Simple to make Hilden-Brand style motor

[i_ron]

Looking very good Ron, great to see so much effort and reporting back to the community. I should do that as well...
One thing I also wonder, is what amperage is doing. Meaning how fast does it reach "maximum draw" or saturation. With them reluctance motors you are in between a rock and a hared place. You want hard attraction to attract the distant pole in. And once the alignment is getting more and more in line you can in essence drop off much of the strong input.

You are right about many motors and solenoids. The strongest alignment is also the moment of worse mechanical transfer. I wonder if that can be fixed at all. Since it is a problem is next to all motors, electro or combustion...

One other difficulty with the Hildenbrand and genesis valve it that, as long as there is not yet a good pole alignment, the 'resistance' to switch the magnet is incredibly high. The magnet does not like to be switched into an huge air gap and would much rather stay in the core. So in order to force it to switch out, you need much power. This required power decreases squared with pole alignment. This also is not easily fixed I think.

You mentioned the long pole pieces of the Jacks rotors as being an advantage.
Well I think it depends how you look at it. Yes it gives you a longer attraction period. But since the 'on' time of such long poles is so long you will only be able to capture a traction of your input back. Since pole saturation in reluctance motors is reached very fast (and wanted) you are very likely to have reached maximum amp input long before the pole has reached full alignment. So this is all good for the motoring properties but not so good for spike recapturing. Since all past saturation is not recoverable. Personalty I prefer many narrow rotor poles and multiple overlapping http://www.mathworks.com/help/toolbox/physmod/powersys/ref/sw_rel_mot1.gif stator poles.

Flynn is also very interesting I have no experience with it in a dynamic (fast switching) environment. It does seem interesting though since it works a bit different. It couples with 1 magnet and pushes another. And Jacks valves only pushes.

Hi Steven,

Thanks for the kind words, yes, the response has been more than I expected. The number of 'hits' on my jpgs shows a strong interest still.

The amp draw would be much like a sine strongly favoring the right side. I have two coils up and running with the draw at .85 amps and 17.5 volts, so say 15 watts... no load.

I want to do a prony brake test (just for laughs) but the way I have it built I don;t have a bit of the shaft accessible on either end so will have to pull it down and either make a new shaft or extend the old... needed something to do, LOL so might get that done to day... or not...

You are right on the short pole piece, I hadn't thought that through too far.

Flynn is interesting, any working groups that anyone knows of?  Other than
"what's his name" the one mentioned again in the Russian list, as this is the style I don't want to pursue...with the fancy cut lam's.

Ron

[slapper]

perhaps this would be more appropriate in the a smith thread
but since there has been some interest in pulse recovery i
thought i may as well throw this out there on the pile to
consider.

http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=1PgRAAAAEBAJ&dq=6754091

the challenge for many is the high side switching control
for the power. there are off the shelf parts for this but
consideration on the specifications is very important.

component values have to be selected which will determine an
efficiency at different drive frequencies.

thanks for all your work Ron.

take care.

nap

[i_ron]

I want to do a prony brake test (just for laughs) but the way I have it built I don;t have a bit of the shaft accessible on either end so will have to pull it down and either make a new shaft or extend the old... needed something to do, LOL so might get that done to day... or not...


Ron

OK, even worse than I thought!

with a 12 lever (300 mm) the weight on the scale is .95 Oz (27 g)

I make this to be about .74 watts out for 9 watts in = 8%

Now the usual disclaimer... not saying that the Hildenbrand/Genesis is faulty, just that my build is faulty.

I think I had 3% with my first Garry Stanley motor... so I am getting better!

Here endeth the lesson. Thank you for your support and attention. It comes as no real surprise to me as the lack of power was the reason I put it on the shelf for so long.

If anyone has had (or will have) better results, please post...

Ron

Edit: at 42 volts it runs a little brisker, and up to 12% now

[yssuraxu_697]

Just a remark. Is is not about absolute efficency at this stage, it's about efficency with magnets and without them. For example when without magnets efficency will be 10%, with current design 15% and with Flynn style 20% then it will be clear sign to move forward to better materials, smaller tolerances and other ways to minimize losses. Also proper flyback collection may change things a bit. Scienculo did report up to 99% recovery.
This is far from dead end right now.
Besides, this is not a entirely proper way to measure output, would you measure internal combustion engine (also impulse powered!) this way and with what results? I would go for generator with permanent magnets and known efficency.
Hope we all make good progress with this in new year and more people will join in.

PS. http://www.faraday.ru/net.htm => http://www.faraday.ru/content12.html => files in attachment.

[i_ron]

Just a remark. Is is not about absolute efficency at this stage, it's about efficency with magnets and without them. For example when without magnets efficency will be 10%, with current design 15% and with Flynn style 20% then it will be clear sign to move forward to better materials, smaller tolerances and other ways to minimize losses. Also proper flyback collection may change things a bit. Scienculo did report up to 99% recovery.
This is far from dead end right now.
Besides, this is not a entirely proper way to measure output, would you measure internal combustion engine (also impulse powered!) this way and with what results? I would go for generator with permanent magnets and known efficency.
Hope we all make good progress with this in new year and more people will join in.

PS. http://www.faraday.ru/net.htm => http://www.faraday.ru/content12.html => files in attachment.

I like your reasonable approach!

I feel that it has been shown that the magnets are helping but anyway, here is a test of the two different core styles ... with and without magnets

test 1, 56 G, 36 RPM, [no magnets]

test 2, 49 G, 75 RPM [4 magnet stack, 1/2 inch]

test 3, 59 G, 77 RPM [6 magnet stack, 3/4 inch]

test 4, 59 G, 80 RPM, [8 magnet stack, 1 inch]

final test with the original core, short length, wide foot...

test 5, 59 G, 89 RPM, [6 magnet stack]

Ron

pic of old core style