Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?

[tinman]

Do you like jam on your cheezburgers? As in, Jam Yesterday... Jam Tomorrow... but No Jam Today.

You talk like there is infinite time ahead of us... but there isn't. 

"I made a thing that makes five times as much electrical power out than it takes to run it. Unfortunately I didn't think about connecting it as a self runner, and then I took it apart, so I can't show it to you now. And I'm doing something more important right now, so you'll have to wait three months before I can rebuild it."

It's right there in the script.

For a COP of 533%,im happy to wait.
This will give me time to get one of Daves gens together.

He is shifting house and shop--i know what thats like when you have as much junk as i do.

The test procedure will be very simple and fool proof.
!st series of tests-->

1st,the motor with rotor is run by it self(no generator attached) from a stable DC source.
RPM and P/in is taken.

2nd-The motor and rotor are placed within the generator,but no load on the outputs of the generator.
RPM and P/in are taken again.

3rd-a 10 ohm load is placed across each gen coil.
RPM and P/in are taken again,along with the v/RMS value across each 10 ohm load.
High quality true RMS DMMs or a scope can be used to get these values.

Should the outcome seem fruitful,then we move onto the very simple looped system.


Brad

[TinselKoala]

For a COP of 533%,im happy to wait.
This will give me time to get one of Daves gens together.

He is shifting house and shop--i know what thats like when you have as much junk as i do.

The test procedure will be very simple and fool proof.
!st series of tests-->

1st,the motor with rotor is run by it self(no generator attached) from a stable DC source.
RPM and P/in is taken.

2nd-The motor and rotor are placed within the generator,but no load on the outputs of the generator.
RPM and P/in are taken again.

3rd-a 10 ohm load is placed across each gen coil.
RPM and P/in are taken again,along with the v/RMS value across each 10 ohm load.
High quality true RMS DMMs or a scope can be used to get these values.

Should the outcome seem fruitful,then we move onto the very simple looped system.


Brad

That's good, and I trust you to run a full and comprehensive series of tests.

BUT... I still think that the _first_ thing we should want to see is Dave's own device and his own setup and measurement technique that gave him the 300 watt input vs. 1600 watt output values. If he himself can't actually support that claim with apparatus he built and with proper tests he performs himself in his own reconstructed shop ... what reason would there be to go any further?

[tinman]

That's good, and I trust you to run a full and comprehensive series of tests.

BUT... I still think that the _first_ thing we should want to see is Dave's own device and his own setup and measurement technique that gave him the 300 watt input vs. 1600 watt output values. If he himself can't actually support that claim with apparatus he built and with proper tests he performs himself in his own reconstructed shop ... what reason would there be to go any further?

Those tests were for Daves device--not mine.

[TinselKoala]

Those tests were for Daves device--not mine.

Oh, I see, that's even better then. So you'll be supervising Dave's testing of his own device, over Skype or something like that? That's an excellent way to proceed.

I wish everyone good luck, and I hope the Test Day isn't too far off.

[Dbowling]

tinman,


OK, let me start from the beginning...
The original build of this generator was by Matt Jones. He took a stock motor pulsed by a 555 timer, a rotor with either two or 4 of the two inch neos on a rotor and two high impedance coils. He got speed up under load and output that was slightly in excess of input. We understood that if we ran it on the 3 Battery circuit and could recover some of the input, there was really something to this, so I replicated it, got the same results, and because I don't know any better, I started working on a big machine with 12 coils. I had six big 2" neos on the rotor, and a coil on each side of each magnet. With only a couple coils in the machine, it did what I wanted, and I was very excited. I could probably find the videos of some of those early tests somewhere, but that's beside the point. As I added MORE coils, the increased magnetic drag of the magnets past additional iron cores and caused too much amp draw through the motor. Because I was a school principal, (and an English teacher for crying out loud) and don't have an education in electronics, it did not occur to me what the issue was, and it took me a while to figure it out. So I burnt up a few motors. When I FINALLY DID figure out what the problem was, I started looking at ways to eliminate or neutralize the magnetic cogging. Many MORE motors bit the dust as I experimented with different (failed) methods of solving the problem. These were all MY1016 motors. I even finally went to the MY1020 hoping that a larger motor could stand the additional amp draw, but alas, it was not to be. With six coils on the motor the amp draw required to turn the rotor was enough to draw enough amps through the motor that heat became a serious issue that could melt the insulation off the coils. I have a box full of wire from ruined coils as evidence if you are interested. I have wound new coils either three or four times, and it is over $700 to wind a set of coils plus the time it takes. And I have a LOT of burnt up motors from before I figured out a way to neutralize the magnetic cogging.


I began researching to see if I could find a solution to magnetic cogging, and I kept on experimenting. Finally something WORKED, and then I ran across an old patent that showed that if each time a rotor magnet approached a coil core to which it would be ATTRACTED, if it ALSO approached a magnet in repulsion, you could neutralize the tendency of the magnet to lock on the core, and reduce the cogging. It supported the idea I was working with. That patent had the coil on one side of the rotor and a magnet on the other side at the same time. I didn't like this arrangement because it meant the rotor was being pulled in one direction by the iron in the core and PUSHED in that same direction by the magnet in repulsion and with HUGE neos, it caused wobble in the rotor and caused a need for increases in tolerances. So after a couple different builds I figured out that If I had one set of magnets that went between the coils and a SECOND set of magnets out on the rim of the rotor that went between magnets in opposition, I could get magnetic neutralization. That is what I did on my BIG machine that has 12 coils and six neos on it for generating and another six magnets on the rotor and twelve more on the stator (one on each side of the rotor magnet) in repulsion. That is the machine that I experimented with the MOST and have actual data and numbers from. THAT rotor has some WEIGHT with all those magnets in it, especially when you consider that the rotor is actually TWO rotors, with magnets on BOTHE SIDES of a thin piece of plastic. The magnets are attracted to each other through the thin plastic so they do NOT come out of the rotor once they are in, not even at high speed. I also have videos showing the inputs and the outputs, but only with a couple coils at the early stages, and that is NOT the machine I focused on in the video.


Eventually I figured out a CHEAPER way to construct the machine that does not put out as much power as the 12 coil machine, but costs far LESS to build because it doesn't require all the magnets. That is the 10 coils machine I showed in the video. I simplified the design.But although I have run it to TEST THE DESIGN as far as magnetic cogging goes, I have NOT tested the output of that machine. My numbers are based on the fact that it is using the SAME magnets on the SAME sized rotor being turned by the SAME motor using the SAME coils. And I know what an individual coil produces, so I can multiply that by the number of coils. Although, since the rotor weighs far LESS the rpm may be significantly higher meaning more production. I really haven't had time to experiment with the new, smaller machine.


That I do not have the time to go through boxes to find all the parts to put these machines back together is unfortunate but far from bull. I had just torn the front porch off my house as well as the back deck, assuming I had lots of time to work on the remodel and could work on one in the morning and the other in the afternoon when the sun has shifted, when my wife found the house of her dreams. Before we can move in it has to have the fence replaced, the roof replaced, the deck replaced and the kitchen remodeled and I want cabinets and benches built in my shop. That may sound like a lot of work for a "dream house, but you should see the view. To finance it we are selling the property we bought to build a retirement home as well as the "fixer upper" we bought to live in while we BUILT the retirement home. The current fixer upper house has to have the front porch replaced, the back deck rebuilt, the popcorn ceilings scraped, textured and repainted, the carpet replaced, and two bathrooms remodeled before we can put it up for sale. Until that happens and it is sold, we are making two house payments. What would be YOUR priority. I am working 16 hour days to try and get all this crap done and I am 64 years old, so when I quit working for the day, I QUIT WORKING FOR THE DAY. All the stuff for the generators is in boxes for the move and I really have NO PLACE to assemble it even if it wasn't. That's the truth. I have pictures if you want to see them.


I had NO INTENTION of putting this generator in the public domain. My intention was to patent it and go into production. When I realized it would probably be MONTHS before I could get back to it, I decided to share. I did, on Energetic Forum. There are a couple folks who are already building it, so if they get it done before I get back to this, you will probably see their work at some point. I believe this machine to be of great value. Time will tell. I will be happy to do the testing when I CAN. But selling this house HAS to be a priority. I DID NOT POST HERE to discuss the generator, ONLY to offer a simple solution to magnetic cogging and this has all been blown our of proportion. I have DONE that. Take it or leave it.


The Tesla patent is 512,340 which is his pancake coil patent. If you read it carefully, you will see he is talking about building coils with increased capacitance that delays lenz long enough that it actually ASSISTS in the rotation of the rotor, because at the CORRECT RPM, the generator coil fills at the right time to create an electromagnet that DOESN't repel the approaching magnet, but has delayed long enough that the magnet has passed TDC, and instead PUSHES IT AWAY. This can also be done by attaching a small capacitor to the coil in parallel.


As to the other patent, on magnetic repulsion, I KNOW I have it somewhere, but I cannot find it. When I do, I will post it.