Hi Bill,
actually I told the investors they should invest in a mobile battery shop and follow the circus around. They will sell a lot of batteries.
have a goo one mate,
Mark

http://pesn.com/2010/06/30/95001665_Joseph_Newman_June26-2010-demo/

The torque load on the shaft is really too small to demonstrate the power of the device well.

It is like taking a V6 engine and attaching a shaft to it to spin a chicken breast.

There is something called mechanical impedance. Newman's machine has a lot of mechanical impedance. This means that adding additional torque on the shaft will not decrease the rotational rate of the shaft as much.

In Part 2 of a series of 5 videos, we see Newman turn on this machine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1RVZPK0ZIw

I have many videos of my own (http://www.youtube.com/kmarinas86/). It is clear in my personal observations of my small motor device that the amount of work displayed by the device does not say much about the potential of it. The small fan device I made two years ago could easily reach 330 rpm. I noticed that as I added more wire and voltage to compensate, I could get it back to 330 rpm. With more copper, the fan at 330 RPM resisted my hand more than before. With the big fan motor, it reached the point where I would actually have slightly red cuts etched through the top skin layer (epidermis) of the tips of my fingers from the threaded bar shaft due to large mechanical impedance despite the fact that rpm was lower than before. There is more resistance to slowing down the rotation of the rotor than its moment of inertia (determined by the shape of the stack of 38 cubic inches of neodymium magnets) would tell you.

When the mechanical impedance is greater, you should be able to hear the difference in the clicks that the machine makes (i.e. the acceleration of the rotor is much jumpier and will reach the final rpm sooner rather than later). It would reach top speed in less time, but it would not necessarily rotate any faster because you still have to compensate for voltage. With more copper windings, more force is needed stop it entirely even though voltage was raised only to raise the running rpm to the original value. More copper windings will increase mechanical impedance, but you won't appreciate it without a proportionately sized torque load.

There are few demonstrations by Newman that defy this pattern. Most of them are demonstrations his Newman's small motor generator:

Older videos from 2008:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5399697456012877363 (He prepares to start motor hooked to a generator at 9:50, and prepares to measures amps and volts at 11:40 (17 watts) and after that, the motor speed is doubled and eventually tripled. This could mean that the power input increased by a factor of 4x then (9/4)x (which is 68 watts and 153 watts respectively). 153 watts input fails to explain how the meter picks up (which occurs at 7.5 horsepower according to the Grainger catalog for this generator).)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3747078809628665374 (This is the previous video. He does not show power input of the motor (only amps), but if you compare it to 10:40 in the second video above (10 volts and 1 amp) and have your speakers on, you will see that is it faster than that. In this setup he used 18 nine-volt batteries. Obviously 9V is the maximum voltage. It is going about 1/4th as fast the speed where the meter picks up beyond 7.5 horsepower. 5595 watts / 4^2 = 350 watts, which is more than 98 volts * 3.5 amps. If the internal resistance of each battery is 2 ohms, then that is already a loss of 7 volts per 9V battery.  If you had 3.5 amps, the voltage of all eighteen 9V's combined under load would be 22 volts.)

Playlist of select examples of the small Newman fan motor:
http://www.youtube.com/kmarinas86#g/c/7EFA67FFA7897FE5

When I attached the bigger fan, it turned out to not be as much torque and rpm as I had expected as the rpm only reached around 75 rpm:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10W7qIxoNUo

However, when I added a fourth coil on the other side, efficiency shot up by and large. For the same power, I had it going at 130 rpm.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KtqdUOzh2g

I now know without any doubts that the proximity of the wire is the key player in getting this machine to work in a convincing way. Using stronger neo magnets can allow you to put more power into the same size device, but your tradeoff is the voltage you will need to get it working. So with a smaller torque load, using stronger magnets is a just "a wash" or worse. With more than two coils, the device using the small fan actually decreased efficiency, which was the opposite result of having a heavier fan attached which gained efficiency right up to the point when I added the 6th coil.  The current device can run from the charge capacity of batteries of 1800 milliamp hours for over 60 hours before needing recharge. So my device uses about 0.03 amps. Voltage measured in my big fan demonstrations is usually less than 300 volts:

http://www.youtube.com/kmarinas86#g/c/2506654B08626453

I am departing from the old design of mine and I plan to use a new geometry I had just come up with. The objective is higher torque density than before.

I generated a graphic design image using Microsoft Word Autoshapes. You can download the file in the attachment link below or you can view the *.jpg image copy at my Xanga site (http://kmarinas86.xanga.com/photos/914f9269378122/). By going to Tools>Options...>General you can change which length units are used for the ruler. I used millimeters. Lego dimensions were taken from http://www.robertcailliau.eu/Lego/Dimensions/zMeasurements-en.xhtml.

I no longer have my old room. I will have new furniture, paint, carpet, and a computer stand. I am not quite sure where I am going to place the experiments.

Upcoming designs will not use any ribbon cables.

A 11LB spool will be used and have magnet wire about 1 mile in length which will be wound by hand around a square non-magnetic frame support made out of Lego set pieces.

A zig-zag pattern around four alternating corners of a Lego frame will effectively create four semi-coils (CW-CCW-CW-CCW) with just one wire winding. In this way, the closest contact between the wire coil and the magnetic rotor will centered between the non-magnetic support frame beams.

The rotor will have a four pole design which will fire at least twice every revolution in the same polarity. If polarity reversals are added into the design, then there will be four reversals per revolution. With twice as many rotor poles and twice as many firing sequences per revolution, as much as four times the torque can be expected, and if polarity reversals are incorporated, then the torque can be as much as eight times as much as the previous design.

Self-inductance of the wire will exceed that in the previous design as well as the designed proximity of the wire to the rotor poles. To take advantage of this, neodymium magnets will be used at the very ends of the poles only. Ferrite magnets will be used in the majority of the rotor to reduce costs. The motor will be about 8"x8"x9" (l-w-h). This is approximately 2/3rds the scale of the previous design.

The primary justification for this new development is the deteriorating state of the old motor which results from its jerry-rigged construction, and the RPM of the old motor was less than was predicted due to the massive amount of insulation used. The new design therefore incorporates non-magnetic hard plastic (Legos) for support and increases the proximity of the average wire element by four times or more by using tightly-bound magnet wire.

Due to the new design's absence of any solenoid design, the wire field strength in the center is reduced compared to the previous design as emphasis is shifted towards putting more of the wire field stregth (percentage-wise) at the very ends of the rotor poles not only for torque, but also for reducing parasitic back-emf by increasing average proximity of the rotor magnetization to the wire.

Despite using only one coil, the Lorentz force equation gives me confidence that the azimuthally-oriented zig-zag configuration will be effectively equivalent to four semi-coils (CW-CCW-CW-CCW). As a result, more dischargable magnetic field can be built up parallel to the shaft which will not contribute as much to the rpm-limiting back-emf, yet it may itself add to the Newman effect.

The wind resistance of the motor will be reduced greatly as air will be better able to flow straight through motor's air gap.

I will not fully commit to this project until I have secured a job or paid internship related to my future business career. It may take as late as a year before I can get that.