Thane Heins Perepiteia.

[aether22]

Oh yeah, and the top speed rpm in those test was a long way from the real top speed, and the speed did vary a little as there is no such things as a rock solid rpm.  And so there were speed differences and I don't know how large since the tach can only be in one mode at a time and so it's last sample seconds old by the time I am ready to switch over, and while it took less that a minute to slow down it is totally possible that different starting speeds can account for the 2-3% difference in rpm's.

But the shorted HV coils make a huge difference in RPM and apparent power,

[springfield]

... 2 tests, in the first case you get Thanes generator up to speed with the HV coil shorted, and then once the speed is at max you open circuit the HV coil as you simultaneously turn the power off to the motor.

In the second you follow the same procedure but when you turn the motor off you keep the HV coils shorted.

If the Generator were providing some motive force directly then the second instance should take a lot longer to decelerate.

However if the generator is increasing the motor power then shorting the coils may not slow deceleration and depending on the core may speed deceleration, especially with a laminated semi closed circuit core.

@aether, congrats on getting yr system running. Hav eyou thought about doing your comparison deceleration test on it?
-Mike

[aether22]

Mike, the above 2 posts deal with the deceleration test.

The result is that there is no apparent difference between HV coils being shorted or not. (I will do higher speed tests either tonight or tomorrow, maybe include a flywheel or 2 so it spends more time within the zone (rpm) where the HV coils have an effect)

[aether22]

I just did the deceleration test with a speed of arrrox 2,100rpm and a grinding disk as a fly wheel on the other end of the bench grinder, so with far more energy in speed (almost 2 times the velocity so 4 times the energy and more mass on top of that so tons more energy)

II got about 300 revolutions either way, though the margin of error between tries was far larger than before, to be honest mostly just that I was nervous being so close and have it make the sounds it makes. (and everything being shaken off the table)

So if Thane or Luc or anyone else that may believe the force arises at the generator wants to try this experiment to show me I did it wrong I welcome that, but for me personally it confirms all the other experiments, the increased torque arises in the motor.

One suggestion would be to have 2 people co-ordinate, or (and maybe this is what I should have done) have 2 switches next to each other, one for the motor and one for the coil so both can be opened sanctimoniously without effort with a single hand, leaving the other hand to work the tach.


One think I would note is that there seem to be issues getting it to turn as fast, each test it seems to lose top speed (in an irregular fashion) and how long it would rotate for after also seemed to be effected by which run but not by the condition of any coil.

This is probably due to the tape holding the magnets in (the ones where the washer sits in the cup) getting stretched and hence allowing the magnet to smack the stator. (due to a clearance of ziltch on some magnets)

Indeed the tape has stretched.

[CRANKYpants]

TRICKYpants, I think you would find the cogging torque to be entirely canceled not just halved assuming same number and core qualities of the 2 coil types

I AM BEING CONSERVATIVE WITH MY ?HALVED? STATEMENT ? I SHOULD HAVE SIMPLY SAID REDUCED. AND YES I AM CONFIDENT WITH PROPER COIL PLACEMENT THE COGGING TORQUE CAN BE VIRTUALLY ELIMINATED.

Thane