Author Topic: Muller Dynamo (Read 4342393 times)

synchro1 · « **Reply #5940 on:** December 15, 2012, 01:57:33 AM »

@DeepCut,

The output coils were two air core Radio Shack 24 gauge bifilar speaker wire coils wired Tesla series, different near to far end. The spinner was a 1" neo sphere with a strip of reflective tape seated in a hard plastic holding cup. The power coil was a spiral bifilar of the same gauge speaker wire driven by a 12 volt battery with a Bedini SSG circuit and charge battery. I laser tached the neo sphere and measured the voltages of both coils along with the RPM. The inductance on the output coils was around 850 Ohms apiece as I remember. I picked the spin rate up around 30K with the coil shorted, then tried the two and measured half the output voltage on each along with the same rate of spin increase on the neo sphere. Try it on yours and double check to see if our results match.

T-1000 · « **Reply #5941 on:** December 15, 2012, 02:44:09 AM »

Quote from: synchro1 on December 15, 2012, 01:57:33 AM

I laser tached the neo sphere and measured the voltages of both coils along with the RPM. The inductance on the output coils was around 850 Ohms apiece as I remember. I picked the spin rate up around 30K with the coil shorted, then tried the two and measured half the output voltage on each along with the same rate of spin increase on the neo sphere.

This is same fact everyone encounters.. http://www.energeticforum.com/218531-post8285.html

If your rotor momentum reistance is not too big, the speed up effect would actually make driving coils from generator coils

Cheers!

DeepCut · « **Reply #5942 on:** December 15, 2012, 05:21:25 AM »

I think Zebok's (synchro1's) mention of the fact that the effect is shared between coils is an important design point.

This evening i did a quick test using two coils with the diametric magnet setup. (Bearing in mind that everyone's experience is different, ambient temperature, tightness of winding (resistance-stretch) etc)

So, the challenge is, multiple coils share the effect so it is factored between them.

I'm glad to say this small, two coil, experiment contradicted that result.

The open rotor speed, with no coils/cores present, was 28,000 RPM.

When i shorted both coils, ie, they are not at all connected, but individually shorted (just being clear !), the rotor got up to 25,000 RPM.

When i serially-connected both coils, then shorted them, the RPM was 27,950.

I think there's room for improvement.

Zebok i would also ask, were your coils bifilar, because that gave me a 400% increase in the effect ?

Here's to lightweight appliances of the future

DC.

DeepCut · « **Reply #5943 on:** December 15, 2012, 05:31:21 AM »

I forgot to highlight the obvious advantage here.

I was only a few tens of RPM short of the open rotor speed with two coils/cores present.

More turns means a stronger AUL effect because CEMF has a direct relation to inductance.

I've ordered some materials in order to make my custom coil-formers.

Early next week i hope to make a hybrid coil that will overspeed the rotor.

In one of my early attempts i thought i'd done this, but it turned out the weight of the coil pressed on the rotor base, thus lessening the pressure on the bearing so the rotor went faster.

Now i have a fat, wooden base that stops the perspex from bending, so that's one fault negated.

I will do a video of the two coil demo tomorrow, it's 4:30 here and i am VERY drunk, had a very nice day today

All the best,

DC.

synchro1 · « **Reply #5944 on:** December 15, 2012, 01:47:19 PM »

@DeepCut,

Yes my output coils were bifilar. Your test results don't add up because both shorted coil speeds are less then the open rotor speed.

DeepCut · « **Reply #5945 on:** December 15, 2012, 02:07:47 PM »

Quote from: synchro1 on December 15, 2012, 01:47:19 PM

@DeepCut,

Yes my output coils were bifilar. Your test results don't add up because both shorted coil speeds are less then the open rotor speed.

The results do add up, i didn't claim they oversped the rotor, i was showing that the effect isn't equally shared among the coils in my setup, the effect is additive, two coils are better than one.

DC.

synchro1 · « **Reply #5946 on:** December 15, 2012, 02:18:28 PM »

@DeepCut,

Two coils are worse then no coils.

DeepCut · « **Reply #5947 on:** December 15, 2012, 02:20:02 PM »

Yes, obviously.

The simple point i'm trying to make is that what you observed about the effect being equally shared isn't happening with my setup.

That's something we should be happy about

DC.

synchro1 · « **Reply #5948 on:** December 15, 2012, 02:51:59 PM »

@DeepCut,

You're below the "Lenz Propulsion" threshold. Two coils create less Lenz drag then one in your setup. It's wrong to infer that two coils will create more "Lenz Propulsion" then one based on your experiment. Two shorted coils do not generate enough propulsion to exceed the open rotor speed, which shows they're still creating Lenz "drag", but add advantage over one. That's significant in itself, but I don't think it's fair to extrapolate based on that data. The two coils have not yet maximized the propulsion potential. My results indicate the potential's limited. Maybe you could repeat the experiment to see if the second coil accelerates the rotor over the threshold. That's the result we're interested in.

crazycut06 · « **Reply #5949 on:** December 15, 2012, 04:01:37 PM »

Hi syncrho1, & DC,

Should the coils be at different ohmage, like stepping it up, lets say the first coil 800 ohms the second 1000 ohms, etc, not all equal? It will be frequency dependent on how much each coil will accelerate within their max speed tresholds... Have you tried this?

T-1000 · « **Reply #5950 on:** December 15, 2012, 04:28:57 PM »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=971tWhaY2R8 - this is where conventional scientist says "it is impossible". The same effect was used to turn Faraday motor+generator into self running machine plus giving mechanical power to run conventional generator..

DeepCut · « **Reply #5951 on:** December 15, 2012, 05:20:54 PM »

Quote from: synchro1 on December 15, 2012, 02:51:59 PM

@DeepCut,

You're below the "Lenz Propulsion" threshold. Two coils create less Lenz drag then one in your setup. It's wrong to infer that two coils will create more "Lenz Propulsion" then one based on your experiment. Two shorted coils do not generate enough propulsion to exceed the open rotor speed, which shows they're still creating Lenz "drag", but add advantage over one. That's significant in itself, but I don't think it's fair to extrapolate based on that data. The two coils have not yet maximized the propulsion potential. My results indicate the potential's limited. Maybe you could repeat the experiment to see if the second coil accelerates the rotor over the threshold. That's the result we're interested in.

Yes, it's the fact that it's an advantage over one that i was emphasising, but you're right, it's unfair to extrapolate further.

Cheers,

DC.

Scorch · « **Reply #5952 on:** December 17, 2012, 12:33:16 AM »

12/16/12

Just stepping for a quick update.
Haven't done anything in a while.

My current direction-
-Going to fabricate a new rotor with goal to be less wobbly and will use N45 magnets, instead of N42, and magnets are on order.
-Going to fabricate a magnetic timing rotor for use with hall sensor. Will be 1/4" thick acrylic disk with 1/8' X 1/8" neo disks.
-Will first try simple hall circuit then, maybe, graduate to an arduino controller. Want analog controls like quanta magnetics has.
-Going to stick with air coil stators, for now, but do have the materials to build new stators with ferrite cores.

That is all for now.
Hope to get some work done within the next few weeks.

Happy holidays.

}:>

Scorch · « **Reply #5953 on:** December 23, 2012, 11:48:59 PM »

12/23/12

Completed some more fabrication this weekend.

Built a new rotor with significantly less wobble and stronger magnets.
Replaced the terminal blocks in favor of flat bottom terminal blocks which work better with mounting tape.

And fabricated a new timing disk.
The plan is to just use the original hall circuit, as per beginning of this thread, but will have the ability to adjust timing while running and can also try different sized magnets in different timing disks to change parameters such as "on time".

But; I am wondering, short of upgrading to an Arduino controller, and trying to keep it as simple as possible, isn't it possible to add a "time delay" to the TIP42C in order to change 'on' time? Needs to stay simple such as a capacitor and potentiometer or some such thing.

PS: Timing magnets are 1/8" diameter X 1/8" high in this particular disk.
Which is just another 1/4" Thick X 4" Diameter acrylic disk with 1/2" hub.

}:>

T-1000 · « **Reply #5954 on:** December 24, 2012, 04:08:04 AM »

Quote from: Scorch on December 23, 2012, 11:48:59 PM

The plan is to just use the original hall circuit, as per beginning of this thread, but will have the ability to adjust timing while running and can also try different sized magnets in different timing disks to change parameters such as "on time".

You might check on Time Delay Circuits in http://home.cogeco.ca/~rpaisley4/Comparators.html for ideas

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Muller Dynamo (Read 4342393 times)

synchro1

Re: Muller Dynamo

T-1000

Re: Muller Dynamo

DeepCut

Re: Muller Dynamo

DeepCut

Re: Muller Dynamo

synchro1

Re: Muller Dynamo

DeepCut

Re: Muller Dynamo

synchro1

Re: Muller Dynamo

DeepCut

Re: Muller Dynamo

synchro1

Re: Muller Dynamo

crazycut06

Re: Muller Dynamo

T-1000

Re: Muller Dynamo

DeepCut

Re: Muller Dynamo

Scorch

Re: Muller Dynamo

Scorch

Re: Muller Dynamo

T-1000

Re: Muller Dynamo