Thane Heins Perepiteia.

[aether22]

OK, I agree to that. Go ahead.

Excellent!

Ok, well let's see if I can sum it up, it's the same argument PB and you have made.

The theory is that since induction motors have both a greater torque and lesser current (energy) input at higher speeds than lower speeds over some of it's operational range, that therefore accounts for the acceleration.

The first problem is that it makes no sense, the fact that if it were rotating faster it would have a greater torque and lower current pull does not suddenly make something accelerate, now you can increase the energy into the motor for a while and get it up to the higher speeds then set it back and it will begin to accelerate, but it takes energy to get it there.

The other reason is that of it is dropping say from 1,000 rpm, and then you short the HV coils and it accelerates a few hundred rpm and then you open the HV coils again guess what? It will decelerate showing that there really is not enough energy anywhere near that speed range.   On rare occasions I have however accelerated it with the HV coils and then opened them up to find that it indeed has enough power to keep accelerating but this however is somewhat rare to find and requires just the right ranges.

Also acceleration from HV shorting works even near full rpm, 50hz = 3,000rpm, the motors max speed is listed as 2,800 but goes to almost 2,900 (maybe a tad higher if I removed the grinder disk from the other end but it's a nice surface to put the tacho reflective tape on) and even at the high ends on 2,800's shorting the HV coils causes acceleration despite this being far past the pull out or whatever you want to call it speed.


The remaining points are that:

Vince found an increase in torque and none have been able to imagine any way his reading could be errored.

Thane found a steel shaft connecting the motor and generator is required with some stator coils.

Thane was able to accelerate it beyond the speed of no stators by putting a stator there and shorting it.

There may be more and this message may be added to but breakfast is ready.


Addition:

Ok, now let me make your argument for you, first you could argue that the speed increases because of a reduction in losses from cogging torque and core losses (hysteresis and eddy currents) from shorting.

However that would not be the theory the good doctor was proposing, it is also a theory that is disproven by Vince's torque measurements, by Thanes steel shaft experiments and contradicts with the requirement for high voltage coils and it also contradicts with Thane accelerating the rotor beyond the speed of no stator present.

Also the use of laminated cores creating closed flux circuits reduces hysteresis and eddy losses significantly and cogging torque has little impact at higher rpm's.

But do not argue that because it has no relevance to the subject which is specifically the Ph.D's theory and not other failed attempts to explain away Thanes results.

Since Thane's friendly Ph.D suggests a theory that fails to account for how the acceleration could even begin you have therefore lost, now please go since there is no valid reply possible, and don't come back with a different name/gender.

[aether22]

Not sure how I didn't realize this earlier (well I do kinda, it's the way the meter is layed out) but my multmeter has a range that I hadn't noticed, a 200 ma range.  So with the monster coil it's 28.9ma .0289 of an amp, nice to have that extra resolution.

I did finally also see what the max voltage was and my meter lived to tell the tale, 980 volts and that is RMS mind you so peak will be a bit higher, actually maybe as much as 1.5kv due to the distance between the magnets in the rotor. (the larger the gap the more off time there will be and the lower the average voltage will be)

[LarryC]

@ The sheep lovers on this thread:

New Zealand scientists have developed a "flatulence inoculation" aimed at cutting down on the massive amount of methane produced by its sheep and cows.

http://watthead.blogspot.com/2008/06/no.html


@OUman,

You should have heeded my warning about the Thanemanian Devil.


Regard, Larry

[OUman]

Excellent!

Ok, well let's see if I can sum it up, it's the same argument PB and you have made.

The theory is that since induction motors have both a greater torque and lesser current (energy) input at higher speeds than lower speeds over some of it's operational range, that therefore accounts for the acceleration.

The first problem is that it makes no sense, the fact that if it were rotating faster it would have a greater torque and lower current pull does not suddenly make something accelerate, now you can increase the energy into the motor for a while and get it up to the higher speeds then set it back and it will begin to accelerate, but it takes energy to get it there... etc

Aether, I can see now what your issue is. It's hard to visualize what happens in an unstable or metastable system like this so let's take it step by step:

1. Suppose you have a system which is rotating at a constant speed under the influence of a constant torque. The speed is constant because the torque is exactly enough to balance the friction and other braking effects. This is our starting point.

2. Suppose also the the motor has a rising torque-speed curve, which is typical of the motors being used in these experiments. A rising torque-speed curve means that as the speed increases the torque also increases.

3. Now, suppose there is a tiny random increase in speed. That results in a tiny increase in torque, which increases the speed further, which increases the torque, and so on, in a feedback loop. This results in the observed acceleration.

3A. Alternatively, suppose there is a tiny random increase in torque. This causes a tiny speed increase and the same feedback occurs, also resulting in acceleration.

4. What sets it off? Any little random nudge can do it but in practice, the perturbation that sets off the instability in these experiments is usually the throwing of the switch on the coils.

5. The acceleration will continue of its own accord, either indefinitely or until the shape of the torque-speed curves of the motor and the load bring about a new equilibrium. It is NOT necessary to "increase the energy to the motor for a while" - it's sufficient for a tiny random variation to set it off as described above.

6. You're correct that it does "take energy to get there" - that energy is supplied by the increasing torque. The motor is supplying more power to the generator because its torque is increasing. At the same time the motor is drawing less power from the mains: the reason for this is that its efficiency is increasing as its speed increases, which is a well established fact for motors of this sort.

Before I address the rest of your post I'd like to get us straight on this first part because it's fundamental to the rest. If you don't believe me about it, do some Googling on the subject of stability of systems and I think you'll be able to verify it. It's a concept that's happening all around us all the time in all kinds of natural and man-made systems. I'm not pulling your leg...

[aether22]

You're the kind of guy that brings a gun to a knife fight aren't you.

Aether, I can see now what your issue is. It's hard to visualize what happens in an unstable or metastable system like this so let's take it step by step:

1. Suppose you have a system which is rotating at a constant speed under the influence of a constant torque. The speed is constant because the torque is exactly enough to balance the friction and other braking effects. This is our starting point.

2. Suppose also the the motor has a rising torque-speed curve, which is typical of the motors being used in these experiments. A rising torque-speed curve means that as the speed increases the torque also increases.

3. Now, suppose there is a tiny random increase in speed. That results in a tiny increase in torque, which increases the speed further, which increases the torque, and so on, in a feedback loop. This results in the observed acceleration.

3A. Alternatively, suppose there is a tiny random increase in torque. This causes a tiny speed increase and the same feedback occurs, also resulting in acceleration.

Sure, but what about the tiny random decreases in speed/torque that causes a feedback resulting in continued deceleration?
How is shorting HV coils unbalancing randomness?

But assuming somehow it is (ridiculous) why when the HV coil is opened does the speed drop back down? Either the motor does not have enough increased torque at that new speed after all to maintain the speed once the HV coil is opened (which means the increased torque was not primarily a function of the torque speed curve). or hey maybe it is making up for all the tiny improbably unidirectional increases in torque/speed with a bunch of tiny unidirectional decreases in torque/speed, kind of restoring probability, Thane has invented the infinite improbability drive!

The problem is your (insane) idea IS NOT the idea the Ph.D proposed, it is you own contraption, er concraption.
He simply did not bother to consider that the speed must be reached before the increased torque comes into force.

4. What sets it off? Any little random nudge can do it but in practice, the perturbation that sets off the instability in these experiments is usually the throwing of the switch on the coils.

"Brutal Acceleration" .vs little random nudge  hmmm, doesn't seem quite compatible.
The thing is if a torque/speed variation is unidirectional it is not called 'random nudges' it is called power, it is called acceleration and it only happens if there is real energy behind it.

5. The acceleration will continue of its own accord, either indefinitely or until the shape of the torque-speed curves of the motor and the load bring about a new equilibrium. It is NOT necessary to "increase the energy to the motor for a while" - it's sufficient for a tiny random variation to set it off as described above.

You make it sound like a butterfly flapping it's wings could make it happen, let me assure you that is not even slightly compatible with the practice.
There are very few ranges where a small rpm increase lets an otherwise decelerating rotor into a swiftly accelerating one.
And if such a zone was hit then opening up the HV coils would not send the rpm's crashing, it would continue accelerating or stabilize, but in the majority of occasions (it depends on the power input, the coil setup and the pre and post shorting rpm's) the moment you open the JV coil the rotor decelerates right back to what it was doing before you shorted the HV coils., the increased torque from the higher rpm if present are not nearly enough to slow the rapid drop deceleration.

The fact that acceleration works just fine outside of any such zone puts another nail in the coffin, of course i told you all of this in the previous message, you are retarded.

6. You're correct that it does "take energy to get there" - that energy is supplied by the increasing torque.

And that increasing torque is supplied by the aether enhanced motor.

The motor is supplying more power to the generator because its torque is increasing.

And we still agree, at least in words technically.

At the same time the motor is drawing less power from the mains

Yes, yes.
: the reason for this is that its efficiency is increasing as its speed increases[/quote]
No, no.
Did it take out a loan on future projected earnings?

What is not being debated is that induction motors have ranges of operation where speed and torque increase as current drops, however the effect works outside of such zones and on opening the HV coil the speed in most tests drops right back down to the previous speed.so clearly it was not a factor.

, which is a well established fact for motors of this sort.

Before I address the rest of your post I'd like to get us straight on this first part because it's fundamental to the rest. If you don't believe me about it, do some Googling on the subject of stability of systems and I think you'll be able to verify it. It's a concept that's happening all around us all the time in all kinds of natural and man-made systems. I'm not pulling your leg...

You are so full of shit, how can you stand it?

Well I posted my critique of the Ph.D's opinion, and you have not addressed my points but ignored them since you found them unassailable and so created a new theory for the acceleration, the terms you agreed to is that it would be your last post unless the regulars of the thread all agreed you won the argument, I'll let them chime in if they think so but I think I have far far better chance of getting $3k out of you for a torque sensor than you have of getting them to side with you.

Therefore I will expect no more posts from you on this thread and if there are any I will point out where you agreed to the terms to Stefan and he can kick you, I'll also ask him if your IP is the same as was PB's if he has such records.

"Good day! I said good day!!" fez, That 70's Show