Motor-Generator

[gotoluc]

Now here's something interesting

Yesterday I posted my replication at the Energetic Forum topic: http://www.energeticforum.com/energetic-science-ministries/16629-motor-generator.html
and today I can no longer post to any topics there! Says "the administrator may have disabled my account" 

After 8 years of free sharing this is what you get ... good work Arron ... guess I wasn't profitable enough for your books and stuff or maybe it's a sign to me to forget about sharing?

Luc

[Miroslav13]

Здравствуйте gotoluc.
Я могу только сказать, что я видел проведения экспериментов.
Чем меньше расстояние от магнита к катушке, тем точнее вы должны сделать все.
У меня было много неудачных экспериментов, которые связаны с не должным образом обернуты и дизайн геометрия.   Я также сомневаюсь, что такая мелочь может повлиять на результат, пока я не увидел обратное.
С уважением Мирослав.

[yssuraxu_697]

Hello,

I would like to point out that experiment presented in the Miroslav13 video here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFXecIxEqR4
is not conducted correctly and has sadly lead to incorrect assumptions.

1) measuring AC output using these instruments is erroneous. One of correct ways is presented here:
http://www.picotech.com/applications/mains-power-analysis.html

2) Reference point for power measurements should be machine with no coil in place (physically).

3) It's good practice to provide full parameters for all components used (resistance, inductance of coils etc).

4) Fact of being granted a patent does not guarantee that the concept is viable because it takes very specific knowledge to sort this one out.

Seen "effect" is explained as follows:

The "regular" coil A tested seems to be winding made with thin wire and relatively small core. Core is made from conducting metal (laminations). Also it's a solenoid so magnetic loop is very "open". All this boils down to pretty poor performance with high ohmic and core loss and low inductance. Result is that even when shorted it behaves as resistive/dissipative load and naturally slows the generator down.

In case of the "special" coil B there are some differences:
Core is still made from conducting metal (laminations) but is much larger and forms better (more closed) magnetic loop. Also the wire is thicker. This results of relatively high inductance and low ohmic losses.

These differences have following consequences:
When coil A is "open" only effect it can have on rotor is due to core losses. Since core is small and coupling  between rotor and core is also small effect is non-existent. But when coil B is "open" then coupling between rotor and core is good and core losses kick in very heavily.

Coil A => 12V * 0.69A = 8.28W
Coil B => 12V * 1.01A = 12.12W
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            3.84W of core losses B vs A

Now when coil A is "shorted" then wattage goes UP (or RPM down) due to mainly RESISTIVE nature of the coil.

When coil B is "shorted" then wattage goes DOWN (or RPM up) due to mainly INDUCTIVE nature of the coil.

But why is it so? Well there's a little "secret" that has surely fooled hundreds of researchers (including me)

This is the "secret" (drums beating):

When the generator coil is good inductor and has high Q on working frequency it will cancel out magnetic field inside the core when shorted! Effectively cancelling out all the core losses because there's no more changing magnetic field in the core. Core has been "shielded". When the core is high-loss core, shielding it speeds up the generator.

This is all that there is to "speedup under load" that various have reported and all that there will ever be.

This effect (speedup) is promiment only when having high-loss cores from laminations etc. It will go away when having low-loss ferrite cores etc.

When having low-loss core there will be no net load to prime mover when coil is "open" and no net load when coil is "shorted" also.

Also I must sadly point out that there is no extra energy to be taken from this or any other setup involving linear components and no source of extra energy. Maybe time to stop chasing ghosts... Concept of "classical OU" and "perpetuum mobile" is spoon fed to us by the PTB, scammers and people who have not done their homework.

I'm sure user verpies would wrap this information in more "teachable" form and support it with some formulae.

[yssuraxu_697]

Some additional points about gotoluc's test here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQ_Fo7GNfGs

- you are using much better core (iron powder I presume) with much lower loss
- you are using proper load that seems pretty well impedance-matched to generator
- your statement that cogging will cause load on prime mover is incorrect in this case,
when rpm is so high cogging will have no effect, all the loss is due to eddies in the core
(when there's no load on gen)

To see the "effect" try to short the coil. Possible there will be slight speed-up  and slight drop of wattage but no more than the original condition was (no core present). However this is pretty low-loss core so the outcome could also be no effect or very slight rise of used wattage. In that case you can simulate the "conducting core" case by winding one layer of extra winding, connecting that one to resistor - looking up the wattage used and wattage over resistor. Then shorting the main winding and observing rise of rpm and lowering of used wattage (and lowering the power dissipated over resistor!). Nature chooses path of least resistance.

To properly understand the situation take ratiometric Hall of suitable sensitivity and investiage magnetic field inside of the core under varios no load ... load conditions.

[crazycut06]

The cores ends should align exactly with the magnets n/s ends, just like leedskalnin's pmh!