Thane Heins Perepiteia.

[aether22]

What OUmon says is to the point. The best starting point is to run the rotor not only with no coils but
no CORES. This gives a base line reading.

Sadly it's not quite that easy since unless you remove cogging torque and core losses it is likely to fail.
Thane managed to impressively beat no stator cores by a little at a given speed but that would not work over the whole speed range as the acceleration effect only kicks in at speed, also I have not been able so far to get it faster shorted than with none at all. (which does not surprise me since Thane has the effect quite a bit stronger than I).

The only way the idea would not lead to almost sure failure is if there was 'brutal' acceleration and if only a speed range where acceleration was found to be greater than losses from the cores presence.
This would require a recording of rotational rates (via a data logging oscilloscope or similar) so that the valid speed range can be analyzed.

Sadly this takes it far outside of the easy test that I first envisioned and it does not seem entirely worth it anymore, still if you want to run the test (preferably with a data logging method so that it is known precisely how long it took to get to each rpm then that could be of value.

Then run the rotor with the cores and take the second reading.
Note when you short the HV coils the reading does not go below the initial no core reading.

I fail to comprehend what you mean by "reading does not go below the initial no core reading".
Do you mean the total revolutions during deceleration reading or some other reading?
When you say "does not go below" are you predicting experimental results? you lost me.

It is primarily the reduction of steel core drag that is initiating the RPM acceleration.

So you are saying that the reduction of core losses play a majority part on the acceleration effect.
Now it does play a very possible part but it is a part just as present in the HC coils shorting and all they do is slow the rotor.

I would not say that reduction in core losses is a major or primary component, although since Thane has switched to closed circuit laminated cores and differentiated the effect by HV and HC and found 'Brutal' acceleration I feel safe in saying that during the right range it is merely a small component and nothing more, now outside of that range and in more marginal result levels it is indeed something to be wary of.

In fact if I do not pay close attention to that today I might get false positives and see the effect when really I am seeing only a conventional core loss reduction.

This can be shown with a HV coil with a Somaloy core... there is no acceleration, only lenz reaction.

I would be interested in hearing more of this test as it is the first I have heard of it, however you are mistaken.
The effect is clearly not only or even in majority due to reduction of corer losses as you seem to be saying.
You should be aware that Thane has been able to increase rpm beyond the no core speed.
You also know perfectly well that the HV coils generate more energy than they increase motor pull and that the HC coils with in your case a lesser ampere turns than the HV coils have a decelerative effect.

So I am quite unsure why you now seem to be saying the effect is just (or primarily) artifact.
And that seems to go against the point of the message which was to run a sans core deceleration test which would fail miserably if you are right.

[CRANKYpants]

Just You,

J   A  S
U  W  H
S  E   E
T  S
    O
    M
    E

[CRANKYpants]

WE HAVE A COOL GROUP OF CHARACTERS HERE

AND DESPITE ALL THE NONSENSE HERE - REAL STUFF IS HAPPENING ALSO.

ENJOY!

CHEERS
T

PS
HOPEFULLY J.A.S. CAN REDUCE THE FILES AS THEY ARE TOO BIG.

Subject:
From:    "Raptis Theofanis"
<rtheo@dat.demokritos.gr>
Date:    Fri, 6 June, 2008 9:12 am
To:      "zahn@mit.edu" <zahn@mit.edu>
Cc:      "rhabash@site.uottawa.ca"
<rhabash@site.uottawa.ca>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear professors

I have recently become aware of your involvement in a peculiar area of investigation concerning Thanes Heinsch accelerating generator ("perepiteia"). I would like to inform you on the content of a similar research at a theoretical
level concerning the existence of instabilities in electromagnetism of very different origin than those appearing in
gravitational theories. This research is intimately connected with the possibility of geometrization of EM field theories. It is based on an attempt to construct a very general homotopy class for vector fields (see EM-0 Demo Report) and is connected with a kind of projective bundles when applied to Maxwell equations.

It also ended with a number of experimental propositions for a number of different possible constructions that would
shed some light on the peculiarities of this subject. As this is an area of the highest importance given present environmental and socio-economical global conditions I would like to express here my deepest concerns for the ultimate fate of such a research and urge you to make your contribution the sooner possible.

Please, take a look on our efforts and if you find any similarity with the object of your research on "accelerating"
generators send me a feedback. Thank you in advance.

my best regards

Theophanes Raptis
Physicist-Scientific Software Developer
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ag. Paraskevi, Attikh, Greece
tel      : +30 210 6514544/6511020 (secr)
mob   : +30 6938051028
http   ://cag.dat.demokritos.gr/raptis.php
e-mail: rtheo@dat.demokritos.gr
            t_raptis2005@yahoo.gr

National Center for Scientific Research
''DEMOKRITOS''
Division of Applied Technologies

[i_ron]

Sadly it's not quite that easy since unless you remove cogging torque and core losses it is likely to fail.
snip
And that seems to go against the point of the message which was to run a sans core deceleration test which would fail miserably if you are right.

Let me put some numbers to that and see if it comes through better...

With just the rotor at full speed the input draw is say 1.58 amps. This I call the baseline,
this is the friction loss and windage losses for the motor and rotor.

With the coils and cores in position the input draw is say 1.89 amps, (no load, no short)

Now with the two HV coils shorted in series the draw is reduced to 1.72 amps.

The difference between 1.89 and 1.72 is the reduction in core drag.
The speed didn't change noticeably because it was already near sync speed.

But the reduction in draw did not go below the baseline 1.58 amps.

My definition of cogging and drag is cogging manifests its self at low speed and "apparently" diminishes at speed. Where as core drag is minimal at low speed and increases with speed.
It is directly related to number of poles, double the number of poles and the drag is doubled.

I was more specific as to where I was going with that in my reply to 'just her' (JAS)
I didn't want to use the H (brake) word and give OU any ammunition. lol

One can't do a, "sans core deceleration test" so no problem there....

Please keep in mind that these numbers are from a very crude build, Perhaps Mr T's numbers go
below the base line as has been show... but all I am saying is, mine doesn't at this point.

Ron

[aether22]

Let me put some numbers to that and see if it comes through better...

With just the rotor at full speed the input draw is say 1.58 amps. This I call the baseline,
this is the friction loss and windage losses for the motor and rotor.

With the coils and cores in position the input draw is say 1.89 amps, (no load, no short)

Now with the two HV coils shorted in series the draw is reduced to 1.72 amps.

The difference between 1.89 and 1.72 is the reduction in core drag.
The speed didn't change noticeably because it was already near sync speed.

I really need to get in the lab, but anyway.
Yes your results indicate that the acceleration was not as great as the deceleration from core losses.
However this does not mean the source of acceleration was a reduction in overall losses (and every indication that shorting increases losses in most cases) and this has been very well disproven as the primary cause of acceleration, including tests where the acceleration is greater than and deceleration.

But the reduction in draw did not go below the baseline 1.58 amps.

My definition of cogging and drag is cogging manifests its self at low speed and "apparently" diminishes at speed. Where as core drag is minimal at low speed and increases with speed.
It is directly related to number of poles, double the number of poles and the drag is doubled.

I was more specific as to where I was going with that in my reply to 'just her' (JAS)
I didn't want to use the H (brake) word and give OU any ammunition. lol

One can't do a, "sans core deceleration test" so no problem there....

Please keep in mind that these numbers are from a very crude build, Perhaps Mr T's numbers go
below the base line as has been show... but all I am saying is, mine doesn't at this point.

Ron

And I have no issue with you saying that, but the fact that it does not go below baseline powerdraw does not mean the the acceleration was a result of a reduction in core losses primarily.