Has anyone tried making a generator with a toroidal stator?
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=bjiHAAAAEBAJ&dq=2003/0025416
(Beware, fig 1 in patent doc is prior art and not part of the invention)
I guess it separates the stator flux from the rotor flux and thus
minimize the Lenz-effect, reminds me of Thanes bi-toroid-transformer
with its separate flux-paths for primary and secondary.
/Hob
Yes I have tried years and I do today,
but why to speak about "lenz-less" ???
Have built 3-phase toroid wound motors/generators many years.
Milled out from soft magnetic powder cores,
Pressed segments from SMC powder like Somaloy 700,
Thin si-steel laminations
also slotless toroid wound motors,
lot of different experiments and ready works, small and big ones, wind generators, high speed spindles ...
They all be subjects to well known motor laws and rules, where we always have Lorentz force ... Faraday's Law and induction ... Eddy Currents and Lenz's Law ... in principle it depends only about you have toothed or toothless design ::)
It does not matter you like to wind stator negs, tooths or connection ring, or you place windings on to one or both side of flux returning ring when slotless design.
Some advantages when toroid wound slotted stator I do know, of course, but there is nothing to do with Lenz-less.
cheers,
khabe
Quote from: khabe on December 17, 2010, 06:18:58 AM
Yes I have tried years and I do today,
but why to speak about "lenz-less" ???
It was my interpretation of the text in the patent.
Quote from: nilrehob on December 17, 2010, 06:25:45 AM
It was my interpretation of the text in the patent.
Yes, I understand,
and it was my opinion about this patent ::)
Peace :D
cheers,
khabe
Although Your generators look awesome and are excellent builds as far as I can tell,
the pictures You provided don't reveal enough information to expose any similarities or differences to the patent that I can see.
So let me rephrase my question:
Has anyone tried making a generator with a toroidal stator as in the patent?
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=bjiHAAAAEBAJ&dq=2003/0025416
/Hob
I got a "correction" from another forum:
this is actually a Tesla patent:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=VMtxAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=1#v=onepage&q&f=false
so, if even Tesla came up with this solution it must be really worth while testing,
and two patents describing the same thing must make it easier to replicate, right?
:)
/Hob