So their are 36 coils I found that with my stator slots I can have a max of 34 17ga wires so two coils at 17turns each will just fit the slots. I'm about half way thru inserting the 36 coils man it is a pain I have to put one wire in the slot at a time and near the end I have to push them down into the slot with wood.
I'll have to redsign the PCB into two boards one as a controller and 9 others each having 8 FETs. The Arduino 2560 has 54 digital outputs so I'll have to use 36 of them twice to get 72. so each pin connects to two buffers each have an enable line.. Pierre did this on his control board look at his top left and you'll see two FET by themselves. These provide a ground path each of his 36 relay groups. He uses 72 diodes to gather BEMF positive spikes only that's why his waveform has so much negative noise after each relay is opened.
I want the sawtooth with noise to pass into a 1:1 transformer cap on primary for 60 hz resonance. this should clean up the signal."
If you alternate polarities between coil groups, you loose the continuity of flux, as then you cant overlap fields?
I also tried this with relays, without the overlap, and the output was not very much.
L192
-
The passage of the magnetic flux is only when the coil is within the rotor range from one or both sides. When the coils are active on the sides there is no magnetic flux.
When the coil is shorted, all the coils respond and add to the primary coil. This is my explanation. I do not know if correct.
-
Hello all,
Been thinking more about how to change the inductance and current in rotation without loosing field rotation. We have many possibilities of changing inductance with 6 fields. As long as you keep the 6 field orientation (NSNSNS), you can combine any of these 6 coils in series or parallel to increase and decrease inductance. For example, 2 could be in series, while the remainder 4 could be parallel. You never loose the 6 field NSNSNS rotation, you only add the change in inductance and current as you drive each grouping that has variations in them. Otherwise, everything else stays the same.
For example, to keep this easy, let’s say the inductance for a single coils is only 10mH per coil. 6 in series would = 60mH while 6 in parallel would = 1.67mH
For a 36 slot stator, you have 6 groups of 6 fields. So you can cycle the inductance with 6 increments/decrements in inductance in rotation, I’m thinking forwards and backwards here in the cycle as you want NS…then SN on the 6 groupings.
1. Group 1 starts with 6 fields in series. = 60mH
2. Next Group 2 (one increment in NS or SN slots) with 4 in series, while 2 are left in parallel = 45mH
3. Group 3 with 2 in series, while 4 are left in parallel = 22.5mH
4. Group 4 with 0 in series, while 6 in parallel = 1.67mH
5. Group 5 back to 2 in series, while 4 are left in parallel = 22.5mH
6. Group 6 back to 4 in series, while 2 in parallel = 45mH
Then starts over opposite polarity with same cycle.
For this example, you are generating a variation in inductance and current as it cycles back and forth between:
60mH
45mH
22.5mH
1.67mH
22.5mH
45mH
this happens over and over in inductance shifting as it rotates WITHOUT CHANGING NSNSNS ORIENTATIONS in rotation. Wouldn’t this create d(LI)/dt? Also wouldn't this simulate the magnet getting closer and further away?
You still keep the code the same, you can do overlap mode as well, and you have full recovery from off states. For example, you can recover from any group when off using a single mosfet on the d.c. side of fwbr.
This would only require 6 H-Bridges to work in both polarities, 12 pins from MCU, and 6 more pins for recovery FETs, for a total of 18 pins of MCU.
I may be far off on this thought process, but at least I”m trying to think of ways to increase and decrease variation and intensity as it rotates NS then SN in 6 coils groupings. We already know that just rotating fields is not enough.
Otherwise, I really like the concept of more variation and intensity from Konehead’s work/experience on the coil shorting. I can see how Pierre gravitated to his scope images.
Just thoughts right now, but this is how I’m thinking at the moment.
Jerdee
-
Tous,
Je vous prie d'examiner ce petit détail sur cette capture d'écran à 2'15 sur la vidéo 1 ?
personnellement je voix comme un connecteur ,qu'en pensez-vous?
cordialement Mosha.En:
All, Please review this little detail on this screenshot at 2'15 on video 1? personally I see a connector, what do you think?
-
Hello all,
Been thinking more about how to change the inductance and current in rotation without loosing field rotation. We have many possibilities of changing inductance with 6 fields. As long as you keep the 6 field orientation (NSNSNS), you can combine any of these 6 coils in series or parallel to increase and decrease inductance. For example, 2 could be in series, while the remainder 4 could be parallel. You never loose the 6 field NSNSNS rotation, you only add the change in inductance and current as you drive each grouping that has variations in them. Otherwise, everything else stays the same.
For example, to keep this easy, let’s say the inductance for a single coils is only 10mH per coil. 6 in series would = 60mH while 6 in parallel would = 1.67mH
For a 36 slot stator, you have 6 groups of 6 fields. So you can cycle the inductance with 6 increments/decrements in inductance in rotation, I’m thinking forwards and backwards here in the cycle as you want NS…then SN on the 6 groupings.
1. Group 1 starts with 6 fields in series. = 60mH
2. Next Group 2 (one increment in NS or SN slots) with 4 in series, while 2 are left in parallel = 45mH
3. Group 3 with 2 in series, while 4 are left in parallel = 22.5mH
4. Group 4 with 0 in series, while 6 in parallel = 1.67mH
5. Group 5 back to 2 in series, while 4 are left in parallel = 22.5mH
6. Group 6 back to 4 in series, while 2 in parallel = 45mH
Then starts over opposite polarity with same cycle.
For this example, you are generating a variation in inductance and current as it cycles back and forth between:
60mH
45mH
22.5mH
1.67mH
22.5mH
45mH
this happens over and over in inductance shifting as it rotates WITHOUT CHANGING NSNSNS ORIENTATIONS in rotation. Wouldn’t this create d(LI)/dt? Also wouldn't this simulate the magnet getting closer and further away?
You still keep the code the same, you can do overlap mode as well, and you have full recovery from off states. For example, you can recover from any group when off using a single mosfet on the d.c. side of fwbr.
This would only require 6 H-Bridges to work in both polarities, 12 pins from MCU, and 6 more pins for recovery FETs, for a total of 18 pins of MCU.
I may be far off on this thought process, but at least I”m trying to think of ways to increase and decrease variation and intensity as it rotates NS then SN in 6 coils groupings. We already know that just rotating fields is not enough.
Otherwise, I really like the concept of more variation and intensity from Konehead’s work/experience on the coil shorting. I can see how Pierre gravitated to his scope images.
Just thoughts right now, but this is how I’m thinking at the moment.
Jerdee
Jedree,
You've come up with it. It would be like changing the intensity of the field and the movement of the magnets.
If you do it with ordinary magnets and subtract friction, it will still be too little. Maybe it would be 99% efficiency. I think Pierre does it all but he also coils up on the coil as the konehead says.
-
I noticed the same a couple of days ago. The other side has something similar, see attached image. Not sure why there would be a need for any connectors if this is a continuously wound coil. Maybe it is a reed switch?
PmgR
-
pmgr
what i point out are in the other side ,go fram by fram on vid 1 at 2'15 .
-
Basics of self induction. When there is a time varying change in current, you induce voltage. The higher the rate of changing current the higher the value of EMF. When doing groupings of series and parallel to change current rate of change, you induce voltage on the armature output. This is how I see it. If current remains the same in other wiring configurations, you don't allow EMF. Maybe I'm wrong, but I see a need for change in current THROUGH INDUCTANCE to induce voltage while in rotation.
Jerdee
-
.
-
jerdee,
You're on the right track. Let me add a couple more pieces to the puzzle...
If you take a transformer, two coils, good coupling and short the 2nd coil, you can pull down the inductance of the first coil to nearly zero. This is good, but unfortunately it's not enough. We actually need the inductance to become negative. We need the 1st coil to act more like a capacitor than an inductor. Sounds funny, but it can actually be done.
When we short the 2nd winding, observe the direction of current flow. Now replace the short with something that increases the magnitude of current flow keeping the direction the same.
Seems counter-intuitive right? Why would we ever want to do this?
Reactance.
A typical inductor is going to have the characteristics of inductive reactance. When it does, all the Lenz Law stuff comes into play--CEMF now opposes every change we make to current. But if we "transform" the inductor into a negative inductor (capacitor), we get capacitive reactance. Now the CEMF aids every change we make to current. Think of it as an investment. We pay with some current to change the characteristics of the inductor and get back an inductor that no longer fights everything we try to do with it.
-
Hi Dog-one
"Replacing the short with something that increases magnitude of current flow but keeps current flow in same ditection"
You wrote this a few posts back....could this be a FWBR?
Perhaps instead of actual short circuit of neighboring coil, instead a very heavy, very "useful" resistive/capacitive load such as supercaps on DC side of FWBR??
Maybe single diode or half bridge rectifying energy into super caps would do the trick too...
-
You wrote this a few posts back....could this be a FWBR?
If one uses a shorted (or a heavy load like a discharged supercap to our) FWBR, it creates the proper 2X frequency bumps necessary for parametric resonance. However I'm pretty sure we need more than this. We need to push current into the second winding, not just create a short.
Perhaps instead of actual short circuit of neighboring coil, instead a very heavy, very "useful" resistive/capacitive load such as supercaps on DC side of FWBR??
Maybe single diode or half bridge rectifying energy into super caps would do the trick too...
Simplicity is best, but I'm pretty certain what we need can be done with active components. From what I can see so far, Pierre found a way to use caps, diodes and switches to get the proper results.
I've spent hours today working Bode Plots trying to find the right combinations. There's a bit of magic in there still, but I'm starting to see patterns we can take advantage of.
-
If you could copy the magnet, would the setting of the coils be the same?
and let's add a move to it.
-
If each subsequent coil was supplied with increasing and decreasing voltage, we would have such a magnetic field.
The movement of the field itself will not be able to do anything, and the change in inductance will only affect the field's power, just like to increase the voltage. The same can be achieved by one or two coils. You need to look even deeper.
-
If each subsequent coil was supplied with increasing and decreasing voltage, we would have such a magnetic field.
The relays in Pierre's setup was not altering amount of current going through individually. The paralel overlapping coils was making variation of the flux strength when 2 coils at once was turned on.
Ideally you want to have as many paralel coils turned ON as the diameter of output core is which was 4 coils with single North or South poles. Then change positions of the edge coils for forward movement.
P.S. Even where are 4 coils all ON they are connected in series so +/- 1 coil does not alter flowing current a lot.
-
Hi Dog- one
I looked up parametric resonance and the word parametric comes from "parameters" so you could maybe say parametric is similar to "changing the parameters"
Anyways one analogy I read about with resonance is someone on a swing, and to get more power and greater length to swing, the person on swing will stand up and sit at points on swing to create a stronger swing... so sort of vertical actions applied to horizontal swing motions using weight and gravity at cost of more physical effort to get more power into the swing. (whatever eh)
Anyways about super cap working as very heavy load to create a shorted condition, I would think not a drained down super cap bank, but instead like Pierre does, pre-filled super caps which will accept and store the energy easily, and still have the inductor "see" this load as a short (very heavy load) but not so heavy that it becomes a brick wall to the extra energy produced and cap will not full any faster or higher or fill at all...so sort of perfect world in cap's internal resistance is needed where inductor sees a short and cap size just right so it works as receptor and "resonant chamber"
I would guess if Pierre did not pre-fill his caps his DZ generator would not work at all...
-
A couple of points about the BTS7960B bridge boards.
They are missing a recommended 270nf cap across the supply rails close to each device.
Overvoltage protection kicks in at 27.5V which turns on the HSS and turns off the LSS.
If this gets invoked, then other LSS's will be on sequentially throughout the switching sequence, effectively causing the on HSS device to conduct current continuously.
This is not desirable behavior in this application.
The later BTN8962TA device that replaces the BTS7960B, does not have this feature, relying only on thermal and current limitation.
The BTN8962TA pulse current rating is higher than the BTS7960B however, the continuous current rating is only 30A compared with 40A. Otherwise the the later device is pin for pin compatible.
A few weeks ago I had a mysterious failure of a single high side device , while the supply was increase to 30V and I attribute this to the over-voltage protection. The device in question had a permanent HSS short afterwards.
Just a warning for anybody using these boards that wants to increase supply voltage, to achieve the same current at higher switching speeds.
L192
-
In an AC generator, with a DC energised rotor, the flux splits and travels round the stator to the opposite rotor pole, largely closing the flux.
In the DZ generator, each adjacent pole pair is energised at the same time. With a N and S in registration with the rotor, some of the flux will tend to close through the airgap between the adjacent pole rather than close through the stator to the opposite pole. This is a large difference between the generator types.
Experiment:
If you remove 2 poles, 1 from either side of the stator and then switch the remaining poles back and forth i.e. clockwise then anti-clockwise, the poles will always couple flux fully through both sides of the stator and across the rotor.
Rotating the poles continuously in the same direction would just use more switch steps than required, as rotor induction only need be over a limited angle of arc. Some pole separation would decrease the flux cancellation.
L192
-
Here is a drawing of the diodes in action that Pierre drew on the back board in one of his videos. You should see why we have to shut off the field in rotation now. Keep the code the same using overlap mode. This also explains why you do not want the coils in series. You want to isolate the field(s) and you can run them in parallel.
No the field is not shut off in rotation. This waveform shows a pulsed signal riding on top of the output sine, these are not recovery pulses, although as there is pulsing, there could be recovery current via the switch body diodes.
Attached is a simplified drawing of how this could be achieved.
Only a few MOSFET switches shown for clarity. Coil connections and switches remain unchanged only the supply rail is modified.
This could be accomplished with one relay or two MOSFETS.
L192
-
Yes exactly
That's how I built it a few weeks ago.
For the coils to fully drive through please use PNP and NPN FET types.
I send you the circuit diagram again.
-
Yes exactly
That's how I built it a few weeks ago.
For the coils to fully drive through please use PNP and NPN FET types.
I send you the circuit diagram again.
Hi Andy71,
I am using the BTS7960 bridge boards, so that it how they were connect from the start.
The main point of my post was not to show the waveform switches but to show how we could achieve the pulses that Pierre had riding on top of the sine waveform (see post 1186).
The only problem I see with your circuit is that you have no isolation for your MOSFET drives. One device failure could destroy an arduino digital pin, or even take out the whole board.
At some point in experimentation it is likely this will happen. I have had switch failures twice now as I have pushed current limits.
Regards
L192
-
No the field is not shut off in rotation. This waveform shows a pulsed signal riding on top of the output sine, these are not recovery pulses, although as there is pulsing, there could be recovery current via the switch body diodes.
Attached is a simplified drawing of how this could be achieved.
Only a few MOSFET switches shown for clarity. Coil connections and switches remain unchanged only the supply rail is modified.
This could be accomplished with one relay or two MOSFET's as shown.
L192
Further points on this circuit...
There is never a period where all switches are off, so coil current is maintained.This is achieved with +25V.
The caps in series provide +50V to drive an ON/OFF pulse above the sine waveform (when looking at the output waveform) i.e. a further pulsed increase in current through the coils.
When the pulse turns OFF, the input caps have switched back to the parallel configuration +25V, this allows substantial current to flow through the body diodes back to C2, as the flyback voltage is 25V higher than C2 voltage.
The problem with this is I can't test it at +25V input, as the BTS7960B over voltage protection will turn on the HHS at +27.5V, as advised in a previous post.
So I could only test at say +12V.
L192
-
Attached is the result of the experiment, as shown in the circuit posted previously.
The cap charge scheme did not work very well, with the top cap only developing about 5V, so the bottom cap has about 25V, you can see this in the dark blue waveform.When the caps are switched in series, about 30V is developed. You can only see a very small increase in current due to the top cap not adding much voltage to the stack.
When the pulse is turned off, the rail drops back down to about 25V, however a large recovery current is developed into cap due to the lower potential on the parallel caps.
In this timing I am switching the overlap coil off immediately after the one preceding it is turned on, then apply the pulse (width determined by delay X), then followed by another delay X, followed by the next sequence.
The next experiment will be to use the circuit shown below. This should allow a decent current pulse and be able to show a large pulse voltage on top of the stepped output sine.Possibly the caps on the bridge boards will absorb some of the voltage pulse, as they charge from +12.5 volt to +25V.
Note: the external recovery diodes shown as D1 & 2, allow the coil flyback to recover directly onto the lower cap bank.If you were using relays a higher DC voltage could be used (compared to the BTS7960B device limits).
L192
-
The experiment using the cap bank in two series sections was problematic with the top bank getting warm.
I changed over to the circuit attached, so just a single pulsed 25V DC supply.
The recovery voltage was enough to maintain the waveform between pulses.
In the second scope shot you can see the supposed recovery current however, I think this is actually just bleed through during the pulse period.
The first scope shot shows the output off load and the second on load. Not much in the way of voltage pulses.
I had the timing a little different in this run, so I will try also in the previous configuration.
Rotor induction is still poor, infact generally worse since I cut down the end of the rotor to 6 slots from 9.All this tells me is that I just reduced the flux linkage.
L192
-
Long Poles:
This test reverts back to long poles which briefly tried before.
11 slot span rotates and reverses polarity on 2nd pass (visible in current waveform), still with (short) overlap, so there are no interleaving poles to short out the flux.
Output voltage in blue input current in yellow.Scope shots for unloaded and loaded output.
Not a bad output for only 2A RM,S 26.5 DCV input. The 6 pole configuration was running 10 times this current for the same off load output.
Note the unloaded waveform and the spikes due to the increased inductance of 12 coils in series. The coil resistance and double the inductance is the limiting factor for current.Note a 50/60Hz output is achieved and if you reduce the switching rate this output does not increase.
The bridge boards will over volt at 27.5V, so current cannot be increased by increasing applied DC voltage.
So the only way to increase coil current is to reduce coil resistance and inductance, this means parallel coils which means breaking up the 360 degree series chain.
Of course this is just a reiteration of what Pierre has already disclosed.
L192
-
Hi Listener
Not so bad looks like about 40W output for 52Winput (?)
Can you try paralleling just two coils of the "long pole" string?
Such as the first and the last coils, (#1 and #11) then the "trapped" coils in between (#s 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10) all these un-pulsed coils in between become induced pickup windings, which will make power everytime the two energized parallel coils get some juice.
Maybe then string the 6 pole pattern then in series, not parallel so resistance is not so low and tons of amps is drawn however Pierre was talking about 160W input so you could put 3 times more power into it via it drawing more current...
Anyways just an idea!
Thanks for continuing your experimenting and reporting to everyone what you find...
-
No its only about 4.2W out for 52 W input. The scope shots are showing output voltage and input current.But there is no fall off in output voltage until you get above 150Hz, so 50/60Hz is achievable.
I am looking at how I can parallel drive 10 coils and then connect them in series at switch off.
Probably the reason that Pierre wanted to use a higher DC voltage was to get more current through the coils, as you can only do so much with parallel coil arrangements.
The BTS7960B half bridge devices become a real limitation, with regards to voltage. The BTN8962 half bridges can be operated up to 40V, performance only limited by their current limiter, whereas the BTS-7960B voltage limits at 27.5V.
Attached is the data sheet for the BTN8982 half bridge 50A continuous 40V same pin out as BTS7960B. If the devices are replaced, this is the one to go for.
I noticed that 10 coils in series start to produce recovery current, on switch off. To get high levels of recovery current, either the cap potential need to be well below rail or the flyback voltage needs to be much higher than rail. The unloaded output voltage waveform starts to look more like that drawing with the spikes on the sine wave. The experiment pulsing the rail just didn't result in any meaningful voltage spikes.
I also noticed with this 10 coils scheme, that more flux is crossing the rotor, as at low frequency the rotor rotates unless firmly wedged.
The 6 pole scheme just lock the rotor in plus. PmgR's simulation shows that my rotor should be 3 stator poles wide instead of the 6 stator pole width I have an the rotor.
L192
-
Hi Listener
Not so bad looks like about 40W output for 52Winput (?)
Can you try paralleling just two coils of the "long pole" string?
Such as the first and the last coils, (#1 and #11) then the "trapped" coils in between (#s 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10) these two become induced pickup windings, which will make power everytime the two energized parallel coils get some juice.
Maybe then string the 6 pole pattern then in series, not parallel so resistance is not so low and tons of amps is drawn however Pierre was talking about 160W input so you could put 3 times more power into it via it drawing more current...
Anyways just an idea!
Thanks for continuing your experimenting and reporting to everyone what you find...
Clarification 10 coils in series (between wire tap 1 and wire tap 11).
-
You can use two additional discreet MOSFETs (one on high side input and one on low side ground connection) with the body diode in reverse direction. So on high side the drain of one of these FETs would be connected to all the drains (Vdd inputs) of the high side H-bridges. On the low side the source of the other FET would be connected to all the sources of the low side H-bridges (GND/sense connection). In that way you have two body diodes in reverse all the time which will prevent any recovery through the body diodes.
PmgR
Hi pmgr
Can you please say some more on this? Do you mean just using the body diodes without driving those two mosfets? And if yes, is there any particular reason for choosing this method instead of two simple diodes?
Thanks
-
Hi everyone
I made a mistake describing the idea I had, with only two coils (the end ones) of the string of 10 coils in a pole....I corrected it in my post a couple posts back.
Should read something like "all the un-pulsed coils in between become induced pickup winds" where before I described the coils in between as "these two" which made no sense
So I meant to say all those coils trapped and between the two energized pulsed coils become induced pickup coils....
-
Latest result with 10 coils in series North and 10 coils in series South.An issue in code was giving a bad result for this configuration previously.
If I break the series loop of coils, output falls a little, and waveform distorts.
You can see the input current is 3A, so if this can be increased 9A, there would be 230V RMS across this load.
It will maintain this output to over 70Hz.
I tried Gotoluc's 3 coil scheme however that had a square waveform and lower output.
Perhaps each of the 5 coils have to be on an isolated H bridge.
Note we have a bit of phase shift between voltage and current due to the small clean up cap on the output.
Hardly any recovery current present.
L192
-
Hi pmgr
Can you please say some more on this? Do you mean just using the body diodes without driving those two mosfets? And if yes, is there any particular reason for choosing this method instead of two simple diodes?
Thanks
Jeg, you can check this TI note on back to back FETs:
http://www.ti.com/lit/an/slva948/slva948.pdf (http://www.ti.com/lit/an/slva948/slva948.pdf)
Compared to using simple diodes, this method won't have the voltage drop of the diode when turned on as the current will flow through the FET. When turned off, the body diodes back-to-back will block any current in any direction.
PmgR
-
Jeg, you can check this TI note on back to back FETs:
http://www.ti.com/lit/an/slva948/slva948.pdf (http://www.ti.com/lit/an/slva948/slva948.pdf)
Compared to using simple diodes, this method won't have the voltage drop of the diode when turned on as the current will flow through the FET. When turned off, the body diodes back-to-back will block any current in any direction.
PmgR
Nice gift pmgr! Thank you ;)
-
This is a scope shot that accompanies the last set.
It shows an average of 0.5A recovery current into every bridge board rail cap.
This for a forward pulse current of approx 4A.
This can only be seen by extending the cap off board with wires, so a current clamp be be applied.
This shows that most of the recovery current is absorbed locally and not on the main cap, bank even though external diodes are provided.
L192
-
To obtain lower input voltage high current operation, each H Bridge could control 1 or 2 coils. In the second coil arrangement the second coil would be 180 deg opposite and would be connected in reverse parallel to form the opposite pole.
As then we would not need to reverse operate the H bridge, in this configuration we could use one Half bridge as a boost converter, which I could never see working with Pierre's series coil connection.
In the figure attached, Q1 and Q3 are switched on to charge the coil, Q2 is not used and remains open.When the coil turns off, Q3 is opened and Q4 is closed and the inductor charge is pushed by the rail (input) voltage into C. Q1 remains closed.
You may see from the above that Q1 & Q2 are not required, so just a half bridge is used. C = the big cap bank .
The input voltage push ensures all of the coil charge is transferred to C.
In Pierre's series coil arrangement, for the boost to work, the HHS are all connected to the + rail so they cannot have body diodes if they are MOSFETS. Relays would not have that problem. As Pierre has shown, the recovery diode goes from the coil to the super cap.
The LSS's also don't need a body diode, although the presence of one is not detrimental to operation.So when discharging the coil the HSS charging the coil needs to stay closed. The LSS that was on for charging, then switches off. The recovery diode connected to the LSS and the coil conducts the coil charge pushed by the rail in the cap bank.
So the first thing we are doing wrong is having HSS body diodes in circuit (in the series configuration). These body diodes left in place, stop the current flow as they are connected to the same DC rail as the input, so no push. There would be some recovery via the current flow through the other LSS body diode but not a boost function. One way of eliminating the action of the body diodes would be series diode in the supply side of the HSS's. This would stop the body diodes conducting during coil discharge and external diodes connected to the coil can need perform a boost recovery
The second problem is the overlap.. not the second HSS switch being turned on, but the second LSS being turned on before the first LSS is turned off. This will stop the boost function by not allowing the end of the coil chain to float, keeping the coil chain in charge. I cannot see anyway of have an overlap and a boost function together in the series configuration.
So using the half bridge on a parallel coil connection, the HHS body diode (Q4 in this example) is fine, because the it is not connected to the input rail, only the cap bank, so the boost push will function.
Overlap is not a problem, as the adjacent coil has its own Half bridge.
If using the BTS7960B bridge board, the rail connection would have to be split into two i.e. separate + inputs for each half bridge.
You can use the figure attached to visualize this.
Taking the concept further, as Q4 in our half bridge is not connected to rail , we could replace the HSS with a diode, as current only needs to flow in one direction.This leaves us with one LSS Q3, which could have isolated drive, but otherwise simplifies control and reduces cost.
L192
-
Attached is a snapshot of Falstad running a boost circuit for a single coil. Simulation is attached.The shot shows the boost charge in progress and it has got to the point where the cap bank starts to charge the 220uF cap to a voltage higher than rail.
Across the bottom left to right we have..
Voltage across 27F cap bank:
Voltage across 220uF cap:
Current through 5ohm resistor acting as a load: - normally the load would be coupled by the coil to the rotor winding.
Current through the 4ohm resistor: - the 4 ohm resistor is needed for the circuit to work. It isn't just a cap bank charge limiter.
If you leave out the diode connected between the cap bank and the 4 ohm resistor, then the cap bank charges first through the 4 ohm resistor.
DC supply is 25V and has a diode isolated pre-charge of 25V for the cap bank. Note this is just to speed up the simulation, in practice a resistor needs to be in series to limit the current.
If you imagine that you have 20 single coils active, you can see there would be continuous boost and that 4 ohm resistor would get very hot.Also attached are circuit examples for uni polar and bi polar boost circuits.
L192
-
I think this statement from pmgr in the Figuera message thread may be relevant here also:
"EMF = d(flux)/dt = d(L*I)/dt which only simplifies to L*dI/dt in case L is constant (and this last simplification is the only thing we are taught in school).Adding or subtracting windings to an inductor changes L itself and thus L*dI/dt no longer applies. Instead d(L*I)/dt should be used. And with that it is very simple to obtain an overunity system as long as the amount of energy that it costs to change L is less than the amount of excess energy you obtain with the system.The more difficult part of this is to design a system that will do exactly this and which can be built in practice. The Figuera device is such a device.PmgR"
-
Attached are few scope shots of a discrete switch running in boost mode.
The switch is driving 2 stator coils connected in inverse parallel, rotor in registration no load on rotor.
10.5V DC input
Not shown, the coil current is actually over 8A due to the boost configuration.
The recovery current/power is shown. Note: use average power reading.
In a working system, 10 pairs of coils would be powered at any one time, which in this example would be over 600W.
You can see this configuration has no problem achieving high power levels.
I did try to use the BTS7960B H bridge boards, with modifications however the voltage rating of the MOSFET's in the devices was not high enough and this type of converter is prone to switching node transients.
Tests conducted at 20V DC input, the last photo shows voltage at the node, after a snubber was added immediately after the recovery diode.
Originally, the transient was 100V in this example, now reduced to 60V. This really needs to be reduced further perhaps by slowing the switching speed down, trading a little heat in the MOSFET.
The due to track inductance and working space difficulties, I was unable to reduce the switching transient on the BTS-7960B lower than 40V @10V DC input, which is too close to the maximum rating of the device. The over voltage protection also proved to be problematic.
A discrete H bridge design is the only reliable way forward.
L192
-
The first photo shows the improved rising edge transient suppression after snubber addition.
Now only a 10v overshoot at 25V input, so a 60V device with a low RDS (4 mohm) can now be used.
This will show a current drive improvement over the 28 mohm 200V MOSFET used in this example.
An H bridge built with 4 of these MOSFET's will have a combined RDS of 8 mohm plus, the isolation diode volt drop.
The second photo shows another problem that you can get with boost converters, falling edge ringing. Some MOSFET driver devices do not like the negative excursion.
Pmgr suggested another diode is added in the source to ground path to stop this, although this will add to effective path resistance and limit current.
The driver currently used does not exhibit any problem with this -4 volt excursion, however I do have 18V zener protection between gate and source for extra protection.
Attached is an experimental circuit to determine if a discrete H bridge boost converter can be constructed from these cheap Chinese boards.
The intention is not to use P channel MOSFET's for the HHS, as these have higher RDS than N channel devices. By maintaining very low device RDS, it will not be necessary to employ large heat sinks.
The boards need some modification, with removal of some parts and addition of others.. with some external diodes etc.
The two HSS would have complementary switching, 15 arduino outputs go to one HSS and same lines are inverted via TTL and these go to the other HHS. These only switch once every half cycle. The LSS's are controlled by individual arduino outputs (30), 45 outputs in total.
The floating supplies I have used are rectified & regulated 15V rails obtained from individual winding's on a central pot core inverter stack. This allows for a compact low cost design.
L192
-
Attached are current waveforms for two sets of anti parallel coils (180 degs spaced on stator)25V DC input voltage.
The coil sets are momentarily overlapped, no load on rotor.
Shown..Input currentcombined coil currentcombined recovery current.
Note the recovery duration for the last coil is greater however, this coil turns completely off, something that wont happen in the complete circuit.The first coil recovery represents what would be achieved by each coil pair turning off.
Note current is a respectable 15A peak.
L192
-
Attached are scope shots showing rotor output for he 2 overlapped coils @25V DC input.
This output is only 20% of the full set of energised coils however, it is lighting the 25W bulb.
Addition of the second coil set with the output loaded, the output voltage increases from 86V to 122V.
L192
-
I think this statement from pmgr in the Figuera message thread may be relevant here also:
"EMF = d(flux)/dt = d(L*I)/dt which only simplifies to L*dI/dt in case L is constant (and this last simplification is the only thing we are taught in school).Adding or subtracting windings to an inductor changes L itself and thus L*dI/dt no longer applies. Instead d(L*I)/dt should be used. And with that it is very simple to obtain an overunity system as long as the amount of energy that it costs to change L is less than the amount of excess energy you obtain with the system.The more difficult part of this is to design a system that will do exactly this and which can be built in practice. The Figuera device is such a device.PmgR"
Let me explain this a bit further. You need to a way to vary the inductance as a function of time such that
1. the energy required to vary the inductance is less than the energy you will get from the overunity system. Or in other words, how much energy does it cost you to vary the inductance?
2. you vary the inductance on a continuous time-basis. That means there can be no discontinuities in the current in/voltage over the inductor
There are a few ways to change inductance as a function of time that everyone can think of, but unfortunately, they don't comply with the above two conditions, either the energy expended is the same or more than the energy the overunity system produces, or the current/voltage doesn't change on a continuous time-basis.
Feel free to post your ideas!
PmgR
-
Vary the power supply ?
-
Hi Pmrg
To radically change inductance as well as creating hyper ringing situation to the inductor, (which fills caps X20 or X 50 higher in voltage) short circuit the inductor's in and out leads together just for short blip during peak voltage period.
Run through fwbr and dc into cap.
Unload cap by itself to load.
Use slow mechanical relays that are slowly burning up and sticking closed! (haha Pierre's method)
Seriously must be very low ohm AC capable switching
Brush-commutator switching probably ideal or else if solid state, clusters of parralled mosfets connected bidirectionally also fast diode from soure to drain on each cluster to sustain ringing during switch closure period.
-
I decide to model my rotor/stator in FEMM to determine why the rotor coil output collapses under load.
The first thing was to trim the rotor down to 5 poles. The coil pitch is still 5 slots, required to fit the 30 slot stator.
You may see that the 6 slot pitch of a 36 slot stator would have better linkage with a 5 pole wide rotor, with 5 coils overlapping.
I tried reducing the rotor width to 4 poles, but this resulted in a lower output, so 5 pole rotor width was the best compromise, this only has 4 coils overlapping so output will always be lower than the 36 slot scheme.I had been running a two stator pole scheme, with 10 coils either side on at any time.With the simulation I could see that switching more than 8 coils either side would be a waste of energy.Coil input was 5A (each).
A load was simulated with -1A of counter flux applied to the 1370T rotor coil, the first picture shows the result of that.
The stator flux from the outer most coils wants to close through their teeth.
The next picture shows the situation if I increased the coil current to 10A. Rotor flux increase to 1.1T close to the 1.15T value with coils @5A (no rotor load).
The next picture shows 5A through the coils but with the addition of a 5A bias coil on the rotor. This coil can be split and wrapped slot to outside of stator (in line with flux) however, it is convenient to have the coil on the rotor.
The polarity of this coil needs to change when the poles reverse. Flux level is about 0.9 T.So this coil makes a large difference for a much smaller energy input. The issue is coupling the flux into the rotor, so just doubling A/T via the coil set does not increase the rotor flux above 1.2T, as the linkage is still the same and a large portion of input is wasted as heat.
The bias coil ensures the stator flux closes around the stator and through the rotor, where it can do useful work.
So the bias coil makes a 0.7T step with the step switched coils adding the a sine component on top up to 1.15. As there is an un-energized gap between the two poles, the end result will average to a sine.
Until I try this out I am not sure what output into a load will be seen.
The bias coil only switches every half sine.
L192
-
Test of new MOSFET board.
Low RDS results in 5A of coil current for only 5V input.
10A for 10V with 10A recovery.
Switching node voltage has little signs of transient spike due to slow MOSFET switch off.
Slow switch on also means only 200mV of below ground ringing.
Tested @30A, heat sink remained cool.
Clock input was TTL.
Looks like this will make a good H bridge part.
Final shot shorter period using Arduino clock. 10A requires 12.7V input
L192
-
Here is the answer to the rotor flux problem.
My M16 steel stator was saturating at 1.5T(purple color on previous posted plots).A linear B/H plot from FEMM demonstrates this below.
If I apply a stator model equivalent to Pierres stator i.e. 33% pole length 66% solid steel, then 1.4T is achieved with only 5A through the coils, without any other input on the rotor.
The attached flux plot shows 1.4T or 2.8T swing with 1A of counter flux representing a 236W load.There is also more flux capacity on the stator and rotor.
Pierre's stator is unusually thick and I think we will not be able to replicate a working device without the thicker stator.
No matter how the flux is generated, if the stator steel saturates, the flux will not be fully coupled to the rotor.
-
Here is the Floating DC supplies circuit I have been using.
Its pretty bomb proof, even a driver failure shorting the +15V supply is recoverable if you use L series 7815 that have SOA protection.
L192
-
Makes for a slow turn off @70uS but additional cap across Drain Source solves parasitic turn on spike.
Cap now hold drain voltage after boost diode switches off. Cap discharges slowly so no dv/dt problem.
Turn on is not fast @5uS, however device doesn't get warm even at 30A
A compromise driver circuit that does the job.
L192
-
Test for robustness of Boost H bridge.
Attached shows 8 coil on periods in 10ms.
The 30V input voltage results in 45V recovery into cap bank.
This then feeds into input cap through 4ohm resistor, in this instance about 10A pk flow through the resistor back into the input cap.
This is just a single parallel pair of coils.
Note: This test was without rotor load. With rotor load the coil current (for this input voltage increases considerably.
The Boost H Bridge design is usable, although an improved MOSFET drive would reduce the LSS dissipation. The duty cycle for each coil pair is less than 100% so I will see if heat becomes a problem. If it does I will take the driver outboard and use a well tried circuit for the LSS's.
The HSS's have a low duty cycle, so they can use the existing on board driver.
It was noted that as you load the rotor, the coil current increases which decreases the input cap voltage. When the input cap voltage decreases, the potential difference between the input cap and the cap bank increases and therefore maintains recovery current to the input cap.
For 16.5A average through the coils 4A average recovery is maintained under all load conditions.
L192
-
Hi All,
I was very sceptical about this whole setup but thought I would give it a go and see what the outcome is, I see that many people have also made this setup and not succeeded in getting any reasonable output from the unit.
I have not given up with it yet but my observations of the whole topic are as follows:
1. Pierre posted a video showing his device producing 100+ volts output.
2. GotoLuc made a similar setup but with only 30 slots instead of 36 - I personally dont think that the missing 6 slots in the stator would make so much difference.
3. Pierre released a copy of the source code which was copied, this code also appears to be the same as that used by Pierre in his original video, in as much as the LEDS are looking similar.
4. Pierre produced drawings and after examination by people following this topic it was decided how to wire the stator.
In my opinion members of this forum have reproduced devices close enough for somebody to have found a result, then Pierre states that all these copies have just produced a rotating field and that the "pistons" are missing, and saying he has withheld some vital details, This cannot be the case as the reproduction has been done pretty faithfully, in so far as the rotating field etc, same LED Sequencing etc.
I think that returning the energy back to the caps, while it will help with the overall efficiency is not where the "secret" lies. We should be able to reproduce the high output voltage without the energy going back to the caps, although we would consume more current.
Obviously if we put many many more turns on the block (fixed rotor) we would increase the output voltage, but, this would then be just acting as a transformer.
I have a few questions which may be useless but they may cause a Eureka moment for someone else reading them.
1. What is the Orange material in between the rotor and the stator? Is it paper or some secret thing, if I put paper between my rotor and stator my low output voltage becomes even lower, but in Pierres video the orange material is in between his rotor and stator.
2. When using a switched mode power supply to feed the caps it will attempt to regulate the voltage of the capacitor bank, or at least my one did, it was necessary to add diodes in the +ve and -ve lines to prevent the psu from regulating the cap bank voltage.
My output voltage is very low, attached are some pictures, 1 of my setup and 1 of my voltage output waveform and 1 of the motor I used.
-
Wow, great job dhodge
As far as I can see you have done everything right based on the information that has been provided.
Hopefully Pierre will come back before the end of the year to show his improved DZ version 2
Thanks for taking the time to share your result even though they are similar to what replicators have achieved.
Regards
Luc
-
Forgot to mention in my post that I actually wired the stator 4 times and differently each time before settling back to the original one which is 36 slots each coil with 6 slot span, so all slots have 2 windings in them.
Have both ends of each coil out to terminals so can swap them at my leisure, spent weeks trying so many different permutations of the coils to end up no better off.
I honestly did not believe it could possibly work but thought I would give it a go anyway, unfortunately I am still not 100% sure that it wont work but above 90%, I hope for the sake of the planet and all the other things that go with it that Pierre comes along with the answers and follows it through.
Just for information, I had variable delays which could be entered into a web page on my attempt at the DZ generator, all of the Bridge boards were switched using SPI Port Expanders so only using a few IO Lines of the processor.
The coil switching was as in the below file, just to explain briefly there are 2 times set from the user interface, 1 is the overlap time and called switching_delay, the other is the coil running time - pulse_duration,
This is to say - coil on for pulse_duration time, then next coils in sequence are switched on and this means both sets are then on for the switching_delay time, then the first coils are switched off - that is to say the 2nd set of coils are on on their own for pulse_duration time. ( This is hard to say in words )
The xStepMode part at the begining of each step allows me to pause the sequencer and step manually, This is mainly for checking wiring for shorts (had 1 in the stator at some point) and correct direction of pole (N/S etc)
Only really posting to share information, if anyone sees any "deliberate mistake" it may be helpful. Coil notation is as in the connection between coils, eg COIL_1_2_HI means coil1- and coil 2+ connected to high power supply, COIL_1_2_LO is the same connection but to gnd, COIL_1_2_OFF means floating (Subject to body diodes).
Switching pattern should conform to the picture below (Taken from elsewhere on the site)
The time delays are accurate and can go as low as 50 microseconds, processor running at 150MHZ and program is compiled from C.
-
Hi All,
I was very sceptical about this whole setup but thought I would give it a go and see what the outcome is, I see that many people have also made this setup and not succeeded in getting any reasonable output from the unit.
I have not given up with it yet but my observations of the whole topic are as follows:
1. Pierre posted a video showing his device producing 100+ volts output.
2. GotoLuc made a similar setup but with only 30 slots instead of 36 - I personally dont think that the missing 6 slots in the stator would make so much difference.
3. Pierre released a copy of the source code which was copied, this code also appears to be the same as that used by Pierre in his original video, in as much as the LEDS are looking similar.
4. Pierre produced drawings and after examination by people following this topic it was decided how to wire the stator.
In my opinion members of this forum have reproduced devices close enough for somebody to have found a result, then Pierre states that all these copies have just produced a rotating field and that the "pistons" are missing, and saying he has withheld some vital details, This cannot be the case as the reproduction has been done pretty faithfully, in so far as the rotating field etc, same LED Sequencing etc.
I think that returning the energy back to the caps, while it will help with the overall efficiency is not where the "secret" lies. We should be able to reproduce the high output voltage without the energy going back to the caps, although we would consume more current.
Obviously if we put many many more turns on the block (fixed rotor) we would increase the output voltage, but, this would then be just acting as a transformer.
I have a few questions which may be useless but they may cause a Eureka moment for someone else reading them.
1. What is the Orange material in between the rotor and the stator? Is it paper or some secret thing, if I put paper between my rotor and stator my low output voltage becomes even lower, but in Pierres video the orange material is in between his rotor and stator.
2. When using a switched mode power supply to feed the caps it will attempt to regulate the voltage of the capacitor bank, or at least my one did, it was necessary to add diodes in the +ve and -ve lines to prevent the psu from regulating the cap bank voltage.
My output voltage is very low, attached are some pictures, 1 of my setup and 1 of my voltage output waveform and 1 of the motor I used.
Hi DHodge,
Attached is about the best I achieved with the BTS7960B bridge boards. In this test I was using a linear power supply so the power in measured was on the AC secondary.
If you look at previous posts, you will see that in the case of the stator I used for these tests, the flux wanted to couple across the teeth not so much across the rotor. I modeled the stator thickness ratio based on Pierres stator and this then ensured most of the flux crossed the rotor.The orange material is just plastic packing to stop the rotor rotating/vibrating.
You wont get enough current through the 5 or 6 coils in series, to achieve any more output than I have shown @25V DC input. Pierre later stated that he used parallel/series coils to overcome this limitation.
The BTS7960B bridge boards can't support the voltage boost function. I modified a couple to achieve this with additional diodes, but their voltage rating is too low for the voltage boost at 25V DC input, which is about 45V.
I have solved this with a discrete design H boost bridge.
Pierre showed the boost circuit as a separate schematic however, it really needs either a parallel or parallel/series coil arrangement to work and different code to run it.
So there is much missing from what Pierre has shown.
L192
-
Hi DHodge,
it really needs either a parallel or parallel/series coil arrangement to work .....
L192
-
Attached shows progress on my new build.
Driver boards for MOSFET switches, and 30 x isolated 15V DC supplied for all HSS.
Boost H bridges qty 5 per plank.
First plank constructed, and tested remaining two planks will stack vertically on first.
Software completed.
Wiring to stator coils then follows coils in opposed parallel.
For current rotor pole width, I will be using 7 x 2 coils on at a time, 7 coils per pole.
L192
-
WOW L192... you sure give it all you've got
Thanks for sharing
Luc
-
WOW L192... you sure give it all you've got
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Hi Gotoluc
The idea is to make it fairly bomb proof.
These switches will handle all the current you want, so in the case of my 30V supply, that would be up to +/-30A through each switch. The MOSFETS are rated at 210A so the RDS is very low. The input current is limited by the high side isolation diodes @ 30A.
Recovery current is rated up to 30A (average) per bridge.
The input rail is up to 60V and recovery up to 100V (limited to 48V by the super cap bank).
If you want to go up in voltage then just change the LSS, for example to 100V. The HSS are isolated by diodes rated at 100V.
In practice, the boost voltage manifests as current drive to charge the cap bank. The cap bank then supplies current to the much smaller value input cap via the 4 ohm resistor.
I may still be missing something in the architecture, but the building blocks are good.
The HSS's use the on board opto drives and are slow switchers and just control bridge polarity.
The LSS's are driven by Toshiba drivers that have a fast on time and a controlled off time to limit the voltage transient when you turn the LSS's off.
Some may wonder why I didn't just use charge pump MOSFET drivers? and the answer to that is they work OK when driven with a periodic waveform but when your duty cycle starts varying the LSS have to be switched sufficiently frequently to charge the capacitor to maintain a reasonable gate voltage. I wanted to remove his a potential source of problems ,so went for isolated drivers.
Still searching for a 10KW 3 phase motor (not Chinese), that will provide a stator thickness two thirds of the teeth depth.
L192
-
looks like a 1970s Moog:)
-
Here is the answer to the rotor flux problem.
My M16 steel stator was saturating at 1.5T(purple color on previous posted plots).A linear B/H plot from FEMM demonstrates this below.
If I apply a stator model equivalent to Pierres stator i.e. 33% pole length 66% solid steel, then 1.4T is achieved with only 5A through the coils, without any other input on the rotor.
The attached flux plot shows 1.4T or 2.8T swing with 1A of counter flux representing a 236W load.There is also more flux capacity on the stator and rotor.
Pierre's stator is unusually thick and I think we will not be able to replicate a working device without the thicker stator.
No matter how the flux is generated, if the stator steel saturates, the flux will not be fully coupled to the rotor.
So the stator cross sectional area must be greater than or equal to that of the rotor? Why aren't the pole ribs a flux limiting bottleneck if they have the smallest area?
If I have digested your posts correctly, then the coils at either end of the rotor are used for EMF collection. So can the same results be achieved with 120 degrees of stator (9 coils) and a half length rotor, or even 90 degrees (3 stator coils) with extra coils also at both ends of the rotor? I ask because this could cut the cost of the electronics by 60 or 70 percent. It could also allow for simple fabrication of the array of stator segments. I'm thinking bars machined over the length with a bull nosed cutter then welded together in a radial arrangement so the coil field focal point is the end of the half length rotor.
-
So the stator cross sectional area must be greater than or equal to that of the rotor? Why aren't the pole ribs a flux limiting bottleneck if they have the smallest area?
If I have digested your posts correctly, then the coils at either end of the rotor are used for EMF collection. So can the same results be achieved with 120 degrees of stator (9 coils) and a half length rotor, or even 90 degrees (3 stator coils) with extra coils also at both ends of the rotor? I ask because this could cut the cost of the electronics by 60 or 70 percent. It could also allow for simple fabrication of the array of stator segments. I'm thinking bars machined over the length with a bull nosed cutter then welded together in a radial arrangement so the coil field focal point is the end of the half length rotor.
Hi FixedSys,
Yes, the FEMM plots confirm that the stator CSA has to equal or exceed the rotor CSA, if you want most of the stator flux to cross the rotor.
5HP upwards motors, have greater stator thickness in proportion to the teeth depth and offer that larger CSA.
In the thin stator FEMM plot, the stator thickness (both sides combined) is equivalent to about 4 teeth thickness of the 5 teeth shown, so the flux impediment is the stator. The stator enters saturation before the rotor even gets close.
In the thick stator FEMM plot, the stator thickness (both sides combined) is equivalent to about 8 teeth thickness, so the flux impediment is the teeth feeding the rotor, however we can still easily get the flux level through the rotor up to saturation, which for M15 steel is about 1.5T
On the face of it, other geometries could offer improvements however, not something I am considering at this time, as this would be introducing another variable into a mix that we still don't understand.
Regards
L192
-
Attached.
1. Output power @15V DC input
2. Unfiltered output voltage showing recovery voltage transitions
3. Unfiltered output voltage driven to maximum. Note: stator in full saturation, as predicated by FEMM simulations.
4. Picture of finished Boost H bridges x 15 driving opposite stator coils in parallel. Note: control/driver hardware behind the bridge boards.
5. Super cap recovery current (yellow) and voltage(about 25V DC for approx 15V DC input) [/size]
7 coils either side are energised (2 pole), 5 slot pitch. Rotor covers 6 poles.
Some further experimentation with software planned however, main push now will be to find new stator from 5HP to 10HP motor.
Highly inefficient at this time, as saturation of stator causes coil inductance to fall rapidly above 10A total input draw. If the stator was thicker and did not saturate, the coil inductance would be higher and recovery voltage/current would increase.
The maximum input on this test was 47A @ 15.5V DC.
The H bridge and recovery circuits remain cool. 4 Ohm resistor (large heatsink), gets warm.
The other two 58A diodes on heatsinks are...
A. Isolation for DC Switch Mode power supply input.
B. In series with 4 Ohm resistor to block initial charging of 27F super cap bank.
The bank charges initially through the H bridge isolation diodes when the HSS switches are turned on.
As the circuit runs straight away the bank charges fast through the recovery diodes, as well.
At the moment the parallel connected coils are 180 degs apart.
There maybe some improvement in rotor coupling by offsetting the coils, so they couple through through the rotor by the shortest path.
L192
-
WOW L192, you are the most dedicated true builder I have ever seen so far.
Thanks for sharing
Kind regards
Luc
-
Just an update on the analysis of my scheme as it stands...
The move to 30 x H bridges driving parallel coils was largely influenced by the need to increase coil current drive, as the inductance of 6 coils in series was limiting current, demanding a higher supply voltage and this device needed to function on 25V DC. As I wanted to use a 2 pole scheme, H bridges seemed the best way to proceed.
Setting aside the my stator saturation issues, identified in FEMM, the main problem is input current not contributing to output.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 50/60Hz output is a composite of discrete MMF steps with individual pole reversals only occurring after pole 15 is switched.
The large static current draw is present with or without the rotor, and is due to the low inductance seen for each pair of parallel coils, switched by the individual H bridges.
The very low inductance is largely a product of each coil pair being switched on for 6 steps. This maintains the continuity of MMF however, once inductance is overcome (within the first ON step), very little current is required to maintain a static magnetic field, so in this case, the applied power is largely wasted as heat for at least 5 step periods.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The scheme Pierre showed for series parallel operation, was really suited to 4 pole operation, (if you work through it), with 6 coils per pole and three coils in each pole in parallel.
As 2 x 3 coils are energized in series, every time the pole advances, there is a new coil switched into each chain. This make a change to the series inductance, as the new coil(s) charge, while maintaining the pole MMF.
It should be noted that this circuit is effectively a current multiplier* and the voltage increase on the cap bank, over input voltage is constrained by the feed back to the input via the 4 ohm resistor.
Coil energy aided by the boost function of the DC supply rail when the coils are released, the current developed charges the next coil to be activated. The continued current from the supply ensures series coil current is maintained, which in turn maintains MMF.
*I have found an example of a current multiplier that uses multiple pulse transformers that has similarities however, no examples of this this exact configuration.
This direct reuse of coil energy is an important feature of how the device achieves its performance and also explains why the coils have to be kept in a series configuration within an active pole group.
Step charging an inductor is largely a lossless process when the supply is a voltage source.
The trailing coil(s) in a pole group are being sequentially switched out of the pole group, with the energy being recovered into the cap bank via the LSS body diodes and the recovery diodes.
This arrangement limits the power wasted as heat.
So, the challenge is to modify my scheme, so the individual coil pairs, see inductance change at every step but without a dropout in the composite MMF i.e. an unbroken sine distribution.
L192
-
WOW L192, you are the most dedicated true builder I have ever seen so far.
Thanks for sharing
Kind regards
Luc
It's really too bad that all that dedication, talent, knowledge, effort and money is being spent on chasing a hoax.
-
It's really too bad that all that dedication, talent, knowledge, effort and money is being spent on chasing a hoax.
What you mean ? exactly please explain, Faffing about with inductors can be a mugs game adding bits
and experimenting is best on a one-off prototype arm of the original as practical what was thought to be a good
idea can often turn to a bad idea if not properly tested out first and a waste of resources as we experimenters often
find ;D ;D ;D good though ain it!
-
Start small please. Only if you have something make it bigger. Don't waste your time, don't waste money. At anytime mechanical switching is better using rotary device.
-
It's really too bad that all that dedication, talent, knowledge, effort and money is being spent on chasing a hoax.
My day job gainfully employs any technical knowledge/ability I may have. My heretical activities are conducted at night under the cover of darkness!
Seriously though, like many on this forum I have spent the last 20 years working on either patent replications, online or my own ideas and so far I have not seen anything close to over unity however, everybody is entitled to a hobby, so think how much money and time I would have spent if that hobby was golf! Some might say that putting a ball around on a green for hours on end is a waste of time and money.
Hobby's are subjective activities, so each to their own!
L192
-
Start small please. Only if you have something make it bigger. Don't waste your time, don't waste money. At anytime mechanical switching is better using rotary device.
Mechanical (rotary) switching, would have the advantage of robustness and not having to worry about protecting semiconductors however, if the success of a device relies on the scale of replication of building blocks, for example a closed loop of circuit building blocks, then rotary switching would become complex and quite a build in its own right.
If you look at my earlier posts, you will see the building block (boost circuit) I am using in this scheme was tested in prototype form before replicating 30 times, which is a sensible path to take.
The discrete electronic route I have taken is a large improvement over previous attempts i.e. relays and two different H bridge boards. The current scheme can generate voltage over 30Hz to 120Hz range (limited by delay settings) without reduction in amplitude. In the previous attempts the high series inductance was the limiting factor.
A final point... I realize that many may not have the resources to commit to such an expensive build however, I don't see why that should cause me to limit my expenditure on this project, after all who would bother to comment on this if I were spending the money on golf, or sailing!
L192
-
Quote from: listener192
« Reply #1343 on: October 27, 2018, 11:13:33 AM »
"everybody is entitled to a hobby," Hobby's are subjective activities, so each to their own"
Well said and thank you for sharing benevolently
jj
-
Attached are some scope shots from the latest scheme.
Still two poles 7 coils each (opposite parallel).
The Arduino digital IO has been extended by treating the analog pins as digital outputs so 60 pins now available.
Individual control of HSS and LSS switches in each of the 15 H bridges.
Links have been placed between the coils and 7+7(parallel) coils are driven in series.
Example:
HSS 1 left = on LSS 7 right = on.
LSS 8 right = on, LSS 7 right = off.
HSS 2 left = on, HSS 1 left = off.
and so the sequence moves forward.
Unfortunately the use of H bridges doesn't allow the sequence to continue unbroken so 1/16 & 15/30 are not linked.
When the leading coil of the sequence of 7, reaches coil 15/30, the trailing edge coils are sequentially turned off at the same time a reverse sequence starts at coil 1/16.
The feed forward boost into the leading coils in the sequence, terminates prematurely and this is seen in the waveform.
The unfiltered output voltage waveform is starting to look closer to that of Pierre's however.
I ran this at 30V DC input and the no load input current draw was only about 3.5A
Output was about 150W approx, so much better than previous schemes.
I should mention the recovery current was much higher in proportion to the input current averaging about 5A for under 9A input,
whereas the previous scheme was producing 10A but for an input of 40A.
More testing required before deciding the next step.
L192
-
....This make a change to the series inductance, as the new coil(s) charge, while maintaining the pole MMF.
Great work. This is an important discovery that I had missed. This is changing the intensity which in addition to the movement of the field will contribute much to the overall rate of change factor in Faraday's law.
Are we close to being able to put together a timing diagram that describes the interaction of all these factors?
-
Attached is a doc that shows part of the sequence. This is only an example as my scheme has 7 coils in circuit at all times.
The failing of this scheme is the requirement for the H bridges to reverse coil current every 180 degrees.
MMF is still generated by each coil in the reverse chain however, the boost function is not realized. This may be seen in the recovery current scope shot in my previous post. Note the absence of recovery current during the negative going part of the output waveform.
The forward progression of boost current only is fully realized while there are 7(+7) coils active, so 9 out of the 15 steps, each 180 degrees.
I should point out that the changes to produce this were easy and so I tried this first.
Splitting the coils again into a series loop with half bridges and parallel sections as Pierre has suggested, will take much more time to work out.
L192
-
Great work. This is an important discovery that I had missed. This is changing the intensity which in addition to the movement of the field will contribute much to the overall rate of change factor in Faraday's law.
Are we close to being able to put together a timing diagram that describes the interaction of all these factors?
The stator composite MMF, producing the output waveform needs to be varying in amplitude at a 50/60Hz rate but not dropping to zero apart from the zero cross areas of the sine.
The individual MMF's comprising each step created by the current through the individual coils, must therefore also not drop to zero however, if they stay static a lot of current is drawn once the inductance of the coil is overcome. By charging a group of coils in parallel or series parallel and discharging all in series into a leading coil, current is maintained through the charge group coils until the next step.
I have looked at Pierre's switch scheme drawing out 20 sections or so on paper. I have figured out how to parallel/series charge 6 coils and then to series discharge into a single coil.
What I am having difficulty with, is completing this action in reverse direction to generate the opposite pole. The traveling direction need to be the same as the other pole for the switching sequence but the current direction needs to be in the opposite direction.
Two completely separate switching circuits with separate coils could accomplish this easily, but you have to be able to visualize a scheme that will work with one set of coils.
L192
-
Mechanical switching can get very complicated ,I've tried
Electronic is the way to go if you have the knowledge, which sadly I don't.
Using the reverse fields is part of the solution I believe
Like you say I don't golf, fish, hunt, take trips, I enjoy tinkering to each his own.
Thanks for sharing and good luck
artv
-
Attached are two pictures.
The first shows the EMF waveform in a conventional generator with a North and South magnet alternately passing a coil.
The second shows a scope shot of the EMF (loaded), from a 600T test coil, about 5 slots wide placed inside the stator.
The main difference between waveform's, is the presence of signal during the inter-magnet period.
In the conventional generator, the signal during this period drops to almost zero however, in the DZ style generator, this period is occupied by the pulsed waveform, although the stator coils in registration with the test coil are not energized.
The only source of pulsing during this period is from the coils creating N & S poles, out of registration (up to 90 degrees) , see third picture that show the current on the coils at 90 degrees.The current clamp was just applied over the coil loops to show the relative time of current, so this is not a calibrated measurement of current.
I have not shown this, but placing the clamp over the coils in registration, shows there is no current on these coils during this period.
This reduces the magnitude of change, of the composite 60Hz waveform, resulting in reduced induction.
Each pole is 7 coils wide so the inter pole gap is 8 coils.
For this test coil there is a huge airgap, so its not clear why this flux is wanting to cross the gap. I also removed the coil core and repeated the test and it was the same.
This requires further investigation to understand why this is happening.
L192
-
Hi. Just a small demo of the TTU v.1. Everything is ready for the funny part which is the programming. :)
30 primaries and 6 secondaries.
25 steps per half cycle right now. No limit in stepping. (The more the stepping the less the input current). Variable output frequency and input current. Variable input frequency.
Square wave output.
2 X PSU inputs for 24V, 12V, and 5V supplying.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6xv7qhcdTM&feature=youtu.be
Regards
-
Hi. Just a small demo of the TTU v.1. Everything is ready for the funny part which is the programming. :)
30 primaries and 6 secondaries.
25 steps per half cycle right now. No limit in stepping. (The more the stepping the less the input current). Variable output frequency and input current. Variable input frequency.
Square wave output.
2 X PSU inputs for 24V, 12V, and 5V supplying.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6xv7qhcdTM&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6xv7qhcdTM&feature=youtu.be)
Hi Jeg,
Substantial build and you stuck with the alternative design, respect for that!
This should have the advantage of keeping the flux in the stator, until in registration with the rotor.
Regards
L192
-
Thanks L192.
Device has designed with no intention of using internal fixed coil. In the video i take the output through 6 of the coils, all in parallel. But I can also use the primaries as secondaries the same time. In general many options for testing. I use low side and high side switches some of them with back to back mosfets as it has been discussed before some pages.
Overlapping pulses at the one third of the pulse.
15 coils driven as CW and 15 coils as CCW.
I have already used between 500 and 10 steps per half cycle. As I said the more the steps the less the input current.
Regards
-
I adjusted the proportions of my FEMM model to more accurately represent my stator.
Driving the 2 x 7 coils at 1.5A average (this would be a much higher pulse current) each, brings the stator up to 1.5T and the start of saturation for M15 steel.
I modeled a 0 deg and a 90 deg case (note: coils relative to rotor). Easier to fix the coils and move the rotor. In the 90 deg case you can see that there is no flux through the rotor, only a very low air coupled flux (0.045T) through the side of the rotor.
Also attached, shot of coil composite coil current (dark Blue) & output EMF (loaded). Used a large current sensor around the coil cables.
Further measurement shows that there is a primary power supply current draw that is coincident with this period but does not show up coincident with the composite coil current.
I will start working through the individual bridges to determine which ones are responsible for this.
L192
-
Attached is a slightly improved waveform, more symmetrical which produces a fairly good sine when filtered.
This was achieved by fine adjustments in code delays. I achieve about 150W maximum output with this waveform but for about 450W DC input, so pretty inefficient.
A vast amount of power is being dissipated as coil heat. You can see from the voltage and current waveforms that the 60Hz wave front is reasonable well formed.
I checked the coil currents for those in registration with the rotor and those at 90 degrees to the rotor. Interestingly, I found both to be almost identical in amplitude, not what I was expecting, as the coils not in registration should be of lower inductance due to lack of the rotor flux coupling.
This implying that a varying flux is established in the stator that is fairly uniform and that the rotor does not offer an appreciably lower reluctance path, as far as this flux is concerned.In an AC generator with a DC energized rotor, there is a point coupling of flux onto the stator teeth in registration , it is a single flux that does not compete with any other flux (ignoring lenz for the moment).
The flux spreads out around the stator in both directions and is at right angles to all of the stator coils, only where the rotor flux couples with the stator teeth, are those coils subjected to a changing flux that produces induction.
Is this flux totally uniform or is there something happening in the direction of rotation along the stator?
Well yes there is and this is normally referred to as armature reaction, see attached diagram.
Note how the flux crossing point from rotor to stator is skewed in the air gap, the lines of flux trail behind the turning rotor.
In an AC generator, the effect of armature reaction depends on the power factor i.e the phase relationship between the terminal voltage and armature current. Reactive power (lagging) is the magnetic field energy, so if the generator supplies a lagging load, this implies that it is supplying magnetic energy to the load. Since this power comes from excitation of the rotor, the net reactive power gets reduced in the generator. Hence, the armature reaction is demagnetizing.
Similarly, the armature reaction has magnetizing effect when the generator supplies a leading load (as leading load takes the leading VAR) and in return gives lagging VAR (magnetic energy) to the generator.
As in this case both armature flux and rotor flux lead, induced emf E by 90o, it can be said, rotor flux and armature flux are in the same direction. Hence, the resultant flux is simply arithmetic sum of rotor flux and armature flux.
In case of a purely resistive load, the armature reaction is cross magnetizing only.
Now, how much of the above is reproduced in the DZ?
L192
-
Simple answer to the coil current issue.
As I am running the coils in series albeit each coil is also in parallel with an opposite coil, of course the current is shared, so the coils not in registration do not contribute to output but have limited inductance and their resistance will consume power.
Compare this to a generator with rotating flux source and you find that it is similar, with several stator coils in series forming a distributed winding (to produce a better sine). So some of these coils will be out of registration and will only have limited inductance and losses due to resistance.
L192
-
On Saturday, I discovered I had a few shorted turns on my rotor coils. I removed all wire and modified the rotor so I could wind some additional turns.
I have rewound with 0.8mm wire but still need to add some more turns to get the 230V operation I desire.
I achieve about 165V RMS with what I have wound on so far, but decided to try a load first before winding more turns on.
Increasing the load now results in step increases in output power, where before there was a maximum load achieved then further increases would result in a decrease in output power.
No magic break through however, the shorted turns were certainly impeding performance.
The 0.8mm wire is a slightly heavier gauge than the wire I removed and I see that has helped reduce the IR loss a bit. That caused me to ponder on the gauge that Pierre used, which in the first video is shown as 20AWG which is close to 0.8mm however, Pierre's wire is quiet stiff and supports the line outlets. On that basis, I think the gauge must be closer to 1mm or 18AWG, which will make a significant difference to the current versus volt drop on the rotor windings.
For 700ft wire length the 18 AWG wire resistance would be 4.799 ohms instead of 7.109 ohms for 20AWG.
L192
-
Here is a quick check on my current build performance.
INPUT OUTPUT RECOVERY
117.5W Av 29W Av 32W Av@25V
224W Av 59W Av 67W Av@35V
373.5W Av 91.7W Av 110W Av@45V
Note: @50V, the max output with the same load used for these tests, is about 138W
The boost recovery circuit is working reasonably.
The ratio of input to output is constant.
A check on flux linkage using 7 + 7 coils in series/parallel energized with 50Hz sine indicates about 0.89%, (close to reasonable transformer operation), which ties up with the recovery to output ratio.
Obviously the input current is way too high, likely due to holding coils on for 7 steps.
It all comes down to generating the advancing MMF wave front in the stator with the overlapping coils.
The low turns value for each coil (35) in combination with parallel coil operation is required to get current to rise in the coil within the step period. This is at odds with what is required once a flux level has been established in the stator. The flux could be maintained by coils with a large number of turns and a lower current however, these coils would be problematic as they would present a high inductance to overcome to rise the current during the step period.
If a sine current were applied to these 35T coils to establish flux linkage i.e 100W input (88W output), then a pulsed composite signal is established on top of the sine current, synchronized in phase.
We know that at least 80% of this pulse portion of the output could be recovered.
We also know that recovery energy is proportional to load, so the real question with this scenario, is what happens to the overall input current when it is always increasing or decreasing due to the slope of the sine i.e there is no time that current is static?
Note: this would not be using half sines as the input voltage for the switches.
I have not figured out how to apply the current sine to the coils yet.
L192
-
Attached is a waveform close to what I am trying to achieve. I still don't have a good circuit to achieve this yet. The actual waveform would be the stepped one with the trailing pulse in the pole being sequentially turned off.
This time for each coil in the series chain that is on for more than one step, a current slope is present. The pulses generate recovery when they turn off. This recovers at least 80% of the energy stored in the coil.
The continual current slope, should provide transformer like flux linkage performance.
The second shot may be a little closer, as the pulses maintain more amplitude down to the zero cross point.
L192
-
@L192 Hi :)
It is nice you still keep it going.And when looking all way back where essence is you might actually try to make coil arrangement where magnetic field could smoothly shift from one driving coil to another for simulating moving magnet. Like back in old TPU days... The rule of the thumb for induction is the rate of change and the drag for current strength.
P.S> Personally I paused a project due other priority things in life but will continue on it at some point as well.
Good luck!
-
Hi T-1000,
Thanks for your encouragement.
The geometry of the DZ does not support energized stator coils to achieve flux cutting in the rotor, as there is no perpendicular path.
I have looked at architectures that would support flux cutting utilizing a stator and the only one I can describe, uses a circular rotor with teeth around the periphery.
If you energize coil on such a rotor, the flux will cross into the stator flow left and right around the stator.
Consider a small flux level.. the flux will take the shortest path around the inner edge of the stator. As the flux level is increased, the flux lines compress and will move outward to increase the flux density in the mid portion of the stator.
Add even more flux and the outer portion of the stator becomes full with flux lines. This process progressively cuts the coil windings on the stator teeth at 90 degrees, so this becomes the direction of movement using right hand rule and because the flux will flow through both sides of the stator coil in registration, the direction of electron flow (looking up at the coil from the middle of the stator) is anti-clockwise on both coil edges.
Physical movement is not necessary to achieve the above however, what benefit this derives I am unsure as both flux linkage and flux cutting are subject to lenz.In the above example, as a current is induced in the stator coil due to a connected load, lenz law will cause a counter flux to be setup that will oppose the flux coupled from the rotor.
In the case of the DZ, my current thought is on being able to make the stepped waveform behave like a sine current in a flux linkage configuration. Once that has been achieved i.e. normal transformer operation, then the magic would be in the recovery of the energy stored in the magnetic field, given up every time a coil turns off. So 100W input yeilds say 85W output but 80% of this is recovered ..68WInput =100W-68W =32W for 85W output.
At the moment the coils behave as DC solenoids, once current has risen in the coil, in particular when they are on for several step periods. This wasted energy appears as heat due to the coil IR losses. At the moment, the only way I can see to counter this, is to keep inductance present, to limit the current by keeping the current changing during the coil on periods beyond the initial current rise. This is the idea of the sine current application. Using half sines as the supply rail for the switches may also achieve the desired result. Initially I dismissed this due to an experiment conducted using the bridge boards however, there were two many other problems that stopped that attempted working properly.
The impediment to making this work is the synchronization of the stepped waveform with the zero cross of the half sines. Before I used an interrupt structure with case statements and a zero cross detector. This allow the interrupt to call the start of the stepped waveform routine. There was a problem however described below that was never resolved.
My current scheme uses delays in the code for the HSS delays, required as the opto couplers are slow to switch the MOSFETS. The use of delay in an interrupt driven routine is not possible as they use internal timers with interrupts, and these get turned off. Perhaps polling a pin for zero cross would be better, as delays could be kept for timing the steps.
If you model the 150uF cap that Pierre has across his FWBR, you see well developed half sines. This is what he is feeding his relays with, so I believe this is significant.
Regards
L192
-
The geometry of the DZ does not support energized stator coils to achieve flux cutting in the rotor, as there is no perpendicular path.
Is it possible that in addition to linking; flux cutting is achieved through the distortion of flux from armature reaction and / or other fields?
It would appear that flux distortion is the only way possible to properly move flux to achieve cutting. Perhaps there's distortion occurring in sympathy with the 60 Hz or harmonic, and perhaps the OU is found in a combination of linking and cutting?
-
Flux cutting occurs in a generator with a physically rotating rotor, irrespective of armature reaction.
The rotor flux flows into the stator and distributes left and right around the stator. As the rotor moves across a given coil the flux level increase and cuts both edges of the coil however, it is the increase in flux density across the coil that causes induction, as this is the effective movement into the coil (right hand rule applies). If the rotor was static, flux cutting could still occur if the flux level in the rotor was changed by a rise and fall in rotor coil current.
In the DZ, the flux from a stator coil enters the rotor but there is no path at 90 degrees to the rotor coil, so the flux passes through the center of the coil, changing the flux density hence producing induction by flux linkage.
Flux cutting offers no advantage over flux linkage.
L192
-
Line Synchronization:
I tried polling a digital pin to look for the rising edge of a zero cross pulse but this was way too slow.
I have achieved locking the stepped sine waveform to an interrupt. I moved the stepping code from the loop and placed it in a named ISR. The loop remains empty.I replaced any delay commands with delayMicroseconds, which don't use interrupt timers.
Just using a square wave from a function generator (purple waveform), I locked the stepped sine to 50Hz.
There is a bit of phase shift between the two signals which is because my original code did not start the waveform at zero. The pot input delay setting was used to get the frequency in the ball park.
I have a zero cross detector to connect next.
L192
-
Attached scope shots showing stepped waveform (blue) synchronized to line sine (yellow).
Zero cross circuit was modified to add a schmitt trigger prior to output, to remove jitter.
Falling edge interrupt was used and code adjusted to ensure correct step start point.
I should mention that the line supply has slightly flat top sine, which is due to supply harmonics from
large numbers of switched mode power supplies that are in use today.
L192
-
I have been experimenting with different overlapping composite waveforms with little output power. As side note, I found during this exercise, I had my coil 10 and 9 reversed, so I corrected this.
I subsequently went back to my linked coil arrangement that uses 30 coils, 15 in reverse parallel with their 180 degree counterparts.This configuration produces an output about 35% of input (this equates to about 135W limited by my voltage input ratings) and I have been puzzled as to why this waveform was different.
Firstly I found that maximum output was NOT where I had the main group of of contiguous overlapping coils, but instead it was when the rotor was over the coil 30-1 & 15-16 junction. This I call the transition region. Note: there is no series link between coil 15 & coil 1 in this configuration.
The first attached scope shot shows the unloaded output voltage. The dip in the waveform over the positive peak is the transition region from coil 30 to coil 1.
The coil switch pattern follows...
Coils 8 -15 are on and their 180 degree reversed counter part, coils 23 - 30. The coils decrement every step so 8 & 3 are turned off then 9 & 24 and so on down to coils 15 & 30. As each of these coil pairs are turned off, coils 1 to 8 and 16 to 23 are progressively turned on (initially inverted by the H bridges to maintain same polarity), so there are always 8 coils on per pole.
As the sequence progresses, the poles move away from the transition region into the middle region of the series linked coil group. If the rotor is aligned in this area, there is only a very small output, although of the face of it, the stepped waveform is identical.
So ... what is the difference?
The middle region coils always have one coil turning on and one coil turning off in the pole group. So essentially the current through the pole group is not changing.
The pole group over the transition region comprises of two sets of coils that add up to 8 coils, these also have one coil turning on and one coil turning off however, they are not series linked so the the number of coils in series is changing i.e 8 to 0 and 0 to 8.
In the decrementing coil group, inductance is reducing and current is increasing.
Note: The recovery current is progressively greater as the number of coils reduce.
In the incrementing coil group, inductance is increasing and current is reducing.
The overall current for the complete 8 coil pole remains constant, just as a contiguous coil pole however, as the pole is divided into two sections, each section experiences large changes in current
Note: No recovery current until 9 coils are in series i.e. No 1 coil switches off. This change in current applied to the stepped waveform is key to improved induction.
The second scope shot shows the input current from the (DC supply in purple).
Now, I have confirmed this by accident rather than design, as it was the use of only 15 H bridges that created this break in the series coil continuity.
The last scope shot shows the output power, which is only limited by input ratings.
So how to improve this?
1. I have tested more than 8+8 coils but this is counter productive.
2. A 36 slot stator with 6 slot coil pitch would allow another coil overlap.
3. Reducing coil current in the middle region to stop wasting power as heat.
L192
-
Just a small update.
Attached shows the same input current as before but input is now half sine.
As you can see, the middle region where muitiple coils are in series, is now boosted to the same level as the single coils period, which are now reduced due to the switch period being close to zero crossing.
L192
-
Looks like Pierre re-surfaced...
He has uploaded two of his old videos to his channel today:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbTYIW_yo65zgWdMlcA3s9A (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbTYIW_yo65zgWdMlcA3s9A)
PmgR
-
Looks like Pierre re-surfaced...
It is unfinished project and still not clear method of obtaining magnetic flux change with fraction of the power in a "slow motion" way.. For background information - the "normal" change of magnetic flux is happening too fast for proper induction in other experiments with reactive power driving a change.
Hopefully Pierre could elaborate on that?
Cheers!
-
A couple of scope shots from new 30HS Switch + 30LS Switch + 30 Intercoil switch rig, running a continuously changing coil current pattern also in rotation.
Very clean sine output with minimal filtering.
Very robust boost recovery on all pulses.
Recovery does reduce input current draw.
Still grossly inefficient.
L192
-
No load output.
-
No load output.
The input power need to be replaced with reactive power on resonant LC tank where coil is inductor for magnetic field induction there. Then you may see something out of ordinary happening when compare input vs output.
Cheers!
-
Basically the device is a rotary transformer but not an efficient one in my current configuration.
If you take the same coils, in this case 11 connected in series, with the inverse parallel windings (a further 11 coils 180 degrees apart) in place and apply say 30V 50 or 60Hz AC, you get over 85% of input coupled to the rotor coil. This demonstrates that the magnetic circuit is capable of achieving normal transformer efficiencies.
This indicates that I am still way off base in a stepped synthesis of a sine.
This is as much about coupling energy, as it is about not wasting energy. There is way too much power being dissipated as heat in the coils.
L192
The waveform is intended to synthesise a 50 or 60Hz sine in a manner that allows energy recovery.
-
DZ2 on Youtube
https://youtube.com/channel/UCbTYIW_yo65zgWdMlcA3s9A (https://youtube.com/channel/UCbTYIW_yo65zgWdMlcA3s9A)
Mfg RoliK
-
'open DZ2 ' compared 'enclosed micro wave owen chamber with rotating disc'
MfGrusze
OCWL
-
In DZ2 No magnetic field really moves.
It acts like in a movie. Deceives the eye and the brain.
If you examine the movie frames, they are actually many still images.
The same with the different sections of magnetic fields.
SEE his illustration with the jumping LEDs. They jump and increase and decrease in light intensity. Nothing MOVES!
Imposing building. A lot of things. A lot of money spent.
-
it seems that all of Pierre's videos have been removed. Does anyone have archives or downloads?
-
Yes , Hello somebody will be kind to show the downloads videos from Pierre? or a site where we can see It?, maybe some messages from pierre direct to the group. Thanks a lot for help .
-
He was harassed until he left the feed. Just as they do to all who say this is OU. They come out of the walls immediately and keep it up until they leave.
I personally think he would have had more luck by charge pumping caps and then dumping them into the coils with a fast diode and cap set to capture the power used to hit the coils. Then at intervals use a make before break to keep a charge set on the output and link the transfer cap back to the input via a isolated dc-dc.
-
I remember several replication “attempts “ emphasis on very big _Attempts _
Will make a few calls and report back ..see if there is any news ?
Respectfully
Chet K
-
I remember several replication “attempts “ emphasis on very big _Attempts _
...
Yes, many expensive and good attempts, but no true replications of the whole system.
Correct me if I’m wrong. No one included a large transformer in the circuit during their tests, even though the first video shows that without it the voltage in the cap banks drops steadily until the transformer is plugged into the generator output. Only then did the system become self-sustaining.
He never divulged any information about the transformer, other than as large and home-made, did he?
Respectfully
Cadman
-
I believe the more serious replicators kept a good rapport with inventor ... off forum,
It did get a bit noisy here , as replicators were not seeing the effect !
Not going to bother persons until Monday about this .
Will report back .
Thx
Chet
-
Over the last few years, I have revisited Pierre's old DZgen1 videos many times and the last time I watched video 3 in slow motion around 10:00sec and on, I noticed something interesting.
Take a look at how long it takes before his Arduino comes up after he plugs the power adapter into the wall. In slow motion it takes a few counts. The relay power supply indicator shows 4.48V (as the power coming from the wall goes through a diode, dropping the voltage from 4.98 to 4.48).
Then take a look at the blue LEDs and red LEDs and note how those LEDs are not moving yet, yet the top blue LED goes on and off multiple times (3x) and so do two of the red LEDs of the relays. But nothing is rotating yet.
However, the voltage meter on the output coil is already showing 90V and then 138V before the relays have started moving! The relay voltmeter also goes to 4.98V indicating that the power is now coming from the rotor output (or whatever is inside that rotor).
There is no way that the output rotor coil can have any (steady) A/C voltage if the relay pattern is not moving yet (we have only that top blue LED go on and off 3x). I also find it interesting that the voltage on the meter is extremely stable with all these relays turning on/off yet no cap on the output.
For those of you that have his videos stored, revisit video 3 in slow motion and let me know what you think.
PmgR
-
Channels in Arduino sometimes have different functions on one pin.
Arduino initialization turns these pins to High and then switches to Low.
Later, each pin is set separately in the program.
Everyone who works with Arduino knows this.
When Arduino resets, it sets some pins to HIGH / LOW and if there is a relay, it turns it on, so the current appears on some coils.
Therefore, the meter sees something. There is nothing strange for you here.
-
There is no way that the output rotor coil can have any (steady) A/C voltage if the relay pattern is not moving yet
In addition, there is a cable connected between the last two supercapacitors in the raw of his cap bank. It gives me the impression that current from the source of his mosfets goes there and charge the last capacitor instead of wasting it to the ground of the system. But this is just an assumption of what this cable is doing there! Only Pierre knows for sure.
Hi guys :)
-
Well
As of this writing
It seems there have been technical issues that
Hindered replications .
And I must add
Incredible efforts were involved
Years long !!
However, there still might be help offered by Pierre at some point if he can find the issue ?
I do not ask anyone about specifics
Just generic ...how’s it going ....?
Respectfully
Chet K
-
It's a hoax. Logically it cannot work for all the reasons I provided previously.
Pierres new build tries to keep the flux in the stator except when in registration with the rotor. This was the fundamental flaw of the original design, a lot of energised coils with low inductance and no flux coupling. The only result I achieved was with a static set of coils and a switching pattern that varied the current through those coils.. about 40% coupling. In the end I used bidirectional MOSFET switches to simulate the relays. A transformer supplied half wave supply was used to vary coil current as another method.
In a real generator the DC energised rotor is producing induction in the stator coils through 360 degrees. How can simulating the moving field in the stator hope to have any efficiency when only a small number of degrees of rotation will couple the stator to the rotor. I use the word simulating rather than emulating as you cannot emulate a field moving through space with stepping discrete coils.
I don't believe that lenz aw can be circumvented, so on that premise .. where is the additional energy source with this device?
L192
-
Has anyone had any success with this?
Can we have a telegram group where inventors and engineers come together to crack the cheapest most effective way of free energy and start fixing this planet and fucking over energy companies as soon as possible please?
Thanks
Jayden <3
-
Has anyone had any success with this?
Can we have a telegram group where inventors and engineers come together to crack the cheapest most effective way of free energy and start fixing this planet and fucking over energy companies as soon as possible please?
Thanks
Jayden <3
that would really be great
-
I have personally witnessed the laws of physics being broken
in virtually every area except electricity/electronics
But i see no logical reason that it cannot also be done.
To do this, we must do the things they explicitly tell us NOT
to do, as engineers.
Why do we have ferrite beads?
Why is there a large power consuming circuit next to every large radio tower?
Why do soldiers break their step on a bridge?
It’s always the same answer…..:
We can do it with light, we can do it with pressure, heat, nuclear
we can do it with sound
We can do it with magnetism and even gravity
Impossibilities exist only in our minds.
Once we have solidified a theory to explain it to ourselves,
what was once impossible becomes commonplace.
Rather than thinking why we cannot do it
Let’s work on how we Can
-
Hello
Could someone provide the original videos.
what about this video? Fake Or????
pierre Cotnoir dz generator part 3 - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wn49fDHCHdo)
-
I contacted Pierre originally and started the first message thread on his device here. Not sure if the video links are still there as I think he took down the youtubes but I had saved them before Gotoluc started a second message thread on his device. Here are uploads I made for you on Sendspace:Here is part 1 and 2 of Pierre's videos:
https://www.sendspace.com/file/v90sah (https://www.sendspace.com/file/v90sah)
https://www.sendspace.com/file/zjnpou (https://www.sendspace.com/file/v90sah)
-
Hello,
Thx. but I only get part1.
Lota
-
Not sure what went wrong but I'll try again in a minute
This should work: https://www.sendspace.com/file/6pnbkj
-
Hello
I have read many of the pages. But it probably won't work that way. In such a generator, the field is generated by the rotor. not through the rotating field of the stator. In order to generate OU in the actual excitation coil, the field must be far too strong. Just as an impulse if someone else is building. As an additional field energy it could get better. The inner coil must build up an additional field.
Greeting
Lota
-
Well last time this question came up
I called a few people who were working on it
Nothing yet ?
Some had stopped altogether ( after years)
And others were still “poking it “but also mostly at standstill?
But ?
I’ll ring a bit this week to see ??
I will comment then …
Respectfully
Chet
Ps
A fellow here did post a link to what he felt was overlooked
In magnet etc techs
Alan
Quote
Your best bet is the udt of Raymond Paul Jensen and the flux diode to give Lenz a different path and more room, aka asymmetric flux linking. He gave it away but people apparently don't want to find.And this https://patents.google.com/patent/US6707208B2/en (https://patents.google.com/patent/US6707208B2/en)
End quote
Going to ask a few fellows about this ? ( just noticed today while looking someone up )
The above quote was buried behind much text ??
-
Just saw this posted elsewhere and thought I would add it. Pierre has a new vid out. Not sure why he would do this. One errant red wire "I think". But who knows. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTOeKZPvssQ
-
Thaelin, I don't believe that is a Video by Pierre. Youtube user 'smokyatgroups' posted the video and put Pierre's name in the title probably to get hits. It looks more like a video just done by one of the many fakers out there like [/font][/size][size=var(--ytd-channel-name-text-font-size)]Electric Multi Works (https://www.youtube.com/c/ElectricMultiWorks)[/size]
[size=1.2rem]
[color=var(--ytd-badge-icon-color,var(--yt-spec-text-secondary))]
-
Thanks E, didn't think he would author something as blatant as that. He is just not the type to post garbage.
thay
-
And what does this have to do with pierre? I call spam hit and a noob too.
-
Hello, has anybody news about Pierre and the DZ generator?, any way to contact him, mail phone etc? Will be wonderful he come back and continue showing his marvel generator and teach us how to reach there. PIERRE I HAD REMOVE ALL YOUR VIDEOS FROM MY YOUTUBE CHANNEL LIKE YOU ASK ME, SORRY FOR NOT ASK YOUR PERMITION, HOPE YOU DOING WELL, WE MISS YOU. MERCI A TOI POUR NOUS ENCOURAGE AVEC LES DZ GENERATOR. :) :) :)
-
DZ gen looks real, but we can't know, if it's a fake then the center coil has a heavy battery. How does he get a 60Hz sine from a 1-2Hz rotation?
The primary coils get hot when the output is loaded, so Lenz is still there being fed-back, this may be caused by the technique to cancel the Lenz feedback by a high pressure zero vector sum between 2 partnered or paired bucking coils, or another redirection, Lenz is strong and so back EMF is high because output power is high, just speculating.
-
DZ gen looks real, but we can't know, if it's a fake then the center coil has a heavy battery. How does he get a 60Hz sine from a 1-2Hz rotation?
Hello Alan,
Simple...Pierre has 6 Poles on his rotary field...that cuts the frequency in like 1/6th...like in a 4 pole exciter generator it only requires 1500 RPM's to make 50Hz...or 1800 (1/2 of 2 poles @3600RPM's) to go 60Hz
The primary coils get hot when the output is loaded, so Lenz is still there being fed-back, this may be caused by the technique to cancel the Lenz feedback by a high pressure zero vector sum between 2 partnered or paired bucking coils, or another redirection, Lenz is strong and so back EMF is high because output power is high, just speculating.
Of course Lenz would always be there...but Lenz can not act over a massless field displacement...Lenz acts only over steel mass cores. The most it would do is to increase the Input currents, but much less tan whenever trying to stop a physically rotating mass of steel and copper coils...just "nickel and dimes"...or like 0.20 to 0.50 amps.
Regards
Ufopolitics
-
Mechanical switching can get very complicated ,I've tried
Electronic is the way to go if you have the knowledge, which sadly I don't.
Using the reverse fields is part of the solution I believe
Like you say I don't golf, fish, hunt, take trips, I enjoy tinkering to each his own.
Thanks for sharing and good luck
artv
Timing can be calculated like this:
f = 2hz or field rotations per sec
n = 36 coils
T = 1/2 = 0,5 sec per rotation
T per coil = T/n = 13,89 ms
-
Hello Alan,
Simple...Pierre has 6 Poles on his rotary field...that cuts the frequency in like 1/6th...like in a 4 pole exciter generator it only requires 1500 RPM's to make 50Hz...or 1800 (1/2 of 2 poles @3600RPM's) to go 60Hz
Of course Lenz would always be there...but Lenz can not act over a massless field displacement...Lenz acts only over steel mass cores. The most it would do is to increase the Input currents, but much less tan whenever trying to stop a physically rotating mass of steel and copper coils...just "nickel and dimes"...or like 0.20 to 0.50 amps.
Regards
Ufopolitics
Thanks for your comment.
In the DZ gen video the field is rotating slowly according to the leds and iron filings, around 1,5Hz? So 90rpm. If it was 1,67Hz and each of 36 coils (singular or paired) created a sine sequentially, then that would be 60Hz. If 2 coils at a time excite the center coil, then it does resemble Figuera.
Maybe I'm seeing it incorrectly, still trying to wrap my mind around it.
Lenz acts on and counters the change in flux, a coil doesn't know how the change is caused, the countering is manifested with mass as drag and with massless as back emf in the primary coil causing a higher V*I.
-
Thanks for your comment.
In the DZ gen video the field is rotating slowly according to the leds and iron filings, around 1,5Hz? So 90rpm. If it was 1,67Hz and each of 36 coils (singular or paired) created a sine sequentially, then that would be 60Hz. If 2 coils at a time excite the center coil, then it does resemble Figuera.
Figuera is a completely different thing...Figuera never had a full 360° rotation of a Virtual Field, but a Linear ramp up-down of the Field(s) by increasing-decreasing currents...so please do not confuse them.
Pierre had Six Poles where each N-S config worked across diametrically aiming towards center.
He added the 6 poles in order to reduce its operating frequency, so relays do not overheat or overworked during operation...and still they end up burning out.
Maybe I'm seeing it incorrectly, still trying to wrap my mind around it.
Lenz acts on and counters the change in flux, a coil doesn't know how the change is caused, the countering is manifested with mass as drag and with massless as back emf in the primary coil causing a higher V*I.
Whenever you get the "touch" by working on these systems (like I have for many years) ...you will learn that Lenz does not affect voltage, but only Currents(I)...As Lenz becomes totally dependent of the frequency you are making the Field rotate...the higher it goes, the less you will see Lenz acting...and actually, there is a point where the opposite will take place...when you load it, currents reduce at input...yes, like magic...I have seen it and done it...have proof.
This have the same principle of a symmetric DC motor Armature...except coils/core are static while field is the one moving...but it results in the same principle...higher speeds, currents comes down and if keeping steady speed...currents will end up stabilizing.
Problem is to keep also the induction at higher levels...under load...but that could be solved in a future with a very fast response AVR.
Cheers
Ufopolitics
-
When looking at the leds of the transistor we can see 3 pairs of leds are activated at a time in sequential order, 2 then the next 2. So I am thinking 3 poles of Partnered coils to redirect Lenz (Sykes-pairs, credits to him for his long time contribution).
Or each transistor pair is controlling N and opposite S, 6 poles like you said.
Trying to figuera it out step by step.
-
When looking at the leds of the transistor we can see 3 pairs of leds are activated at a time in sequential order, 2 then the next 2. So I am thinking 3 poles of Partnered coils to redirect Lenz (Sykes-pairs, credits to him for his long time contribution).
Or each transistor pair is controlling N and opposite S, 6 poles like you said.
Trying to figuera it out step by step.
These systems work better (*Induction gain wise) when poles of same field (same field because coils are turned on at unison) are triggered across in 180°...it could be from outside inwards like DZ or from inside outwards like I am working on, same thing...different spatial positioning.
But this goes a bit more clever...see Pierre had 36 slots on his core, that allowed him to add 36 coils where 18 contained 3 poles and other 18 were the other 3 poles, However, he managed to always keeping the whole six rotating poles "alive" by only reversing a minority of coils on both ends of half circumference or at 180°...can you see/picture that?
And pls, do not take me wrong, Figuera, which I also tried to replicate a long ago, is based on also moving the Virtual Field without moving any parts...what I was referring specifically was the way Figuera moved the field...linearly versus circular and continuously.
The chances of collapsing the field (a big "no, no" on these systems) on Figuera is very high...versus a continuous smooth rotation is easier to track.
I see Figuera handicap in moving field that way, linearly...
Cheers
Ufopolitics
-
Is the rotating flux even seen as varying flux by the coil? Only when flux varies can it generate an emf and current. Or is it static but not static? Moving, rotating but not varying the number of flux lines? The secondary coil is at the center.
-
Is the rotating flux even seen as varying flux by the coil? Only when flux varies can it generate an emf and current. Or is it static but not static? Moving, rotating but not varying the number of flux lines? The secondary coil is at the center.
Alan,
Just go back to an old type (brushes-slip-rings) rotating 2 pole field exciter, generator...then you will see the exciter field is always ON, not varying, just on at all times...except it is displacing through Space/Time...or in simple words..."rotating"...
That is the only "variation" required...to move through space/time, related to the stator coils (secondaries) or output coils, or "induced", etc,etc...
Yes, the stator coils see flux getting stronger as exciter approaches...as weakening as exciter leaves away...
Pls, do not let the existing "terms" to deviate you from getting the reality, the truth...
Cheers
Ufopolitics
-
Alan,
Just go back to an old type (brushes-slip-rings) rotating 2 pole field exciter, generator...then you will see the exciter field is always ON, not varying, just on at all times...except it is displacing through Space/Time...or in simple words..."rotating"...
That is the only "variation" required...to move through space/time, related to the stator coils (secondaries) or output coils, or "induced", etc,etc...
Yes, the stator coils see flux getting stronger as exciter approaches...as weakening as exciter leaves away...
Pls, do not let the existing "terms" to deviate you from getting the reality, the truth...
Cheers
Ufopolitics
I mean, take a coil and rotate a magnet around it at a right angle with the central axis of the coil at a fixed radius, the number flux lines through the space inside the coil remain the same but the field rotates. This happens in the current generator.
Normally in a generator a magnet passes a coil positioned not at the center so the flux always changes so power is generated.
-
I mean, take a coil and rotate a magnet around it at a right angle with the central axis of the coil at a fixed radius, the number flux lines through the space inside the coil remain the same but the field rotates. This happens in the current generator.
Normally in a generator a magnet passes a coil positioned not at the center so the flux always changes so power is generated.
Of course a sideways magnet passing by a coil would not induce it.
Pole(s) [Both] of Magnetic Field must face the center of coil in order to be induction.
Faraday first experiment, perfect induction, magnet bar enters empty (air core) coil...poles facing into coil.
DZ Generator works same way...whenever poles hit the frt or back of single coil at center, induction is achieved at peak values.
In a typical Generator, the exciter Field Poles are rotating with poles faces, facing each stator coil...during rotation...passing by though.
Ufopolitics
-
If the DZ consists of a rotating field with 3 pole-pairs, and the field is rotating inside the coil with the center of rotation along the center axis of the coil, would this cause a change in the flux as per law of magnetic induction ( E=L x dϕ/dt )?
-
If the DZ consists of a rotating field with 3 pole-pairs, and the field is rotating inside the coil with the center of rotation along the center axis of the coil, would this cause a change in the flux as per law of magnetic induction ( E=L x dϕ/dt )?
Hello Alan,
Yes, definitively.
The variation of flux over variation of time, is given by the angular displacement of the fields lines rotating over time, related to the fixed positioning of center coil-core.
It don't matter at what angle you set that center coil...it will always receive a flux variation over rotation timing from Field displacement.
Cheers
Ufopolitics
-
Hello. Ufopolitics, love your work.
Can you elaborate more in this important statement you had made
(But this goes a bit more clever...see Pierre had 36 slots on his core, that allowed him to add 36 coils where 18 contained 3 poles and other 18 were the other 3 poles, However, he managed to always keeping the whole six rotating poles "alive" by only reversing a minority of coils on both ends of half circumference or at 180°)?. This is a critical step in the process of keeping the electromagnets alive constant.
Thanks.
-
Hello. Ufopolitics, love your work.
Thanks Fer, yes I know you do, and I appreciate that.
Can you elaborate more in this important statement you had made
(But this goes a bit more clever...see Pierre had 36 slots on his core, that allowed him to add 36 coils where 18 contained 3 poles and other 18 were the other 3 poles, However, he managed to always keeping the whole six rotating poles "alive" by only reversing a minority of coils on both ends of half circumference or at 180°)?.
This is a critical step in the process of keeping the electromagnets alive constant.
Thanks.
Yes Fer, this is one of the more important properties to have a successful generator.
Pierre had six poles (or three magnetic fields) because he wanted to run at lower frequencies...same as a typical generator works...the more poles the less RPM's(frequency) required to operate it, and still outputing 60 Hz.
So, in order to explain how to keep alive the six poles while rotating the whole three fields is not a simple geometry, unless I show many graphics...which I do not have the time now.
So, let me try with letters to explain this:
Pierre had 36 coils and six poles...and in order to do that, each pole is made of six coils (6X6=36)
In order to keep each pole "alive" only two coils on each side of the pole must be switching (reversing), that leaves four (4) coils that are not switched per pole in a fraction of time/degree of movement.
One N pole = NNNNNN (six coils oriented North)
One S pole = SSSSSS (six coils oriented South)
Now let's just see a Center North pole between two South poles, it should look like:
SSSSSS-NNNNNN-SSSSSS
Now, since I do not have "colors" here for letters...I will just use bold letters for the transitioning (switching) coils, and brackets ([]) to delimit the transition:
>SSSSS[S>N]NNNN[N>S]SSSSS>
On the above let's just analyze the center N pole (configured by six coils"N")...where the bold "N" are the coils being switched per time unit (say seconds)
The left S Pole last "S" coil, would be transitioning into outer coil of N Pole...
As also the right outer "N" coil , would be switching to an "S" Coil for the right S Pole...
And so, we have moved the whole N pole 10º to the Left...(if we have 36 coils, each coil comprehends 10º, or 36X10=360º)
Other way to see it...
The center N Pole has moved 10º to the left by gaining one South coil switched to North on left, while loosing one N Coil to South on right side.
While the four center N coils remained unchanged. This fact keeps the main N Pole Field "alive"...or ON, during the transition.
The same applies to all South Poles next to N Pole...and to all other Poles in the whole circumference.
Hope you understand it better now...
Cheers
Ufopolitics
-
Thanks for the reply, very well explaind an clear how the switching works, even without colors well understood.
In relation with this circuit is very important to have in consideration the coils configuration.
Do you thing the capture lenz reaction with the diodes is very important? From north side or both?
Thanks alot.
Best for you and yours.
-
To All interested in reviewing this Thread comments made by Pierre Cotnoir who is Pedro1 here...
You can go to "show members all posts" from pedro1:
pedro1 all posts (https://overunity.com/profile/pedro1.106067/area/showposts/start/0/)
Even though, there are some "loss of translation" from French to English...in some posts...but you will get the main idea.
Regards
Ufopolitics
-
Thanks for the reply, very well explaind an clear how the switching works, even without colors well understood.
My pleasure, great that you understood
Do you think the capture lenz reaction with the diodes is very important? From north side or both?
Thanks alot.
Best for you and yours.
Nope, it is not important at all...we still can achieve greater output without collecting the BEMF...
But, of course, it will be great if we could collect it and reuse it to charge or add to our input...
While at the same time we would be taking off those reverse currents from our electronics or in Pierre case...off his relays.
I have a strong commutator and carbon brushes...which is built to stand the arcing & sparks.
On another note, Pierre had a resistor on a heatsink which gets very hot during operation...I believe this resistor is just for the purpose to keep currents low to charge supercaps without using high amperage (because they are not very low ESR)...however, "the price" is paid with heat losses.
We can dedicate a "second secondary" induced coil (inside and in 90º to main output center coil, so it does not disturb main output Induction Angle) just to rectify it (from AC to DC) and be sent to Input.
Pierre did not do that...and yes, it can be done, typical rotary Generators have this settings (Stator coils just to feed back the Exciter (Rotor) coil(s))...nothing new.
Regards
Ufopolitics
-
Hello again...
There is a way to feed coils (by a different circuit) and reverse their polarity, without reversing from positive to negative on the switching circuit side.
By having a High side (+) and a Low side (-) Channels, independently or isolated from each others...this way, by simple fast switching diodes we can derive the BEMF or Radiant Energy away from the switching circuit from each Channel.
But this is another material, which I will disclose when I open a new thread...because this design will not only work for static rotor generators, but also for motors.
It will be on the Revival of MAEM, My Asymmetric Electrodynamic Machines... ;)
Cheers
Ufopolitics
-
Hello to All,
Ok, first I want to post here a video about someone out there replicating Pierre Cotnoir DZ Gen (no big deal)...It was uploaded originally by Member Lota at the Holcomb Main Thread, then deleted by being not related to HES Tech (in my opinion, it is about the same exact principle), Member Ramset (Chet) also asked me to post it here...no problem man!!...it was on the wrong Thread...So, it belongs here now...You guys are right.
Neues Projekt DZ-Generator (https://youtu.be/B-SbtBOP7yQ)
Second, I am developing a way to make this same setup to work based on simple FET's circuit in Cascade arrangement (no processor, no timer, no sequential chip required)...so you guys could add as many FET's per shifting Phase as you like...better than relays, more reliable, faster switching plus rated at higher amps and volts...harder to blow if heatsinked properly (FET's would never get on fire like a relay with a plastic casing).
Regards
Ufopolitics
-
(FET's would never get on fire like a relay with a plastic casing).
Your MOSFET are not made in plastic cases?
-
Your MOSFET are not made in plastic cases?
FETs body is NOT a soft plastic, thin walls like a relay is...it is close to a Mica Material, which can stand very high temperatures.
A Relay is built within a plastic BOX, with Oxygen inside...FET's body is vacuum proof, made where all contacts are...
Pierre Cotnoir relays got on fire...they are not designed for this job.
But if you want, you could build it with russian relays left from the old USSR...hahahaha
Ufopolitics
-
And what about hermetic contacts without oxygen in sealed in glass?
-
Maybe this one.
https://menlomicro.com/ (https://menlomicro.com/)
-
Hello
I want to build it as closely as possible to Pieere and see what happens. I wonder why only 28 wires come from the stator. Next test will be with 30 relays.
Greeting
Lota
My English is not good. I hope it works.
-
Hello,
built a little further.
Neues Projet DZ-Generator 2 - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kr-ydbHExoo)
Greeting
Lota
-
Hello,
built a little further.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGLwe9sk4YI
Greeting
Lota
-
Impressive build - are you getting more power out than in? My German is a bit too rusty to understand you on the video and the auto-translate wasn't an option on that video.
-
Hello
no no OU. The program is also not going so well yet. The rotor, in the middle, must also be larger and more power.
Greeting
Lota