Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.

[picowatt]

I have already provided my definition of useful work being done in my last reply to MH.
To totally remove (not reduce) a wasted energy from a system, and have that removal result in either the input energy remain , while the wanted output energy increases, or to have the wanted output energy remain the same while the input energy has decreased, then useful work had to be done in this waste elimination process.

As I stated before, you provided improvements-not a complete conversion.


Brad

Tinman,

Did the "with rotor versus without rotor" tests "totally remove (not reduce) a wasted energy from a system" or were those tests merely a demonstration of an "improvement" and not a demonstration of "useful work" as you define it?

PW

[tinman]

Tinman,

Did the "with rotor versus without rotor" tests "totally remove (not reduce) a wasted energy from a system" or were those tests merely a demonstration of an "improvement" and not a demonstration of "useful work" as you define it?

PW

Unclear yet-as I stated in my last reply to MH.

PW
All these questions you are asking have already been answered in my last post to MH.
You are free of course to provide another option to eliminate all waste heat from the stator coils in the universal motor example, and have that result in a 50% plus efficiency increase in that motor -without the use of permanent magnets of course.


Brad

[picowatt]

Unclear yet-as I stated in my last reply to MH.

PW
All these questions you are asking have already been answered in my last post to MH.
You are free of course to provide another option to eliminate all waste heat from the stator coils in the universal motor example, and have that result in a 50% plus efficiency increase in that motor -without the use of permanent magnets of course.


Brad

Tinman,

I am not trying to be flippant or difficult.  I am just trying to understand your definition of "useful work" to ensure we are not just arguing semantics.

Your remarks regarding your videos seemed to indicate that you believed that the videos proved something about magnets that contradicts normal convention by demonstrating that the magnets were doing "useful work".  But now, based on your definition of "useful work", I am not sure what the videos actually proved or demonstrated.  It seems the rotor only offered an "improvement".  At the least, the videos did not appear prove that the rotor "totally removed (not reduced) a wasted energy from a system".   

Would the elimination of the I²R losses of the stator windings of a motor by replacing those windings with superconductors be an example of those superconductive windings doing "useful work" as per your definition?

PW   

[picowatt]

Unclear yet-as I stated in my last reply to MH.

PW
All these questions you are asking have already been answered in my last post to MH.
You are free of course to provide another option to eliminate all waste heat from the stator coils in the universal motor example, and have that result in a 50% plus efficiency increase in that motor -without the use of permanent magnets of course.


Brad

Tinman,

How or where did you arrive at the "50% plus efficiency increase" ?

PW

[tinman]

Tinman,

How or where did you arrive at the "50% plus efficiency increase" ?

PW

That is in regards to the universal motor mods.
It must be true that the stator windings are doing 50% of the work, and the rotor is also doing 50% of the work -equal and opposites. So by removing the stator windings and replacing them with PMs, then we can say an efficiency increase of 50% has been made-if we take the motors starting efficiency as the 100% starting point, in that that was the maximum efficiency of that motor before the PMs were installed.