Rotating stator and rotating rotor

[lancaIV]

@ this OU forum we have to admit that Russians are very interested (and also very skilled) in building electromechanical devices.
The Quest for OverUnity is going fast in that country and also in it's former USSR satellite states. They have exellent engineers and
scientists using more and more YouTube as their publishing platform.   
I don't know Russian but Google does. This is one of the YT reactions at the contra rotating rotor and stator motor.

"If you are a physicist, RESPOND TO IT.
Experiments are what happens in practice.
I argue with physicists that the rotor has more power than the stator. The rotor and stator have the same torque moments, but the revolutions are different.
That's multiplying the speed at the moment of force and we get different power from the rotor and stator. Physicists on the forum are proving to me
hat there is no such thing in physics, the rotor and stator have different power. And I say to them that the rotor and stator have different power
if we consider the power formula F * s / t. I argue with the physicists at the forum, there is Newton's law, the smaller the rotor is relative to the stator,
the more will have speed. What is the difference in mass and radius of the rotor from the stator in so many will differ their speed. All physicists agree with this.
The moment of force of the rotor and stator is also the same according to Newton's law. Now we multiply the moment of force on the rotor and stator revolutions and see different power.
Everything is still correct according to the laws of physics. Physicists do not like that the rotor and stator have different power.
Why. Yes, because there is Newton's third law, "The force of action is equal to the force of opposition." The question is asked, different capacities may have the same strength of action.
This is a serious topic. Physicists are in a deadlock situation and can not give me an answer. If physicists tell me that different powers have different strengths of action,
this means that Newton's third law is not correct."

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?FT=D&date=19790215&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP&CC=DE&
NR=2733719A1&KC=A1&ND=5

" ! automatic translated german/english !" :
In the generator according to the invention, a portion of the electrical energy generated in a conventional generator is passed through an armature arranged in another stronger magnetic field. The armature, together with the magnet generating this stronger magnetic field, is mounted on the axis of the rotating armature of the generator so that the force exerted by this stronger field on this current and thus on this armature acts on the axis. The current through this stronger magnetic field is so dimensioned and flows in such a direction that the force generated by the field overcomes the back pressure exerted on the axis by the generator. In addition, the force provides the required angular momentum on the axle to keep the generator's armature running, thereby generating electrical energy. This current always flows through this magnetic field in the same direction. Since this field and the current rotate together with the axis, the field always exerts this force on the axis and keeps it running.

When this magnetic field is stronger than the magnetic field of the generator, a lower current in the former field produces a force equal to the force generated at a higher current in the latter field. The back pressure exerted on the generated current through the weaker field of the generator is overcome by letting a fraction of the generated current flow through this thicker field, and that when a little more current flows, the axis receives the required angular momentum the rotation is obtained. Thus, only a fraction of the generated current drives the generator to generate electrical energy. The stronger this second magnetic field can be compared with the generator field, the less is the fraction of the generated current required to actuate the generator. Thus, once the generator begins to generate current, a portion of this generated current, flowing in the stronger magne
tic field, keeps the generator running while generating power.

          now to the essentials :
       read it:with paper and pencil beside and mind integer
The electrical device is mounted on the rotor shaft of the conventional generator and rotates together with the shaft. There is therefore no relative movement between the field poles and the armature during the rotation.  As a result of the magnetic field of the electrical device, a current which is directed at one side flows through the conductor on the armature, as a result of which a force is exerted on the armature by its magnetic field and thus on the shaft which compensates for the counterforce exerted by the generator.

If, in a conventional generator, the field strength B, the length of its conductors is denoted by L, and the current flowing through I, the magnitude of the counterforce F exerted on the conductor, and thus on the shaft, is F = BLI.  If the field strength of the electrical device 2B is the length of its conductor L and only passes through a current whose intensity corresponds to half the current flowing in the generator, the force exerted on the armature is F '= 2B x L x 1 = LI.  2
This shows that the force applied to the armature of the electrical device and thus to the driving shaft is equal to the counterforce exerted on the shaft by the conventional generator. The force is generated to act in such a direction as to compensate for the opposing force. A slightly stronger current flow provides the required torque on the shaft.

Therefore, the shaft and thus the armature are moved further and electrical energy is generated.  In order to allow this half current to flow through the electrical device, half the generator voltage is required. Thus, 1/4 of the generated power is lost to counteract the retarding force. The remaining 3/4 of the generated energy and a little less of it are available for external consumption.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


If the field strength of the electrical device is a multiple of the field strength of the generator, for example 5 times, it is necessary that 1/5 of the generated current flow in the electrical device to produce the compensating force. 1/5 of the generated voltage is required for the current flow. Thus 1/25 or 4% of the generated energy is consumed in the electrical device while 96% or slightly less is available for external consumption. In this way, it is not required that any electrical energy from an external source be introduced into the generator according to the invention for generating electrical energy.  ....................... "

this device is working in a pricinple of a capacitor,so
working  method as " selfcharging rotative capacitor"

Sincerely
             OCWL

p.s.: "If you are a physicist, RESPOND TO IT. .... "
        I am not professional physician
        I am animated physics in a human body,living and applying
        knowledge from elsewhere

http://www.tet.tu-harburg.de/downloads/et-pbl/Wikipedia%20-%20Synchronmaschine%20-%20Dezember%202011.pdf
Um nun ein Drehmoment zu erzeugen, muss in den Nuten, die genau unter den Magneten sind, ein Strom fließen. Nach dem Prinzip der   
                                  Lorentz-Kraft       
                    wird dann das Moment erzeugt

                                    e=mc²  e= Lorentzkraft

           https://www.google.pt/search?q=lorentz-transformation&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b&gfe_rd=cr&dcr=0&ei=DlyuWaaRFpHY8ge6kYGYAQ

               new ton/tom/som ? A-tom/ton/som(e )
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4FtrKfZ0Lo

                        after KAOS to the KALM
             https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vg14HPuXLOU

motor-generator assemblies are/were used as frequency converter
for the radio broadcast,this is RF-technology
today small up to "MEMS-"level as thermal-noise/ionic=phonon and
photo-electric/ionic=photon
                    audio-/video- signal-frequency-band-gap

in memoriam : living equalizing vocoder with echo-hall :
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhq7fSrXn0c

capacitor: = condensator,Lord Kelvin "(bi)metallic spring"-Analogon

[LabDeSyn]

My test debunks the claim that a counter rotating rotor/stator motor is more efficient.

The claim is:
When equal current is applied to the motor, the rotary stator motor generates twice the tork as the conventional motor.
When tork, speed and current of the motors are evaluated together it is seen that the rotary/stator prototype draws about
50 percent less current.

The question is; is a rotary/stator motor (or generator!) more efficient than a conventional motor with a fixed stator?
To check this out I build a test setup with 2 the same motors. One of them I rebuild to a motor with a rotating rotor
and a rotating stator. First I had to fix new bearings on the central shaft, second a DC commutator with 2 brushes.
At the rotor shaft and the stator I attached a belt pulley. The pulleys I toke from a demolished MC deck.
Motor and Rotary/Stator motor (RSmotor) are positioned beside each other and connected with 1 or 2 belts, see photo:
The RSmotor is connected to a adjustable DC source with a V/A meter to measure the input power. The normal motor
becomes the generator.
The generator measures the output power over a load of 120 Ohm with a V/A meter. The output power is also a measure for
the tork of the RSmotor. Most important is to know that I work with relative measurements. So, all the frictions and
electromagnetic losses I do not calculate in the outcome because they stay nearly the same for all tests.

OK, the test consists of 3 parts;
1 In/output power when the rotor of the RSmotor with a fixed stator drives a generator.
2 In/output power when the stator of the RSmotor with a fixed rotor drives a generator.
3 In/output power when RS motor drives a generator in counter rotating mode.

The procedure is as follow:
1 - I measure the Volt and Ampere of the RSmotor and multiply both to Watt.
2 - I do the same for the generator.
3 - Then I subtract the generator power from the motor power to get the outcome.
4 - I do this tests 4 times to avoid wrong data and conclusions.
5 - The lower the used power (in Watt), the more efficient the motor is.

The outcome is that a motor with a fixed stator and a rotor driven shaft and a motor driven by a counter rotating rotor stator
do not differ greatly in power as well in efficiency from each other. So, my conclusion is that the claim of using less current
with a counter rotating RSmotor by the same tork is false or at least exaggerated.

The use of an only stator driven RSmotor was in all tests less efficient.