Hi you all,
Please view my most recent video about the Negative Lenz / Delayed Lenz Effect Experiment.
It is actually a Replication of the Thane C Heins Regenerative Accelerating Generator:
http://www.youtube.com/user/overunityguide#p/a/u/0/kzxc3Ai4T3A
My results are the same as Thane C Heins. In my opinion this is what we all are looking for.
With Kind Regards,
Overunityguide
Quote from: Overunityguide on August 30, 2011, 04:59:41 PM
Hi you all,
Please view my most recent video about the Negative Lenz / Delayed Lenz Effect Experiment.
It is actually a Replication of the Thane C Heins Regenerative Accelerating Generator:
http://www.youtube.com/user/overunityguide#p/a/u/0/kzxc3Ai4T3A
My results are the same as Thane C Heins. In my opinion this is what we all are looking for.
With Kind Regards,
Overunityguide
Higher frequency will change the phase between current and voltage. It also affect the power output of the coil. Loading the motor will probably change the phase between current and voltage, and therfor it appears to draw less energy when loaded. Watt in a AC motor is a product of U x I x cos(phase). If the phase between voltage and current increase when loaded, you get less Watt readings from the grid.
Vidar
Quote from: Low-Q on August 30, 2011, 05:41:21 PM
Higher frequency will change the phase between current and voltage. It also affect the power output of the coil. Loading the motor will probably change the phase between current and voltage, and therfor it appears to draw less energy when loaded. Watt in a AC motor is a product of U x I x cos(phase). If the phase between voltage and current increase when loaded, you get less Watt readings from the grid.
Vidar
@Vidar, I am familiar with the U x I X cos(phase) Power calculation... I am an electronics engineer myself. So yes I know all about shifting phases. This is exactly why I have mentioned in my video that the value which is being displayed is the real Watts Power Value. So with the cos(phi) phase shift corrected.
So to be more specific, it doesn't appears to draw less energy, but it does this for sure. You can see the exact difference when I load it with my finger. When loading it with my finger the real power consumption goes up and the cos(phi) comes closer to 1. So after this I let it run idle again and then I connect my load, so that you can see that the real consumed power is going down after connecting the load.
What happens in this setup is that we use the parasitic capacitance of the generator coil, just like Thane C Heins explains in one of its videos.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
http://www.youtube.com/user/overunityguide#p/a/u/0/kzxc3Ai4T3A
@Overunityguide . Your experiments are very interesting . What happens to the input watts and RPM when you replace the lamp load with a short circuit ? There is a good reason for asking this question . In a recent news item on Peswiki News , Thane Hiens talks about a motor for bicycles . The idea is like your experiment , but uses many coils , all short circuited . The idea is that once the motor is up to speed , it will run just from the delayed Lens effect . I think Konehead mentioned the same idea on the Muller Dynamo thread .
Quote from: neptune on August 31, 2011, 10:37:53 AM
@Overunityguide . Your experiments are very interesting . What happens to the input watts and RPM when you replace the lamp load with a short circuit ? There is a good reason for asking this question . In a recent news item on Peswiki News , Thane Hiens talks about a motor for bicycles . The idea is like your experiment , but uses many coils , all short circuited . The idea is that once the motor is up to speed , it will run just from the delayed Lens effect . I think Konehead mentioned the same idea on the Muller Dynamo thread .
Did he also disconnect the powersource and ran the motor exclusivlely on delayed Lenz effect?
Vidar
@Low-Q .That is exactly what he claims . However the Peswiki article is not clear as to whether he has actually achieved this . I suspect not , as he appears to looking for 6 or 7 thousand Dollars to "develop" the device . Why not look up the article on Peswiki ?
Quote from: Overunityguide on August 30, 2011, 04:59:41 PM
Hi you all,
Please view my most recent video about the Negative Lenz / Delayed Lenz Effect Experiment.
It is actually a Replication of the Thane C Heins Regenerative Accelerating Generator:
http://www.youtube.com/user/overunityguide#p/a/u/0/kzxc3Ai4T3A
My results are the same as Thane C Heins. In my opinion this is what we all are looking for.
With Kind Regards,
Overunityguide
Hi Overunityguide,
What is the power input to the drive, for the same drive settings, but without the coil present?
Nice video.
Thanks
Mike
Quote from: neptune on August 31, 2011, 10:37:53 AM
@Overunityguide . Your experiments are very interesting . What happens to the input watts and RPM when you replace the lamp load with a short circuit ? There is a good reason for asking this question . In a recent news item on Peswiki News , Thane Hiens talks about a motor for bicycles . The idea is like your experiment , but uses many coils , all short circuited . The idea is that once the motor is up to speed , it will run just from the delayed Lens effect . I think Konehead mentioned the same idea on the Muller Dynamo thread .
@neptune
Thank you, I have just checked what the power drop is when short circuiting it, and then it goes from 77 Watts back to 71 Watts. Further when doing this, you can here the motor run lighter...
But for now I am using a .37KW motor (370W) which is a bit overkill for this kind of setup
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
QuoteBut for now I am using a .37KW motor (370W) which is a bit overkill for this kind of setup.
Hi, it might be just right for converting your motor to RotoVerter an then your input power should drop to just a few watts.
Quote from: kEhYo77 on August 31, 2011, 02:26:40 PM
Hi, it might be just right for converting your motor to RotoVerter an then your input power should drop to just a few watts.
Hi kEhYo77,
That is what I was thinking of in the first place, but I cannot do this in my setup, because my motor is rated at 1500 rpm / 50 Hz, and in this experiment I am feeding it with the 3 phase power at 100 Hz which is coming from my converter. But if you buy a 3000 rpm / 50 Hz rated normal induction motor, I expect that you can combine those two different approaches.
Thanks for your Reaction, Overunityguide
@OverunityGuide
I got one of those 3000/3 phase/50 Hz waiting on my shelf for my setup by the way :D
I think it is just a matter of driving frequency. I plan to do my own inverter with a variable frequency sine wave to drive the motor.
This way I will be able to achieve the RPM threshold for different coils/cores.
Best of luck...
@Overunityguide . The logical next step would be to add a second shorted coil , and note the input power reduction .With more and more coils , the input power should become less , but I feel you will eventually come up against the law of diminishing returns .You could also experiment with the coils parameters , number of turns , type of core etc . I wish you success . My old legs are getting tired on my bike , and I dont have a spare 7000 dollars to give to Thane Heins .
Quote from: mikestocks2006 on August 31, 2011, 12:34:44 PM
Hi Overunityguide,
What is the power input to the drive, for the same drive settings, but without the coil present?
Nice video.
Thanks
Mike
Hi Mike
I have just tested it and it seems to be 66 Watts with the generator rotor removed, So when only running the plain motor.
And yes I know what you want to say... This is not Overunity...
Running 71 Watts Shorted, 75 Watts without a load, 73 with a load connected and 66 Watts when in plain motor mode...
But, that is not what I try to show here, I am only trying to show the proof of principle by now. As I have said earlier, there can be a lot improved in this kind setup.
The mechanical design of my generator for instance is one of poorest design which you can use... Further am I using a .37KW Motor right now, which is also a bit overkill.
Please keep remember it is only to show the effect.
Kind Regards,
Overunityguide
Quote from: Overunityguide on August 31, 2011, 03:29:46 PM
Hi Mike
I have just tested it and it seems to be 66 Watts with the generator rotor removed, So when only running the plain motor.
And yes I know what you want to say... This is not Overunity...
Running 71 Watts Shorted, 75 Watts without a load, 73 with a load connected and 66 Watts when in plain motor mode...
But, that is not what I try to show here, I am only trying to show the proof of principle by now. As I have said earlier, there can be a lot improved in this kind setup.
The mechanical design of my generator for instance is one of poorest design which you can use... Further am I using a .37KW Motor right now, which is also a bit overkill.
Please keep remember it is only to show the effect.
Kind Regards,
Overunityguide
Hi Overunityguide,
Thanks for replying with the figures.
No problem at all that this is under unity. I was merely interested in the penalty % that the coil drag adds to the system by itself, for this particular setup. In this case it appears to be about 13.6% added load, and from that there is a recovery of about 44% when fully shorted. So the fully shorted penalty is about 7.5% That may not be all due to the electromagnetic effects, but also there is increased aerodynamic frictional losses as the magnets try to “squeeze†through that air gap between magnets and tip of coil core.
Some tests with ferrite have shown between 3% to 20% penalty depending on speed. The speed up is a bit more elusive though.
Thanks again for taking the time to check the figures ,and post.
Mike
Hi Overunityguide
To add on the above post.
It would be interesting to see what the pure EM losses are, by replacing that coil/core with a nonmagnetic non conductive form -same shape/size - and test for added load needed at the same rpm.
Then comparing these losses to previous, the true added load “if any†! can be calculated.
Thanks
Mike
Quote from: Overunityguide on August 31, 2011, 03:29:46 PM
I have just tested it and it seems to be 66 Watts with the generator rotor removed, So when only running the plain motor.
@Overunityguide, did you remover the generator ROTOR or the coil?
Thanks,
M.
Quote from: mondrasek on August 31, 2011, 04:53:49 PM
@Overunityguide, did you remover the generator ROTOR or the coil?
Thanks,
M.
@mondrasek
I have removed the generator rotor, so the shaft only was turning.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
If the magnets on the rotor will have,all,the same poles up ,will be the accelerating effect present also?
Hello,
I am a lurker here,rarely comment. Now you mentioned shorting the coils. And I am thinking what someone else has done with a ubolt and two coils and connects the coils to a battery and the expected electromagnetic effect of it being able to pickup a metal bars is evident, but when he disconnects the electric source the coils stay energized and are still able to pickup a steel bar after being disconnected from the energy source. See Ed Leedskalnin Magnetic current pt2 on you tube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9z3z1sftowg
I have seen others replicate this and Iam wondering if shorting the coils has a similar effect of storing energy. Now if this has been mentioned before. excuse me. Mike Sliver
Quote from: Mike Sliver on August 31, 2011, 11:31:22 PM
Hello,
I am a lurker here,rarely comment. Now you mentioned shorting the coils. And I am thinking what someone else has done with a ubolt and two coils and connects the coils to a battery and the expected electromagnetic effect of it being able to pickup a metal bars is evident, but when he disconnects the electric source the coils stay energized and are still able to pickup a steel bar after being disconnected from the energy source. See Ed Leedskalnin Magnetic current pt2 on you tube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9z3z1sftowg
I have seen others replicate this and Iam wondering if shorting the coils has a similar effect of storing energy. Now if this has been mentioned before. excuse me. Mike Sliver
Hi Mike
There is a difference between magnetic soft and magnetic hard iron coil cores. I am using a normal bolt as a core. So I don't think that what you say is taking place in this setup, what I think that takes place in my setup is the so called delayed Lenz / negative Lenz effect.
For the Theoretical Explanation Concerning this Effect Please look at the Following Link:
http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins#p/u/0/Z1weXYivARo
Which is provided by Thane C Heins
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzxc3Ai4T3A
Quote from: Overunityguide on August 31, 2011, 05:11:52 PM
I have removed the generator rotor, so the shaft only was turning.
@Overunityguide, when you removed the generator rotor, you also removed all the air drag that the rotor, and especially the projecting magnets and retaining screws, creates. So this would result in decreased power consumption. So I don't think you can compare that 66 watt reading to any of the others.
Did you test WITH the rotor, but WITHOUT the coil?
Thanks,
M.
Quote from: mondrasek on September 01, 2011, 10:31:05 AM
@Overunityguide, when you removed the generator rotor, you also removed all the air drag that the rotor, and especially the projecting magnets and retaining screws, creates. So this would result in decreased power consumption. So I don't think you can compare that 66 watt reading to any of the others.
Did you test WITH the rotor, but WITHOUT the coil?
Thanks,
M.
@mondrasek,
I have just tried it and with the rotor, without the coil it runs at about 68 / 69 Watts idle on 3000 rpm
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Confirming the Negative Lenz Effect:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzxc3Ai4T3A
After A couple of people asked for it digitally, here is my schematic
Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Thane C Heins Replication, Confirming the Negative Lenz Effect: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzxc3Ai4T3A
Quote from: Overunityguide on September 02, 2011, 03:41:20 PM
After A couple of people asked for it digitally, here is my schematic
Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Thane C Heins Replication, Confirming the Negative Lenz Effect: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzxc3Ai4T3A
I have this kind of setup with high impedance single wire coil and bifilar coil and up to 3600 rpm driver with 18 NS magnets. Nothing special... You could follow thread on TC Heins device replication attempt. Me and at least a couple of other replicators didnt get much. Accelerations "effect" is also simply explainable trick. 8)
Minde
@Overunityguide,
Can I ask you for a calibration measurement?
What is the actual power consumed when the whole coil setup is removed?
I am asking this because if the coil units contributes to let say 5 W of extra losses (e.g. eddy current losses in the core of the HV coil) and you notice a power drop of 2 W when connecting the load, you will still end up with 3 W of losses and this will be a very misleading experiment.
Thanks in advance,
Teslaalset,
Fellow Dutch forum member
Quote from: teslaalset on September 03, 2011, 01:08:09 PM
Can I ask you for a calibration measurement?
What is the actual power consumed when the whole coil setup is removed?
@teslaalset,
Please see my previous posts, there you will find your answers...
And before calling it a very misleading experiment...
Please keep in mind: My video is only showing 'proof of principle'
Kind Regards, Overunityguide
I have done a second Video about the:
Delayed Lenz / Negative Lenz Effect for now:
The Difference Between Shorting and Loading
In which I show and clarify how you can get the regenerative acceleration effect when you Short your Generator Coil or when you try to Load your Generator Coil
So if you have any time left, here you can find it:
Delayed Lenz / Negative Lenz Effect, Difference Between Shorting and Loading
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGstOJ4NDQQ
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Quote from: Overunityguide on September 04, 2011, 05:05:45 PM
Please see my previous posts, there you will find your answers...
And before calling it a very misleading experiment...
Please keep in mind: My video is only showing 'proof of principle'
I am not suggesting you are possibly misleading, but when not correctly interpreted, your (and Thane's) setup could suggest this way OU is possible, although you're not speaking this out loud.
Shorting coils has been discussed here and at other fora quite often and some members think it's the holy grail to OU.
You're experiment + data shows it's not as simple as that.
I missed the earlier post on the data without coil, I got it now.
The numbers are even worse than I thought.
9 W loss because of the coil setup, max 2 W gain when loaded with LEDS.
Thanks for sharing this.
Quote from: teslaalset on September 04, 2011, 05:33:21 PM
I missed the earlier post on the data without coil, I got it now.
The numbers are even worse than I thought.
9 W loss because of the coil setup, max 2 W gain when loaded with LEDS.
One has to remember that when full setup of coils would be implemented the drag will be much less and power required
to drive the rotor as well. All that he has to do is to place ODD number of those HV coils around the EVEN number of magnets rotor...
75watts to run the generator
the led's probably consume 2 watts...
ok so its negative lenz effect, so it now consumes 72 watts or so.... but is the effect the same when you put a larger load on it? what happens if you put something that requires say 80watts? is it going to be 70watts in and 80watts out?
Quote from: Poit on September 05, 2011, 02:37:41 AM
75watts to run the generator
the led's probably consume 2 watts...
ok so its negative lenz effect, so it now consumes 72 watts or so.... but is the effect the same when you put a larger load on it? what happens if you put something that requires say 80watts? is it going to be 70watts in and 80watts out?
Ok, there we go again... Please read the previous posts! I have mentioned it for about twenty times by now... it is showing only proof of principle...
In one of my previous posts I also describe that the motor which I am using right now is a bit overkill. Actually my motor is rated at maximum 370 Watts. (so much too powerfull for this setup) And will consume much power only to run idle.
So if you have read all previous posts, Please proceed and see my next video about this subject:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGstOJ4NDQQ
In which I describe the differences between shorting and loading the generator coil.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Quote from: kEhYo77 on September 05, 2011, 01:53:09 AM
One has to remember that when full setup of coils would be implemented the drag will be much less and power required
to drive the rotor as well. All that he has to do is to place ODD number of those HV coils around the EVEN number of magnets rotor...
You're missing the point I was trying to make here:
No coils present : power consumption 66Watts
One coil present, no load: power consumption 75 Watt.
So, the presents of each coil will add 9 Watts of extra losses without delivering extra output.
If you then load one coil with e.g. a LED lamp, like in this experiment, there is a approx. 2 Watt reduction of the 9 Watts.
So, overall, each coil, while delivering output, still has a 7 Watt extra loss.
Adding N extra coils will add 7 x N Watt extra loss.
The whole idea of obtaining OU with similar setups will only fly if the additional lossed caused by the generator coils will be less than the load they deliver.
In the setup of Overunityguide the coil seems to have a solid core. Replacing this by e.g. isolated rods with a small diameter will help a lot in getting the eddy currents reduced.
But, since in this example a coil with many windings is used, there will always be rather large ohmic losses in the generator coil as well. In this demo : R =384.5 Ohm !
Quote from: teslaalset on September 05, 2011, 03:53:09 AM
You're missing the point I was trying to make here:
No coils present : power consumption 66Watts
One coil present, no load: power consumption 75 Watt.
So, the presents of each coil will add 9 Watts of extra losses without delivering extra output.
If you then load one coil with e.g. a LED lamp, like in this experiment, there is a approx. 2 Watt reduction of the 9 Watts.
So, overall, each coil, while delivering output, still has a 7 Watt extra loss.
Adding N extra coils will add 7 x N Watt extra loss.
Makes sense :)
@Overunityguide sorry mate, i read your posts. Keep up the good work
Quote from: teslaalset on September 05, 2011, 03:53:09 AM
You're missing the point I was trying to make here:
No coils present : power consumption 66Watts
One coil present, no load: power consumption 75 Watt.
So, the presents of each coil will add 9 Watts of extra losses without delivering extra output.
If you then load one coil with e.g. a LED lamp, like in this experiment, there is a approx. 2 Watt reduction of the 9 Watts.
So, overall, each coil, while delivering output, still has a 7 Watt extra loss.
Adding N extra coils will add 7 x N Watt extra loss.
@teslaalset,
(Please don't take it personal...)
I think that you still haven't read all previous posts. I am saying this because, also in one of my other previous posts, I am telling everyone that my generator setup for now is one of the most Inefficient and that there can be a lot improved in this setup.
First, you can think of replacing my iron bolt core with ferrites. Secondly designing a more like Thane C Heins Mechenical Generator Coil Dual Rotor setup and so on.
Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Please see my new Video about the Difference Between Shorting and Loading:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGstOJ4NDQQ
@teslaalset
I know what You are getting at with those calculation but adding a full set of coils will reduce total amount of drag significantly.
And then you can not do simple mutliplication of the friction/drag like that for all the coils because balancing magnetic forces does the trick (Muller).
On a side note here, I think that You know that this setup can be converted to RotoVerter resonant motor and then the same 3000 RPM
can be achieved using only few Watts using tuned caps.
Quote from: Overunityguide on September 05, 2011, 04:08:08 AM
(Please don't take it personal...)
No, I don't. It's good to have this discussion.
Always difficult to express things, without causing wrong emotions ;)
I may leave the wrong impression myself, but I mean to dig out the issues here as an open discussion, in a constructive way.
Quote from: Overunityguide on September 05, 2011, 04:08:08 AM
I think that you still haven't read all previous posts. I am saying this because, also in one of my other previous posts, I am telling everyone that my generator setup for now is one of the most Inefficient and that there can be a lot improved in this setup.
Point taken.
Quote from: Overunityguide on September 05, 2011, 04:08:08 AM
First, you can think of replacing my iron bolt core with ferrites. Secondly designing a more like Thane C Heins Mechenical Generator Coil Dual Rotor setup and so on.
In parallel to your response, I added similar suggestions in my previous post.
To be honest, I am doing a lot of Ansys Maxwell simulations on this topic in the background to find most efficient solutions for this.
Indeed, one of the effeciency improvements is better core material.
The other is to get red of the coil resistance. We can discuss how....
The essence is that current lag is maximized.
The fundamental formula in setups like this is explained very nicely in this MIT video, starting from around time = 40:03:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpO6t00bPb8 (great teacher!)
Leaving out any capacity effects of winding(s) it boils down to :
Tangens(phi) = (omega x inductance) / Resistance
(where phi is the delay )
This formula defines the current delay to the induced flux.
To maximize the delay:
- Increase omega (= 2 x pi x freq)
- Increase inductance
- Decrease resistance
Increase of omega is simple. Overunityguide showed the clear effects in his demos
Increasing inductance is not so simple. If magnets approach coil cores, the cores in general tend to saturate, causing a drop in inductance.
There are several ways to avoid saturation of core materials at TDC, e.g. to put bias magnets at the other end of the cores of the coils. But.... this will saturate the cores when rotor magnets are not at TDC, leaving some other disadvantages.
Decrease of resistance is also complicated: using thicker wire is one solution, reducing windings another.
Thane Heins is using HV coils with many windings. This is not the only possible solution. It all depends on the formula above.
The MIT demo shows that even a solid ring has prominent current lag.
And then there is the possibility to play with capacity.
This allows for a whole arrangement of extra options.
Quote from: kEhYo77 on September 05, 2011, 04:22:25 AM
I know what You are getting at with those calculation but adding a full set of coils will reduce total amount of drag significantly.
Only after these coils have introduced much greater drag themselves if they have large losses, which occur in this demo. I even doubt coils can be made that effecient they will leave a surplus of torque when loaded.
Quote from: kEhYo77 on September 05, 2011, 04:22:25 AM
And then you can not do simple mutliplication of the friction/drag like that for all the coils because balancing magnetic forces does the trick (Muller).
On a side note here, I think that You know that this setup can be converted to RotoVerter resonant motor and then the same 3000 RPM
can be achieved using only few Watts using tuned caps.
See my comments in my previous reply.
Adding capacitors to obtain resonance, will introduce zero current lag (exactly zero!!).
This is a complete different ball game.
Very much on topic
ToranaRod Feels He has Seen OU [A strange Runaway ,Burn stuff up "EFFECT"] ,And wants all to know
Here
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/7982-muller-generator-replication-romerouk-51.html#post155261
Chet
QuoteAdding capacitors to obtain resonance...
I ment adding capacitors to turn motor/prime mover windings to LC tank for resonant driving for the rotor.
Quote from: kEhYo77 on September 05, 2011, 08:14:20 AM
I ment adding capacitors to turn motor/prime mover windings to LC tank for resonant driving for the rotor.
Ah, ok, I was mixing this up.
Motor issues maybe a bit offtopic here, but from what I understand of motors, the mechanical load causes a current phase lag that is changing when the mechanical load is changing.
This will result in 'lower impedance load' as seen by the power source.
This means a compensation capacitor value is dependant on the mechanical load.
Also in the case of a motor, the current lag will be compensated to zero to the flux phase when C is tuned to LC resonance.
From what I understand, zero current lag to the flux will end up in zero torque, so useless.
Maybe you have better references than I do, but I haven't seen any spectacular results with rotovertors for the last 5 years.
Quote from: teslaalset on September 05, 2011, 06:36:01 AM
I even doubt coils can be made that effecient they will leave a surplus of torque when loaded.
Toranarod on 08-03-2011 got more RPM with shorted coil than without the coil at all:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/7982-muller-generator-replication-romerouk-35.html#post149807
Quote from: teslaalset on September 05, 2011, 09:02:47 AM
This means a compensation capacitor value is dependant on the mechanical load.
Yes, it is, so the RV capacitor should be selected after finding optimum speed for the effect to manifest and then at this speed we short ALL
the generator coils or put them on a specific, constant value load and then, under this condition we try to select the right compensation capacitor for the RV motor.
This setup should be much more efficient then.
Quote from: futuristic on September 05, 2011, 09:17:26 AM
Toranarod on 08-03-2011 got more RPM with shorted coil than without the coil at all:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/7982-muller-generator-replication-romerouk-35.html#post149807
If that is true and it can be replicated he is on the right track.
I wasn't aware.
Thanks for the link.
I will study this.
I'll try to replicate it too. I already have DC motor and 10mm x 10mm neo magnets. For core I'll use mumetal from hard drives.
Quote from: teslaalset on September 05, 2011, 09:33:39 AM
If that is true and it can be replicated he is on the right track.
Ok, I had a look at Toranarod's data.
Yes, indeed he seems to have higher RPM with a generator coil, compared to the situation without generator coil.
However there is also a motor coil present.
Unfortunately he did not monitor (or post) the data on the motor coil.
The used power of the motor coil is also relevant for solid evaluation.
So, incomplete data unfortunately. Still no proof of concept.
For some reason I can't post messages on EF although I have a valid account.
Can somebody post a question to Toranarod to provide also the input power of the motor coil, to complete his table?
Quote from: teslaalset on September 05, 2011, 02:00:13 PM
Ok, I had a look at Toranarod's data.
Yes, indeed he seems to have higher RPM with a generator coil, compared to the situation without generator coil.
However there is also a motor coil present.
Unfortunately he did not monitor (or post) the data on the motor coil.
The used power of the motor coil is also relevant for solid evaluation.
So, incomplete data unfortunately. Still no proof of concept.
For some reason I can't post messages on EF although I have a valid account.
Can somebody post a question to Toranarod to provide also the input power of the motor coil, to complete his table?
Hello
I am using a separate drive motor. It became very obvious Romero was right about a few things.
One point he made was don't worry about the drive just use a good motor.
the work on the acceleration of the generator coils is where the research is up to at the momment.
the out runner in the photo can provide 2000 RPM at 300 Mil Amps or 8200 RPM at 3.5 amps its very versatile. I recommend giving it a try it has helped me a lot with this work
Hi You All,
Today one YouTube User has asked me to Replace my LED Load with a normal Resistive Incandescent Light Bulb. So this is what I have done.
Here is my Video About this Subject:
Negative Lenz / Delayed Lenz Effect with an Incandescent Light Bulb as a Load
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kluw71YC5p4
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Quote from: toranarod on September 05, 2011, 04:45:10 PM
Hello
I am using a separate drive motor. It became very obvious Romero was right about a few things.
One point he made was don't worry about the drive just use a good motor.
the work on the acceleration of the generator coils is where the research is up to at the momment.
the out runner in the photo can provide 2000 RPM at 300 Mil Amps or 8200 RPM at 3.5 amps its very versatile. I recommend giving it a try it has helped me a lot with this work
Hi toranarod,
Thanks for stopping by.
Can you summarize you findings once more in this thread so we all understand them?
I noticed you have the generator coils fixed, so they probably are difficult to remove.
Most convincing experiment would be as follows:
1) remove (physically) all generator coils and measure the motor power consumption at a given RPM
2) mount the generator coils and drive the rotor such that same RPM is obtained as in 1) with no load to the generator coils (nothing connected)
3) measure the motor power consumed in 2)
4) short all generator coils and measure motor power consumption and RPM.
Quote from: teslaalset on September 05, 2011, 06:26:23 PM
Hi toranarod,
Thanks for stopping by.
Can you summarize you findings once more in this thread so we all understand them?
I noticed you have the generator coils fixed, so they probably are difficult to remove.
Most convincing experiment would be as follows:
1) remove (physically) all generator coils and measure the motor power consumption at a given RPM
2) mount the generator coils and drive the rotor such that same RPM is obtained as in 1) with no load to the generator coils (nothing connected)
3) measure the motor power consumed in 2)
4) short all generator coils and measure motor power consumption and RPM.
i will post a photo of the current set up
by the end of my day i will have the data we are looking for.
today's coil type is mild steal core, solid. 280 turns 4.7 mH wire 18awg. 1.1mm. the core extends 15mm past the coil. and is 1.5 mm gap.
RPM will be 2500 to 3000.
Quote from: toranarod on September 05, 2011, 04:45:10 PM
Hello
I am using a separate drive motor. It became very obvious Romero was right about a few things.
One point he made was don't worry about the drive just use a good motor.
the work on the acceleration of the generator coils is where the research is up to at the momment.
the out runner in the photo can provide 2000 RPM at 300 Mil Amps or 8200 RPM at 3.5 amps its very versatile. I recommend giving it a try it has helped me a lot with this work
Here is some data on short circuits. There is no electronics of any kind.
Just dead short, open circuit or no coil. It’s a basic comparison of core materials using the same coil. All core dimensions are the same only change is material structure.
I thought this was rather interesting.
Quote from: toranarod on September 05, 2011, 11:03:47 PM
Here is some data on short circuits. There is no electronics of any kind.
Just dead short, open circuit or no coil. It’s a basic comparison of core materials using the same coil. All core dimensions are the same only change is material structure.
I thought this was rather interesting.
Hi toranarod,
Thanks very much for the quick data update.
If I understand your data correctly, you have replacable core types?
And the rotor motor is connected to a fixed voltage supply?
I made a quick analysis with excel.
Some observations:
RPM behaviour:
- No coil shows very nicely same results, something you would expect of course
- Open coil shows which core has most losses: solid iron (Fe) core, also, no supprise
- Shorted coil shows interesting RPM increase values for the solid iron (Fe) core from open to shorted coil.
Input current behaviour:
- Solid iron seems to influence the mechanical drag the most
Some missing info for further conclusions:
In particular the Mu metal cores raises some new questions, since it's RPM seems almost untouched and roughly independent from generator coil status.
It would help a lot in getting some more insights when we would know the shorted generator coil current and the coil resistance. This would give us a ballpark figure in what electrical output energy is delivered when generator coil is shorted. Do you have access to a current probe?
Quote from: teslaalset on September 06, 2011, 03:53:16 AM
Hi toranarod,
Thanks very much for the quick data update.
If I understand your data correctly, you have replacable core types?
And the rotor motor is connected to a fixed voltage supply?
I made a quick analysis with excel.
Some observations:
RPM behaviour:
- No coil shows very nicely same results, something you would expect of course
- Open coil shows which core has most losses: solid iron (Fe) core, also, no supprise
- Shorted coil shows interesting RPM increase values for the solid iron (Fe) core from open to shorted coil.
Input current behaviour:
- Solid iron seems to influence the mechanical drag the most
Some missing info for further conclusions:
In particular the Mu metal cores raises some new questions, since it's RPM seems almost untouched and roughly independent from generator coil status.
It would help a lot in getting some more insights when we would know the shorted generator coil current and the coil resistance. This would give us a ballpark figure in what electrical output energy is delivered when generator coil is shorted. Do you have access to a current probe?
great work thank you for the data
I will have some important figures come up in the next few days.
I will post them here if you would do another excel analysis.
thanks for this
Hello Overunityguide and everyone,
I have had my eye on your topic for a few days now and I find you're doing an excellent job.
It coincides that I have lately been thinking of applying what I personally learned while working with Thane Heins at the Ottawa University a few years back. I'm now considering of re-testing with new core material and biasing magnets.
I'm mostly thinking of applying this. A little over a year ago a researcher posted a
YouTube video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuzSkKlnCzc
and also shared his findings at this
Forum: http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=399801
What he found was that a coil wound on a Finemet toroid (nanocrystaline) core would increase in Inductance as much as 3 time when approached to a magnet (up to a certain point)
I do have 2 of theses Finemet toroids and will soon be confirming his findings.
The idea here (if this information is correct) would be to use Finemet as core material on Thane's delayed Lenz coil technique. This would give a huge advantage as we could achieve higher than expected Inductance using minimal wire lengths since High Inductance is the Key factor to Thane's coil effect. The benefit to use less wire is cost but more important is that Thane later found reducing coil resistance boosted the coil current output.
I will soon post my findings.
Great work there toranarod! I have also been following your research and progress for some time.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Quote from: teslaalset on September 05, 2011, 05:57:25 AM
The essence is that current lag is maximized.
The fundamental formula in setups like this is explained very nicely in this MIT video, starting from around time = 40:03:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpO6t00bPb8 (great teacher!)
Leaving out any capacity effects of winding(s) it boils down to :
Tangens(phi) = (omega x inductance) / Resistance
(where phi is the delay )
This formula defines the current delay to the induced flux.
To maximize the delay:
- Increase omega (= 2 x pi x freq)
- Increase inductance
- Decrease resistance
Increase of omega is simple. Overunityguide showed the clear effects in his demos
Increasing inductance is not so simple. If magnets approach coil cores, the cores in general tend to saturate, causing a drop in inductance.
There are several ways to avoid saturation of core materials at TDC, e.g. to put bias magnets at the other end of the cores of the coils. But.... this will saturate the cores when rotor magnets are not at TDC, leaving some other disadvantages.
Decrease of resistance is also complicated: using thicker wire is one solution, reducing windings another.
Thane Heins is using HV coils with many windings. This is not the only possible solution. It all depends on the formula above.
The MIT demo shows that even a solid ring has prominent current lag.
And then there is the possibility to play with capacity.
This allows for a whole arrangement of extra options.
Following is my conclusions of that MIT lecture.
The teacher states very clearly that the phase shift is purely a geometrically property.
If you inset the formula for the wire resistance etc in the solenoid phase shift formula, you will see that the phase shift depends only on the solenoid (coil) diameter, wire resistivity and rotational speed (RPM, Hz).
I did this substitution in a Maple workbook where I'm also can plot the phase shift as a function of RPM.
(Maximum phase shift is +-90 deg with changed sign at the resonance frequency.)
We can change the resistivity by changing wire material, but copper has a very good price/performance value.
So, If we stick with copper, the only parameters that causes changes in the phase shift is:
- the solenoid diameter (large diamter = large phase shift)
- rotational speed (high = large phase shift)
All other parameters falls out, the phase shift does
NOT depend on:
- wire diameter
- wire length
- solenoid length
- number of wire turns
So my conclusion is that there is an operational "speed window" where the effect kicks in and that the rotational speed for this window is lower for solenoids with larger diameter.
The effect (phase shift) does not depend on the resistance.
The level of output (voltage/current) is dependent on the resistance, so in the end we have to think about the resistance. However, it should work with boot high voltage and high current coils.
When we have chosen an operational speed and solenoid diameter to get a large phase shift, we select the wire diameter, wire length, solenoid length etc so the wire and electronics can handle the output.
I'm working with the idea of a coil with as low parasitic capacitance as possible and a separate capacitance bank that is switched in/out to have total 180 deg phase shift. Therefore (low cap), my aircore coils is very flat, 90 mm Dy, 30 mm DI and 5 mm thick. I also have made coils with magnetit/epoxy cores for test. I switch the coils with an Arduino computer, using a hall sensor. I can send all running data in real time to my PC over ethernet (tcp). I'm currently writing an application for the PC that will display all relevant data, store them in a database or file. It will also enable me to setup test sequences with a lot of diffrent values in the configuration (pulse width, length, start, rotational speed).
I have not started to sample data yet.
Anyway, this is what I have been thinking of and working with for a while.
I was originally planning to replicate the Romero UK Muller device, but in the end I decide to build a test rig where I can investigate and document a lot of diffrent properties for some coils. Replicating/building a working machine has to wait until all experiments is done and I fully understand this. Fun to learn!
/Rogla
@Rogla .Yours is the kind of dedicated systematic approach that is so desperately needed . If the "Muller" effect is real , yours is the kind of research that will crack it in the end . Even if OU is not possible using these ideas , as a minimum it can lead to generators having a very high efficiency .This could lead to small wind turbines that are more cost effective . Thanks in advance for sharing your data . As an aside , have a look at the adams motor , where the relationship between magnet size and coil diameter is stressed .
Quote from: rogla on September 06, 2011, 12:40:33 PM
I'm working with the idea of a coil with as low parasitic capacitance as possible and a separate capacitance bank that is switched in/out to have total 180 deg phase shift.
I have to disappoint you rogla, 180 degrees will not happen, max. current lag is near 90 degrees, no capacity applied.
Adding a capacitor will
reduce the current lag to zero degrees max.
@teslaalset
Ok, that's true, 180 deg absolute phase shift will not happen, it was not that I tried to say. What I tried to say was switching between -90 deg and +90 deg by switching a capacitor bank with larger value of impedance compared to the coil at the operational speed and with correct timing. The relative change in phase shift should be near 180 deg (from -90 to +90), not the absolute value. I rather would like to express me in Swedish, sorry for that bad writing....
Quote from: teslaalset on September 06, 2011, 02:34:08 PM
Adding a capacitor will reduce the current lag to zero degrees max.
For a solenoid like in the MIT lecture, I disagree strongly. The only time there is zero degree phase shift (except pure resistance) is a resonance, i.e when the absolute value of the impedance of the coil and capacitor i equal. This is very basic.
The question however is, how much of a phase angle is enough?
30 deg? 45? 60? 85? More?
If we use some already known numbers for e.g. the 8 magnet romeroUK setup:
RPM= 1300
L =1.2mH
R=2Ohms
The figures are approximate and inductance under dynamic conditions may also fluctuate some.
Using the above and solving for phase angle
Tan(phi)=omega * L/R
phi is about 33
couple more on different rpm, rest are the same.
at
3000 rpm its about 56
and
4400 rpm it’s about 65
Again, what should be the minimum or prefered range?
Thanks for the posts folks.
Mike
Quote from: rogla on September 06, 2011, 03:04:45 PM
For a solenoid like in the MIT lecture, I disagree strongly. The only time there is zero degree phase shift (except pure resistance) is a resonance, i.e when the absolute value of the impedance of the coil and capacitor i equal. This is very basic.
I am performing 3D Maxwell simulations right now to get the 3 stages you mentioned.
As soon as I have them finalized I will post them here, so we can discuss.
Quote from: teslaalset on September 06, 2011, 03:30:59 PM
I am performing a 3D Maxwell simulations right now to get the 3 stages you mentioned.
As soon as I have them finalized I will post them here, so we can discuss.
Aha, ok, I did a simple test with two of my coils and my oscilloscope. A generator coil that generates volage behaves diffrent from a solenoid! Because the voltage is in the other direction in a generator, the resulting current lags the voltage in the cirquite. Same direction as for the capacitor. I think this is what you mean. Thanks, teslaalset, I wasn't aware. I stillbe live in the basic idea, diffrent timing. Still fun to learn!
PS. Now I'm thinking of switching a transformer to be able to get phase shift in the other direction. I think I have to finish my evaluation platform and do all my planned tests before I get involved in discussions like this and get new ideas. DS.
Quote from: rogla on September 06, 2011, 03:48:17 PM
Aha, ok, I did a simple test with two of my coils and my oscilloscope. A generator coil that generates volage behaves diffrent from a solenoid! Because the voltage is in the other direction in a generator, the resulting current lags the voltage in the cirquite. Same direction as for the capacitor. I think this is what you mean. Thanks, teslaalset, I wasn't aware. I stillbe live in the basic idea, diffrent timing. Still fun to learn!
You got the hang of it.
Current through the coil shapes the total flux.
Current through the capacitor does not create flux.
My sims take forever, so probably they will not be finished today, but I will post them later on.
It's still educating stuff, also for other members that still want to know.
I can already forecast that anyone that can get the current leading to the flux in a coil of such a device will have a running ZPE device.
@toranarod,
Really nice work, very impressive. I Like your setup especially with the brushless engine outer runner.
Kind Regards, Overunityguide
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kluw71YC5p4
@teslaalset
I appreciate that you are willing to help. I really want to understand everyting I get intrested in in detail.
I think we booth was thinking of a capacitor bank in series with a coil.
In that case I understand that the phase shift can be max 90 deg and min 0 deg with a large capacitor bank (voltage in the generator coil is 180 deg compared to a solenoid).
But what if the capacitor is in parallel with the coil?
In this case, the voltage in the coil is clamped to the voltage in the capacitor.
If the impedance in the coil and capacitor is equal, the resulting phase shift is 0.
If the impedance of the capacitor is much larger than the coil, the current is 90 deg before voltage.
Any opinion on this?
In my mind, it is some basic configurations that produce phase shift (of current and thus flux in coil). I think it is possible to combine two of them or possibly only use one of them in combination with disconnet/short the coil for a part of the wave, by switching. This is my goal, to really understand how diffrent setups impacts the phase shift in the generator coil.
Hi!
Is this the delayed lenz?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhWVBpPGO1M
Quote from: rogla on September 06, 2011, 06:34:34 PM
@teslaalset
I appreciate that you are willing to help. I really want to understand everyting I get intrested in in detail.
I think we booth was thinking of a capacitor bank in series with a coil.
In that case I understand that the phase shift can be max 90 deg and min 0 deg with a large capacitor bank (voltage in the generator coil is 180 deg compared to a solenoid).
But what if the capacitor is in parallel with the coil?
In this case, the voltage in the coil is clamped to the voltage in the capacitor.
If the impedance in the coil and capacitor is equal, the resulting phase shift is 0.
If the impedance of the capacitor is much larger than the coil, the current is 90 deg before voltage.
Any opinion on this?
In my mind, it is some basic configurations that produce phase shift (of current and thus flux in coil). I think it is possible to combine two of them or possibly only use one of them in combination with disconnet/short the coil for a part of the wave, by switching. This is my goal, to really understand how diffrent setups impacts the phase shift in the generator coil.
My opinion is 0 may be the best you can hope for . this is why I think a dead short works 0 volts current at Max. If Only you could make a coil behave like a capacitor wouldn't that be great. I have tried many combinations of capacitors at frequencies. I never seen it affect Lenz drag.
good work. please keep on going if you find something I would love to know.
Quote from: gotoluc on September 06, 2011, 12:22:07 PM
Hello Overunityguide and everyone,
I have had my eye on your topic for a few days now and I find you're doing an excellent job.
It coincides that I have lately been thinking of applying what I personally learned while working with Thane Heins at the Ottawa University a few years back. I'm now considering of re-testing with new core material and biasing magnets.
I'm mostly thinking of applying this. A little over a year ago a researcher posted a
YouTube video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuzSkKlnCzc
and also shared his findings at this
Forum: http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=399801
What he found was that a coil wound on a Finemet toroid (nanocrystaline) core would increase in Inductance as much as 3 time when approached to a magnet (up to a certain point)
I do have 2 of theses Finemet toroids and will soon be confirming his findings.
The idea here (if this information is correct) would be to use Finemet as core material on Thane's delayed Lenz coil technique. This would give a huge advantage as we could achieve higher than expected Inductance using minimal wire lengths since High Inductance is the Key factor to Thane's coil effect. The benefit to use less wire is cost but more important is that Thane later found reducing coil resistance boosted the coil current output.
I will soon post my findings.
Great work there toranarod! I have also been following your research and progress for some time.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Hi everyone,
for anyone interested, I started a topic with a video demo on testing what I have posted above.
Link to topic: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=11377.new#new
Luc
Double post
Ok, a bit late, but I've got some simulations examples.
I'll start with some basics, I need a bit more time to work on the RLC ciruit sims.
Three attachements:
1) basic setup: one coil, no solid core, just air, rotor with 8 disc magnets all facing North upwards. RPM = 3750, meaning that with 8 rotor magnets freq=500 Hz, T=2ms.
2) flux and current at 100 ohm load. 4, 6 and 8 ms is at TDC (Top Dead Center, magnet center exactly at coil center)
3) flux and current at 1 ohm load, also here 4, 6 and 8 ms at TDC
You'll notice that the 100 ohm version has an almost symmetrical value around TDC.
This means that forces on the rotor will allmost ballance out (sum of the pull moments is equal to the sum of the push moments), but the forces are also small due to the limited amplitude in current caused by the 100 ohm.
For the 1 ohm sorted coil situation is quite different, showing the phase shift of the current.
The delay of the current also causes the total flux to be delayed (Total flux= magnet flux + coil flux)
Here you can notice that the peak of the current is before TDC, causing some extra drag to the rotor), since the amplitude of the current is significantly higher.
Folks,
post 1554 by kajunkreations conains a link which leads to a french forum infecting you computer with a trojan- Please see attached pic. Can someone please post this info there as I am not a member in the energeticforum.com
Regards
Kator01
Hi You All,
Please See my Latest Video About: 'How to Calculate the Delayed Lenz Effect'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QziS_o6gSnQ
This Video demonstrates how we can calculate the desired Delayed Lenz Effect, and shows that the experimental results of my previous video about: the Difference between Loading and Shorting the Regenerative Acceleration Generator coil can be explained and can be calculated. So than again high impedance is really important. And the Lenz Delay can be calculated by L/R
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Quote from: Overunityguide on September 10, 2011, 01:53:37 PM
Hi You All,
Please See my Latest Video About: 'How to Calculate the Delayed Lenz Effect'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QziS_o6gSnQ
This Video demonstrates how we can calculate the desired Delayed Lenz Effect, and shows that the experimental results of my previous video about: the Difference between Loading and Shorting the Regenerative Acceleration Generator coil can be explained and can be calculated. So than again high impedance is really important. And the Lenz Delay can be calculated by L/R
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Great video and explanation.
So do you think if a generator had a large diameter rotor with 200 magnet we would be able to get the delayed flyback with low Impedance low Resistance generator coils?
Or do you think it is better to go high RPM and less magnets?
Thanks for doing these experiments and sharing.
Luc
Quote from: Overunityguide on September 10, 2011, 01:53:37 PM
Hi You All,
Please See my Latest Video About: 'How to Calculate the Delayed Lenz Effect'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QziS_o6gSnQ
This Video demonstrates how we can calculate the desired Delayed Lenz Effect, and shows that the experimental results of my previous video about: the Difference between Loading and Shorting the Regenerative Acceleration Generator coil can be explained and can be calculated. So than again high impedance is really important. And the Lenz Delay can be calculated by L/R
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Did you measure the L in the coils, or calculated it from the windings and dimensions?
I have problems with measuring a coil if the internal resistance is too high. The meter is measuring the impedance at normally 1kHz. If the internal resistance is high, it will affect the L-readings to make me believe L is higher than it actually is. This will also affect the calculations of "Tau" the time constant you are refering to in the video.
Just thoughts that might make a difference.
EDIT: If you know at which frequency the inductance is measured at, and you know the internal resistence, you might be able to recalculate the "actual" inductance. I will try that when I get back to work - just to see if my assumptions are correct.
Vidar
Quote from: gotoluc on September 10, 2011, 10:20:27 PM
Great video and explanation.
So do you think if a generator had a large diameter rotor with 200 magnet we would be able to get the delayed flyback with low Impedance low Resistance generator coils?
Or do you think it is better to go high RPM and less magnets?
Thanks for doing these experiments and sharing.
Luc
@Luc,
Thank you very much.
Personally I think that there can be many different setups in where we can expect the Delayed Lenz Effect to see.
- Very high RPM/Many Rotor Magnets/Medium to Lower Inductance
- Medium RPM/Many Rotor Magnets/Medium to High Inductance
- Medium to Normal RPM/Many Rotor Magnets/High Induction
But for now I think that the last option is the most practicable to experiment with. But what is important, is that you can calculate the proper Delay by the simple formula: L/R and that you include your Load R within it.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Calculate the Delayed Lenz Effect:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QziS_o6gSnQ
Quote from: Overunityguide on September 11, 2011, 06:09:59 AM
@Luc,
Thank you very much.
Personally I think that there can be many different setups in where we can expect the Delayed Lenz Effect to see.
- Very high RPM/Many Rotor Magnets/Medium to Lower Inductance
- Medium RPM/Many Rotor Magnets/Medium to High Inductance
- Medium to Normal RPM/Many Rotor Magnets/High Induction
But for now I think that the last option is the most practicable to experiment with. But what is important, is that you can calculate the proper Delay by the simple formula: L/R and that you include your Load R within it.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Calculate the Delayed Lenz Effect:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QziS_o6gSnQ
Hi Overunityguide,
I believe we would get much better current output if using low Inductance coil as the Resistance is much lower.
As far as I can remember Thane's best results were when he had the most rotor magnets he could fit on his rotor, making his own cores 1/2" x 1/2" (square) using new silicon steel transformer laminations so he would have no short between laminations (very important) and the coil would be wound to minimal Inductance (just enough to get acceleration under load at correct RPM).
Minimal Inductance (wire length) = minimal Resistance = most current output
Non shorting steel laminations = less Eddy currents = less rotor drag = less energy in (prime mover)
As far as I know (at this time) these are the the parameters one needs to fine tune to achieve the most efficient Lenz free and Eddy free generator.
One area that has not been explored yet is using more exotic core materials (other than silicon steel) which may give a boost in inductance so we could further reduce wire length and boost current output.
Another area which also needs to be tested is,
how much distance do we need between magnets I find this one to be very important. Do you think a gap between magnets is needed?
Have you connect a scope to your setup to see what's going on? could you do a video of it?
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Hello Everyone,
The coils employed in this prototype are 4.5 ohms, 16 gauge bi-filar wound series connected with M1 core laminations and create acceleration at 1800 RPM with a 10 ohm light bulb. Each coil can produce 50 Watts or more and the magnets are 90 lb pulling weight. They create so much torque and acceleration that two set screws on each rotor were not enough to keep them secured to the drive shaft and they had to be returned to the machinist to have key-ways installed. Even now the air gap on each side is about 1/2 an inch. When properly balanced with three rotors and offset cores the cogging torque is virtually zero and the core "cost" was very low - which is reduced as speed increases anyway and is NOT an issue.
http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins?feature=mhee#p/u/4/u3gVfltiO-E
I will post the test data when I find it to end this discussion (which is a waste of time BTW) because all generators have coils and cores with some hysterisis losses inherent in them but not all generators accelerate when a load is applied which is the REAL issue.
Cheers
Thane
Dear Thane,
We have said it before, we say it again. Those kind of tests are more than an optical illusion rather than scientific ones demonstrating a principle.
Besides the coils, ohm-age, magnets, flux, frequencies and inductancies, motor INPUT and output figures of a VERY efficiency motor have to be taken into consideration and compare net values.
In my eyes, the only "odd" phenomenon" its the magnetic cogging that stops during the application of a current to the working coil, either in "accelarating or decelarating mode"b (iron cores do that in contrary to ferrites). You claim, cogging is not an issue here. I am afraid is not so.
May i sugest,
...................
Since you have a nice laboratory over there, in your next tests to employ ultra high efficiency motors for the specific rpm as high eff. PMDC motors controlled by a variac or the rotoverter principle (more elaborate).
Try to do that, map the exact imput vs output figures and then we discuss again the phenomenon you suggest again and again.
friendly regards,
Quote from: baroutologos on September 12, 2011, 03:47:54 AM
Dear Thane,
You claim, cogging is not an issue here. I am afraid is not so.
May i suggest,...................
May I suggest blah, blah, blah...
I claim that... your claim that my claim IS a claim is not a correct claim . :P
I ceased making claims (which are a waste of time) many years ago and started making statements of fact based on empirical evidence which can be shown and repeated.
Cogging torque is not an issue in a PM generator which is correctly balanced - this [fact] is a well established fact.
Cogging torque is not an issue because the generator can be
started as a motor and then once up to speed the
individual motor coils can be
converted over to
generator coils and NO EXTERNAL prime mover is required. THIS [fact] HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED ON MY YOUTUBE CHANNEL: http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins
Also [fact] the output from a "generator" coil can be fed into a "motor" coil and acceleration can be maintained.
May I suggest that everyone who is bugging Overunityguide to "do this and do that" simply be quiet and watch his progression (which is perfect BTW) and do the same yourself (OR DO YOUR HOMEWORK BEFORE COMMENTING) and share actual [factual] RESULTS not useless statements which have no basis in reality what so ever and take baroutologos earlier advice...Reply #4701 http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4047.4695 on: April 23, 2009, 08:51:07 AM
QuoteI saw your youtube videos Thane.
I think that is all the time we were talking about! Excellent done. Nothing more to say. Who has eyes sees and mind understands. baroutologos
May I also suggest that everyone take Einstein's advice, "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
Cheers
Thane
I am not upto speed with this motor stuff but I want to ask a question.
Tesla used iron shield in one of his trafo designs to delay magnetic field and then he used the delayed field in create more aiding EMF to secondary.
It occurred to me would shielding also work with electric motors ? Some iron shield between motor coil and magnet would change the drag to pull ? Hmm, maybe this is already seen here.
Manner up Thane.
all you are talking about is plain BS. How much is it? 3, 4 ,5 years now? What you have shown? Puzzles for dummies? Lol
If there was any potential in your Potential company, it would have been manifested by now. What is it? Oil barons do not let you? lol
At best keep dreamning for your self. DO not BS-ing other naive indiciduals to the electric art.
Anyone who thinks technology commercialization is easy or fast is dreaming.
However "good things REALLY do come to those who wait and persist"...
with 2915+ connections on LinkedIn
http://ca.linkedin.com/pub/thane-heins-2915-connections/30/2b/a74
and over 2 Million YouTube views the wait is almost over.
Overunityguide and his brilliant work is proof of this fact.
POTENTIAL +/- DIFFERENCE INC.
Background of Potential Difference Inc. PDI is a Clean-Tech/Energy R & D company which was founded by Thane Heins and incorporated in 2005. Initial PDI research began as flywheel energy storage in collaboration with Dr. Paul Allarie at the University of Virginia's Rotating Machines and Control's Laboratory (ROMAC). PDI was invited to move its research into a satellite lab at the University of Ottawa in 2008 following a successful technology demonstration at MIT. PDI's technologies were further developed and refined under the supervision of Dr. Riadh Habash in Ottawa University's power lab.
PDI R & D Products and areas of Business Technology Activity In 2005 PDI began as a UPS/Flywheel energy storage development company due its development of a Conical Magnetic Bearing Design which is now being licensed by NASA.
PDI's area of focus shifted in 2007 with the development of Regenerative Acceleration Generator Technology (RM). Regenerative Acceleration Generator Technology (RM) Regenerative Acceleration Generator Technology represents major breakthrough in EV and HEV design which will now allows all EVs to continually recharge their batteries and may ultimately provide unlimited range and eliminating the need for plug in recharging.
Regenerative Acceleration Generator Technology has the unique ability to reverse the regenerative braking paradigm often employed in EVs to recharge the batteries while decelerating the vehicle. This is accomplished by reversing the polarity of the induced magnetic fields inside the generator.
RM technology can be integrated into existing EV, HEV and ICE vehicle platforms or it can be developed as a standalone motor/generator solution.
INDUSTRY COMMENTS
CHRYSLER ELECTRIFIED POWERTRAINS
- The technology looks really interesting and is revolutionary. I would like to learn more about the technology. Is it possible to organize a demo or a lecture in the USA?"
GENERAL MOTORS
- "This sounds interesting. I'd like you to connect with our Fuel Economy Learning Program manager, to schedule a time for you to come in and share the technology with us. We need to know more about the Physics behind it".
"I have talked with my colleagues in GM US about your solution for vehicles. So, we would like more details about fuel economy and emissions regarding it. Do you have any company that use this approach in vehicles? I am open for discussion".
MERCEDES-BENZ
- "It would be fitting for the inventor of the automobile to be first with your revolutionary technology and for me to play a role in that would be awesome!"
NISSAN Japan
- "Thanks for providing technical information. If the effect of your invention is really true, I am sure there will be strong needs in the market.
How can you prove this on an actual electric vehicle, for example by making a prototype using our Nissan Leaf? I would like to discuss your business model and financial requirements, investment needs, business plan."
EV WORLD
Mike Brace, EV World Tech Editor
- "When we finally understand what Thane Heins has discovered, we likely will have to rewrite the laws of electromagnetism." http://evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=1890
NASA
Erik Clark NASA-Goddard Space Flight Center - "The magnetics lab here at Goddard expressed some interest in having you come down to do a colloquium"
US AIR FORCE
Omar Mendoza, Program Manager Energy & Environmental Quality Air Force Research Laboratory Wright Patterson
- "We really are more interested in developing its use and application for military power requirements"
CANADIAN SPACE AGENCY Gilles Leclerc, Canadian Space Agency Space Technologies - "I have asked Mr. Gilles Brassard, A/Director, Spacecraft Payload here at the Canadian Space Agency to look at your technologies and to visit your laboratory"
ELECTRIC MOBILITY CANADA Mike Elwood, Chairman Electric Mobility Canada and Vice President of Azure Dynamics
"This is a freakin game changer!"
ELECTRIC MOBILITY CANADA Al Cormier, Executive Director Electric Mobility Canada - "I am writing to ask you to submit what you feel would be an appropriate document to describe your regenerative acceleration technology for circulation to our Committee members"
OTTAWA UNIVERSITY Dr. Habash, University of Ottawa
- "Of course it accelerates... this represents several new chapters in physics, that is why we are consulting MIT"
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO Dr. Stanley Townsend, University of Toronto & Former Managing Editor of the Canadian Journal of Physics
- "Thane, Your Press Release was most interesting to me as a physicist & an engineer.
The level of technical detail was adequate to tell me that you probably have made a very significant advance in applied physics & in safely & successfully handling a new source of electric power. Congratulations!"
MIT
Dr. Marcus Zahn
- "It works and it is not something I would have expected, now I am just trying to figure it out"
RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCE Dr. Evstigneev N.M., Institute for System Analysis, Russian Academy of Science - " A number of your experiments are not lying in the field of Maxwellian electrodynamics"
UNIVERSITY OF CONCORDIA Professor Joseph Shin, Concordia University - "This is absolutely fascinating stuff you are doing"
ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE Mike Simpson, Transportation Analyst Rocky Mountain Institute - "You seem to have made an interesting discovery. Our internal physics experts review this information and have determined that it is very interesting work"
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS OF ONTARIO Donald Wallace, Executive Director Ontario Centre for Engineering and Public Policy - "Would you be willing to contribute an article on this technology to the Journal for Engineering and Public Policy?"
CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE David Mann, Canadian Association for the Advancement of Science - "If possible would like to meet with you to discuss your approach to the Association and of course to get a better feel about the physics behind your invention. I would still like to see what you are doing and perhaps we can include some of your material on our website newsletter?"
Thane C. Heins
President
Potential +/- Difference Inc. R & D
"The Transition of Power"
thaneh@potentialdifference.ca
Linkedin http://linkd.in/iIZyXF
YouTube http://bit.ly/gCRePU
"How do we make the world work for 100% of humanity in the shortest possible time
-through spontaneous cooperation without ecological damage or disadvantage to anyone"
-- Dr. R. Buckminster Fuller
Not even impressed.
Most of them, have not even taken a magnet in their hands and spin it past a coil.
have fun though
Quote from: baroutologos on September 13, 2011, 03:20:24 AM
Not even impressed.
Most of them, have not even taken a magnet in their hands and spin it past a coil.
That is because like most people here (and out "there") you can't see past your own EGO unfortunately and nor can they.
But if you could change the way you look at things - the things you look at would change and you and everyone else here would see that;
IF YOU TAKE A CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR -
WITH CORES AND PLACE IT ON LOAD WHAT DOES IT DO?
IT DECELERATES DOWN TO A DEAD STOP... THE MORE OUTPUT POWER GENERATED THE FASTER IT DECELERATES.
GENERATOR OUTPUT = ZERONOW TAKE THE SAME GENERATOR
WITH THE SAME CORES AND THE SAME INPUT DRIVE SHAFT POWER (TORQUE and SPEED) AND PUT REGEN-COILS AND WHAT DOES IT DO ON LOAD?
IT ACCELERATES ... THE MORE OUTPUT POWER GENERATED THE FASTER IT ACCELERATES.
GENERATOR OUTPUT = INFINITY AS SEEN HERE:
http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins?feature=mhee#p/u/3/ARztYvprKkA- WHILE VIOLATING 1) LENZ'S LAW,
2) NEWTONS THIRD LAW,
3) THE LAW OF CONSERVATION OF ENERGY
and
4) THE WORK ENERGY PRINCIPLE IN THE PROCESS???!!!
JUST TO NAME A FEW. :D
Now all the
"smart people" here with imaginations who understand an opportunity when they see one will understand what this means, will stop waisting time and will do what is required to either obtain a license which is free BTW or request a
Promotional Agreement from PDI and promote the technology and get 3% of the IP royalties for life. What other forum anywhere offers this to everyone for free? And the best part is you can still be a jerk if you want to while cashing your cheques... other kind hearted people like Overunityguide, Gotoluc, IRON, Justme, Aether22, Teslaset LarryC and others will ALL be offered employment at the eariest opportunity and at their convenience. THIS IS THE FUN PART!
http://www.ev.com/knowledge-center/electric-vehicles-articles/world-changing-electromagnetism-discovery-licensed-for-free.html#bookmarks
Kind regards
Thane
Thane C. Heins
President
Potential +/- Difference Inc. R & D
"The Transition of Power"
613.256.4684 (cell)
thaneh@potentialdifference.ca
Linkedin http://linkd.in/iIZyXF
You Tube http://bit.ly/gCRePU
"How do we make the world work for 100% of humanity in the shortest possible time
-through spontaneous cooperation without ecological damage or disadvantage to anyone?"
-- Dr. R. Buckminster Fuller
Yeah as I suspected, it was a commercial.
Bottom line is the first person to generate and distribute a WORKING self powering dynamo will be the one that gets the credit. Not the one who first thought of the idea. The world is interested in results, not theories and indefinite examples...
I think some people are concerned that others might get there before them...? If they are, their time is better spent figuring out/designing a working unit than trying to market their name. It will be time MUCH better spent.
Please don't distract this forum from the REAL work. Heck, you might learn something from this forum that helps you be 'that guy'. But clogging it with argument and ego-driven 'glory me' posts surely wont get you there any more quickly.
Just my .02
Quote from: baroutologos on September 13, 2011, 03:20:24 AM
Not even impressed.
@baroutologos,
What is your problem? Why be so negative? Of Course giving criticism is an easy way to go. But really trying to change something and benefit mankind in the future will require some hard work. If you are not interested in Thane's work, then why do you read this thread? Please give motivated people some room to discuss there findings.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 11, 2011, 10:28:10 PM
Hello Everyone,
The coils employed in this prototype are 4.5 ohms, 16 gauge bi-filar wound series connected with M1 core laminations and create acceleration at 1800 RPM with a 10 ohm light bulb.
Cheers
Thane
@Thane, Thank you for replying and sharing the fact that you use bi-filar wound series connected generator coils in your most recent setup. (I guess many readers didn't even saw this...) I can imagine that this will increase the capacitance of the coil through higher potential differences in the coil it's internal adjacent wires.
Recently I found an interesting article about Bi-Filar coils:
http://www.hvlabs.hu/zpe/Gruz/forum_matrix.ru/5/VOLTGN.pdf
Thane, thanks again. (and Please don't let other people demotivate you...)
Keep up the Good Work,
And with kind Regards, Overunityguide
@Thane,
I would like to thank you as well, you have already opened a gate to new era. No body can slime on it...
Can you comment a solid-state version of this effect?
Like strong electromagnet coil is used inside of the coils, rather than magnet passing through on the top?
I cant understand how delayed lenz effect accelerates shaft? While electron flow on the loading coil does is not affected???
I need to understand in terms of magnetic field creation and collapse terminology...
Hoping to hear from you..
Best Regards
Nuri Temürlenk, Turkey
Thane, have you done experiments using Litz cable in your coils ? You could make 3d bifilar windings easily and try different winding styles. Litz comes in many flavours, even rectangular Litz is available.
Have you tried running two currents in the same core in opposite direction at the same time (assuming you are using a core) ? Now you wonder, if currents come from same source they would cancel out each other in the same core. Yes, but using your idea from mary-jo where those currents belong to different sources they would amplify each other while power is taken from them. You would need three cores for this, two for getting two currents from single source then one output core that combines those currents. With Litz wire this would be a joy to test.
If you find above test setup unclear just ask and I will explain in more detail. I have made a short explanation sort of document about this but haven't been able to test the whole setup yet. But you know the back EMF amplification works because you figured it out and I just copied from you, with a couple of twists tho :D.
Read whole thread now and I see the 'problem'. Here is what I came up with,
You take nanoperm toroid with high permeability, divide it in four sections and wound a coil in every even section. So there is space between sections. The magnets you would divide also in four sections, one section facing N, empty section, third section facing S and empty section.
This toroid would then be set so that the rotor is inside, those magnets would sweep inside of the toroid. When motor runs then at any point in time magnets sweep the coils in such a way that each coil gets only hits from magnet facing N or S. Never two at the same time.
This would generate current in those coils in so that when power is taken they would also amplify each other. Nanoperm or maybe even iron would keep the field within itself so there would be no drag. Also the field of a toroid is such that it would not affect the magnets in any way.
Well, this would not generate the delayed Lenz effect but would make an interesting experiment.
Quote from: Overunityguide on September 14, 2011, 03:24:00 AM
@Thane, Thank you for replying and sharing the fact that you use bi-filar wound series connected generator coils in your most recent setup. (I guess many readers didn't even saw this...) I can imagine that this will increase the capacitance of the coil through higher potential differences in the coil it's internal adjacent wires.
Bi-filar wound series connected generator coils increase coil capacitance by 200% or more...
If you replace your 380 ohm monster coil with a bi-filar series connected generator coil you ought to be able to get similar results with (I'm guessing) 10 ohms of 20 gauge wire?
from
Physics of the Fuelless Generator;
Tesla's new "generator" can be explained solely on the basis of its electrical activity. A bifilar coil is capable of holding more charge than a single wound coil. When operated at resonance, the distributed capacitance of the bifilar coil is able to overcome the counter force normal to coils, inductive reactance. It does not allow what Tesla described (Tesla, 1894) as the formation of "false currents."
Because the electrical activity in the coil does not work against itself in the form of a counter-emf, the potential across the coil quickly builds to a high value. The difference between the turns becomes great enough that (Tesla, 1892) "the energy would be practically all potential." At this point, the system becomes an electrostatic oscillator.
Minimal work is done in the system due to absence of translational movement in the displacement current. As small heat losses occur, oscillations are maintained by the surplus charge stored in the coil. Very low energy expenditure allows power delivery to a load over an extended time period without an external fuel supply.
Cheers
T
Quote from: Jack Noskills on September 14, 2011, 07:03:59 AM
Thane, have you done experiments using Litz cable in your coils ? You could make 3d bifilar windings easily and try different winding styles. Litz comes in many flavours, even rectangular Litz is available.
GOTOLUC SPENT TWO DAYS MAKING A 100 STRAND LITZ COIL HURT HIS BACK DOING IT AND ALMOST HAD A NERVOUS BREAKDOWN IN THE PROCESS :P (SEE THANE HEINS PEREPITEIA THREAD)
QuoteHave you tried running two currents in the same core in opposite direction at the same time (assuming you are using a core) ? Now you wonder, if currents come from same source they would cancel out each other in the same core.
NOT TRUE... YOU CANNOT USE ONE MAGNETIC FIELD TO CANCEL ANOTHER.
THE (NET) FLUX IN THE CORE WOULD BE ZERO HOWEVER BUT THE MAGNETIC FIELDS WOULD STILL BE THERE BUT THE WIRES WOULD BE REPELLING EACH OTHER.
http://www.stmary.ws/highschool/physics/home/notes/electricity/magnetism/MagForcesBetweenWires.htm
THE CURRENTS WOULD CANCEL IF YOU CONNECTED THE WIRES TOGETHER THOUGH.
CHEERS
T
I meant the electric currents would cancel if only single output so zero power, flux of course would stay.
I have played with two secondarys sharing the same core and they can be connected together. One way they cancel as expected but the other way they add up. Same stuff but just opposite phase. When power was taken voltage also increased, I verified this with third coil that was in the same core with the other two. Third was not connected to anything, just for measuring purposes.
So my test setup was such that primary created the flux, this went on to two secondaries. When power was taken the 'backward' flux of one secondary feeded the other. Also some of it went to primary of course but there was alternate path between secondaries which enabled this feedback to be more efficient.
With my testing when I got 1.86 COP from a trafo I realised that the amount of COP over 1 was related to area of core that was on the alternate path between secondaries. It was about the same size as area that was in the primary so it makes perfect sense.
Quote from: Overunityguide on September 14, 2011, 03:24:00 AM
@baroutologos,
What is your problem? Why be so negative? Of Course giving criticism is an easy way to go. But really trying to change something and benefit mankind in the future will require some hard work. If you are not interested in Thane's work, then why do you read this thread? Please give motivated people some room to discuss there findings.
snip
And with kind Regards, Overunityguide
Far from being negative, Baroutologos is a serious hands on experimenter. What he is reporting has been verified through experiment. He speaks the truth. I have verified these same experiments and confirm his work.
What this list needs is more good people like Baroutologos who are not afraid of the truth and are willing to speak out!
It is interesting that the two people with questionable unproven technologies should be so quick to castigate my friend.
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on September 14, 2011, 09:35:10 PM
Far from being negative, Baroutologos is a serious hands on experimenter. What he is reporting has been verified through experiment. He speaks the truth. I have verified these same experiments and confirm his work. What this list needs is more good people like Baroutologos who are not afraid of the truth and are willing to speak out! It is interesting that the two people with questionable unproven technologies should be so quick to castigate my friend.Ron
SOME THINGS
NEVER CHANGE... :-\
"What we think determines what happens to us, so if we want to change our lives, we need to stretch our minds" ~ Wayne Dyer
QuoteFar from being negative, Baroutologos is a serious hands on experimenter. What he is reporting has been verified through experiment.
AND EVERYONE CAN FIND IT WHERE?
QuoteHe speaks the truth. I have verified these same experiments and confirm his work.
WHICH EVERYONE CAN FIND WHERE?
QuoteWhat this list needs is more good people like Baroutologos who are not afraid of the truth and are willing to speak out!
SPEAK OUT AGAINST WHAT EXACTLY?
QuoteIt is interesting that the two people with questionable unproven technologies should be so quick to castigate my friend.
Ron
OK HERE IS PROOF...
1) CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR COILS
CREATE "MAGNETIC FRICTION" ARMATURE REACTION COUNTER TORQUE AS EXPLAINED IN LENZ'S LAW WHICH SATISFY NEWTON'S THIRD LAW...
"FOR EVERY ACTION THERE IS AN EQUAL AND OPPOSITE REACTION." THE PROOF OF THIS CAN BE SEEN HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYi2OyS5cK4
AND HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGstOJ4NDQQ
...AND THE FACT IS LENZ'S LAW HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CORES, HYSTERESIS OR COGGING TORQUE ETC BECAUSE LENZ'S LAW STILL APPLIES IN AIR CORE AXIAL FLUX GENERATORS. ANYONE WHO SUGGESTS OTHERWISE IS EITHER IGNORANT OR DELIBERATELY MISLEADING PEOPLE - WHICH IS NOT NEW ON THESE FORUMS.
2) THE REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION GENERATOR COILS
CREATE MAGNETIC ASSISTANCE COMPLIMENTARY TORQUE WHICH IS ALSO EVIDENT IN THE SAME VIDEOS ABOVE.
3) THE IEEE ACCEPTED EQUATION FOR HOW MUCH DRIVE SHAFT TORQUE IS REQUIRED TO PRODUCE 1 WATT OF POWER AT 3000 RPM IS:Torque (Nm) = KW x 9550/RPMSO 0.003 Nm OF EXTRA TORQUE IS REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 1 WATT OF POWER AT 3000 RPM. IN ANY GENERATOR SYSTEM ON THE PLANET EARTH.
NOTE: EXTRA TORQUE IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE 1 WATT OR 1 MILLION WATTS OF POWER IN A CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR SYSTEM.
HOWEVER IN THE REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION GENERATOR (RM) PARADIGM
NO EXTRA TORQUE IS REQUIRED IN FACT IF A STEADY STATE SPEED OF 3000 RPM IS DESIRED WHEN USING THE RM COILS THEN THE DRIVE SHAFT TORQUE MUST ACTUALLY BE
REDUCED BECAUSE THE RM
CREATES ITS OWN TORQUE. THIS WAS INDEPENDENTLY PROVEN BY NRC SCIENTIST DOUG HARTWICK AT OTTAWA UNIVERSITY (DATA ATTACHED) AND FOR MAGNA INTERNATIONAL (DATA ATTACHED).
NRC TEST DATA SHOW:1)A
12% INCREASE IN PRIME MOVER INPUT TO SUPPLY POWER TO A 10 OHM LOAD IN A CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR SYSTEM.
2) A
40% DECREASE IN PRIME MOVER INPUT IS REQUIRED IN THE REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION GENERATOR MODE TO SUPPLY
223% MORE POWER TO THE
SAME 10 LOAD AT THE SAME RPM FROM TEST #1 ABOVE. Running the tests at the same RPM ensures that the induction motor is operating at the same efficiency.
3)
0.00 WATTS OF OUTPUT FROM THE CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR WITH THE SAME PRIME MOVER INPUT AS TEST #2 ABOVE.
CONCLUSIONS: 4) THE RM GENERATOR PRODUCES 4 WATTS OF POWER TO THE LOAD.
5) WITH THE SAME PRIME MOVER INPUT THE CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR PRODUCES 0.00 WATTS.
6) THE PERFORMANCE ADVANTAGE OF THE RM COIL vs THE CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR COIL IS INFINITE%.
MAGNA INTERNATIONAL TORQUE TEST SHOW:7)
A 10.6% DECREASE IN DRIVE SHAFT TORQUE WHEN A CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR COIL SUPPLIES POWER TO THE GRID WITH A FIXED PRIME MOVER INPUT.
8)
A 6.5% INCREASE IN DRIVE SHAFT TORQUE WHEN THE
RM COIL DELIVERS 21.6% MORE POWER TO THE GRID WITH THE SAME PRIME MOVER INPUT AS ABOVE IN #7.OVERALL RM CONCLUSIONS:
AS THE OUTPUT POWER DELIVERED TO A LOAD IS INCREASED TO INFINITY IN A CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR SYSTEM - THE INPUT POWER TO THE PRIME MOVER MUST ALSO BE INCREASED TO INFINITY AS WELL.
AS THE OUTPUT POWER TO A LOAD IS INCREASED TO INFINITY IN A REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION GENERATOR SYSTEM THE INPUT CAN BE DECREASED TO ZERO. CHEERS
T
Thane C. Heins
President
Potential +/- Difference Inc. R & D
"The Transition of Power"
thaneh@potentialdifference.ca
Linkedin http://linkd.in/iIZyXF
YouTube http://bit.ly/gCRePU
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."Daniel Patrick Moynihan
NRC AND MAGNA INTERNATIONAL TEST DATA ATTACHMENTS BELOW:
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 15, 2011, 09:51:13 AM
...AND LENZ'S LAW HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CORES, HYSTERESIS OR COGGING TORQUE ETC BECAUSE LENZ'S LAW STILL APPLIES IN AIR CORE AXIAL FLUX GENERATORS.
I will have to disagree with this logic. It's like saying cold pizza isn't good because hot pizza is...
Lenz law can apply to both... and perhaps one way to overcome it relates to a properly designed core.
Quote from: Shadesz on September 15, 2011, 10:37:41 AM
Lenz law can apply to both... and perhaps one way to overcome it relates to a properly designed core.
I WILL HAVE TO DISAGREE WITH THIS LOGIC BECAUSE IT IS LIKE SAYING A ROUND PIZZA IS NO GOOD SO WE HAVE TO INVENT A SQUARE PIZZA BECAUSE IT WILL BE BETTER...? ???
WHY SCREW AROUND WITH CORES WHEN SCREWING AROUND WITH THE COIL GETS THE JOB DONE SINCE 2007? ;)
A REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION GENERATOR CAN SUPPLY AN INFINITE AMOUNT OF POWER TO A LOAD WITH A FIXED PRIME MOVER INPUT WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT? :-\
CHECK OUT THE
KINETIC ENERGY GENERATING SYSTEM BIKE PROJECT WHICH IS CURRENTLY BEING BUILT TO PROVIDE MOTIVE POWER WITH NO EXTERNAL SOURCE OF POWER.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 15, 2011, 11:18:20 AM
I WILL HAVE TO DISAGREE WITH THIS LOGIC BECAUSE IT IS LIKE SAYING A ROUND PIZZA IS NO GOOD SO WE HAVE TO INVENT A SQUARE PIZZA BECAUSE IT WILL BE BETTER...? ???
WHY SCREW AROUND WITH CORES WHEN SCREWING AROUND WITH THE COIL GETS THE JOB DONE SINCE 2007? ;)
A REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION GENERATOR CAN SUPPLY AN INFINITE AMOUNT OF POWER TO A LOAD WITH A FIXED PRIME MOVER INPUT
WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT? :-\
CHECK OUT THE KINETIC ENERGY GENERATING SYSTEM BIKE PROJECT WHICH IS CURRENTLY BEING BUILT TO PROVIDE MOTIVE POWER WITH NO EXTERNAL SOURCE OF POWER.
CHEERS
T
FIRST, I LOVE to USE CAPITAL letters in TEXT because IT represents me YELLING and THAT yelling MUST make MY information MORE important! So please LISTEN to WHAT I am SAYING!
Seriously, If you want people to take you serious, choose a different screen name and don't present yourself as such a zealot. Yelling doesn't make people listen to what you have to say. In fact, it offends them and turns them off of your knowledge.
Second,
I haven't seen one of your free energy generators (or so you claim) on the market.
Third,
It is obvious that you are so in love with your design you are not open to other ideas. That is not a very good scientist, engineer, marketer, inventor, or whatever you decide you are.
Peace out. I don't like to argue, it wastes time and energy that can be spent on more productive things.
I simply hope people realize that there are more ways to do it than "Thane's way"
I hope you get this OU bike on the market. I really do. The world needs something like that. Happy building.
double post sorry
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 15, 2011, 09:51:13 AM
AND EVERYONE CAN FIND IT WHERE?
WHICH EVERYONE CAN FIND WHERE?
From the information you have released here is how coil shorting works.
Note this is a full time short and not peak shorting ala Kone Head
This video was first presented in 2009
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USnDxqslfyA
1) baseline, no coil/core, 1.2A @ 80 volts AC (input) 3419 RPM
2) coil/core drag, 1.85 A @ 80 volts, 3216 RPM
3) coil core shorted, 1.53 A @80 volts, 3330 RPM
You can hear the rotor accelerate so I have Thane "acceleration" but it is only drag reduction and never exceeds the prime mover RPM .
This is a valid test of among many that have been released, conforming to the information you have released. If you have unreleased propitiatory information then it becomes a whole new ball game. In which case to be believable you have to open source this information.
Both you and romero should do this to become believable, other wise the charlatan label sticks better than velcro.
Ron
As an aside, I did work with Thane in those days and built two rotors for him. He paid me more than I asked so I have no axe to grind with him other than the lack of real information presented here or any other list.
QuoteThis video was first presented in 2009
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USnDxqslfyA
1) NO LOAD PRIME MOVER INPUT = 1.85 A @ 80 volts, 3216 RPM
A) (which is a function of prime mover efficiency,
core quality, coil output optimization/design)
B) (
core quality/hysterisis losses apply in ALL permanent magnet generators whereas NONE accelerate themselves when a load is applied).
2) INFINITE LOAD PRIME MOVER INPUT 1.53 A @80 volts, 3330 RPM
You can hear the rotor accelerate so I have REGENERATIVE "acceleration" WHICH IS INCREASING THE SPEED AND INERTIA IN THE SYSTEM - WITH
NO EXTRA ADDED INPUT POWER IN FACT THERE IS ACTUALLY AN
ENERGY DECREASE WHICH IS A
VIOLATION OF THE WORK ENERGY PRINCIPLE. YEAH! :D
QuoteThis is a valid test of among many that have been released, conforming to the information you have released. Ron
NICE WORK RON! - IF YOU UPGRADE YOUR COIL DESIGN (AS I MENTIONED EARLIER IN THIS THREAD) YOU CAN GET MORE THAN 50 WATTS OUTPUT... AND YOU CAN KEEP ADDING COILS AND CREATING ACCELERATION AT INFINITUM.
QuoteAs an aside, I did work with Thane in those days and built two rotors for him. He paid me more than I asked so I have no axe to grind PERHAPS A KNIFE IN THE BACK BUT DEFINATELY NO AXE - WAY TOO MESSY >:(
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 15, 2011, 01:00:52 PM
1) NO LOAD PRIME MOVER INPUT = 1.85 A @ 80 volts, 3216 RPM
A) (which is a function of prime mover efficiency, core quality, coil output optimization/design)
B) (core quality/hysterisis losses apply in ALL permanent magnet generators whereas NONE accelerate themselves when a load is applied).
snip...
C) : baseline, no coil/core, 1.2A @ 80 volts AC (input) 3419 RPM
Oh that's right, C can't be attributed to your data because you don't do baseline measurements for total system efficiency analysis.
Results do not show what is the power created by the coil so a bit unfair comparison. Also what is the effect when adding coils if one coil has positive effect ?
Anyway, effect has been confirmed by 3rd party so makes no sense to argue about it. I am interested in making it better, I am engineer so always want to improve things. Drives the wife nuts sometimes.
What is your opinion about running the magnets inside toroid made of high perm material ? If iron has u about 5000, and you replace that with core that has u of 450000 then that should give a boost to output load.
If toroid is used then there would be no drag as the magnetic is vertical and the creating field is horizontal. Well maybe magnets would attract to core but enough airgap should reduce this effect.
This does not give you adding of torgue, but would create power without drag. And if you apply Thane's back EMF aplification in the toroid coils you would get double output.
I would add iron shield between the magnet and coil, in fact better to make this shield from iron wire and use it as a coil so that it goes around the HV coil, or just smaller coil that is between magnet and HV coil. For example air core toroid of iron wire and HV coils inside or outside if smaller toroid is preferred. You would then get power out from the shield coil also and no drag. If voltage matches the HV coil you can connect it in parallel, otherwise you can connect it in series with HV coil.
Am I making any sense to anyone, what is your opinion about this setup ?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 15, 2011, 11:18:20 AM
CHECK OUT THE KINETIC ENERGY GENERATING SYSTEM BIKE PROJECT WHICH IS CURRENTLY BEING BUILT TO PROVIDE MOTIVE POWER WITH NO EXTERNAL SOURCE OF POWER.
CHEERS
T
Dear Thane,
I would love to see anyone spinning on your ‘Kinetic Energy Generating Bike’ in the near future. For me there is no doubt that the regenerative acceleration effect exists and that it can be used in real world applications in the future.
Maybe what you can do when you have finished the Kinetic Bike, is to let any of the critics spin around on it and let them accelerate until they are crapping their pants. :)
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
For Information about the Confirmation of the Negative Lenz Effect:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzxc3Ai4T3A
Quote from: hoptoad on September 15, 2011, 10:26:52 PM
C) : baseline, no coil/core, 1.2A @ 80 volts AC (input) 3419 RPM
Oh that's right, C can't be attributed to your data because WITHOUT CORES ITS
NOT A GENERATOR IT IS JUST A ROUND THING ROTATING IN THIN AIR...
AND BECAUSE
ALL GENERATORS IN THIS CONTEXT HAVE:
1) WIRE AND WIRE RESISTANCE
2) BEARINGS AND BEARING RESISTANCE
3) CORES AND CORE RESISTANCE
BUT IF YOU ARE SINCERE AND YOU COMPARE APPLES TO APPLES I.E TWO
IDENTICAL GENERATORS ON NO LOAD WITH:
4) THE
SAME DRIVE SHAFT AT THE
SAME RPM WITH THE
SAME DRIVE SHAFT TORQUE SUPPLIED BY THE
SAME PRIME MOVER BE IT AN ELECTRIC MOTOR, GAS OR DIESEL ENGINE, WIND, STEAM, WATER, DONKEY, GERBILS OR WHATEVER AS PDI HAS DONE. (SEE OTTAWA UNIVERSITY VIDEO BELOW)
5)
THE CONVENTIONAL (REGENERATIVE BRAKING) GENERATOR WILL DECELERATE THE SYSTEM WHEN PLACED ON LOAD. AND THE GREATER THE LOAD THE FASTER THE RATE OF DECELERATION.
6)
THE REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION GENERATOR WILL ACCELERATE THE SYSTEM WHEN PLACED ON LOAD AND THE GREATER THE LOAD THE FASTER THE RATE OF ACCELERATION.
7)
THE REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION GENERATOR COIL WILL EVEN ACCELERATE WHEN THE LOAD IS ALMOST 7 TIMES GREATER THAN THE CONVENTIONAL LOAD AND
8) THE REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION GENERATOR WILL ALSO ACCELERATE
THROUGH THE DECELERATION CAUSED BY THE CONVENTIONAL COIL AS SHOWN HERE WITH A PERFORMANCE ADVANTAGE THAT EXCEEDS 500%:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3JVjbXOssQCHEERS
T
Thane C. Heins
President
Potential +/- Difference Inc. R & D
"The Transition of Power"
thaneh@potentialdifference.ca
Linkedin http://linkd.in/iIZyXF
YouTube http://bit.ly/gCRePU
"How do we make the world work for 100% of humanity in the shortest possible time
-through spontaneous cooperation without ecological damage or disadvantage to anyone"
~ Dr. R. Buckminster Fuller
Quote from: Overunityguide on September 16, 2011, 04:29:15 AM
Dear Thane,
Maybe what you can do when you have finished the Kinetic Bike, is to let any of the critics spin around on it and let them accelerate until they are crapping their pants. :)
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
For Information about the Confirmation of the Negative Lenz Effect:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzxc3Ai4T3A
DEAR OVERUNITYGUIDE,
FIRST OF ALL THERE IS A VERY BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A CRITIC AND A
CYNIC cyn·i·cal Adjective/ˈsinikəl/
1. Believing that people are motivated by self-interest; distrustful of human sincerity or integrity.
2. Doubtful as to whether something will happen or is worthwhile.
CRITICISM IS POSITIVE AND CAN BE CONSTRUCTIVE CYNICISM IS NOT.
HERE IS ANOTHER CONFIRMATION FROM SWEDEN:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeXadyVSxj4QUESTION:IN YOUR SETUP DO YOU THINK IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE TO PUT YOUR
SHORTED COIL ON A SWIVEL AND HAVE IT FACING AWAY FROM THE ROTOR AND THEN MOVE IT INTO POSITION ONCE THE ROTOR IS UP TO SPEED?
GOTOLUC AND I DID THIS AT OU (OTTAWA UNIVERSITY) BUT I DON'T HAVE ANY VIDEO ETC.
IF YOU WERE TO DO THIS I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU REPLACE YOUR ?ALUMINUM? BOLT MOUNT WHICH CREATES LOTS OF EDDY CURRENTS WITH STEEL WHICH WILL ATTRACT MORE ROTOR FLUX THROUGH YOUR CORE AND INCREASE YOUR COIL'S INDUCED VOLTAGE AND INCREASE THE EFFECTS. IF THAT COIL MOUNT IS INDEED ALUMINUM - IT OUGHT TO BE REPLACED ASAP.
CHEERS
T
DEAR OVERUNITYGUIDE,
HERE IS SOMETHING ELSE YOU CAN TRY IF YOU LIKE...?
1) MAKE A CONVENTIONAL COIL AND PLACE IT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROTOR TO
2)SHOW "CONVENTIONAL ON LOAD GENERATOR REACTION" AND
3) THEN FEED THE OUTPUT OF YOUR REGEN COIL INTO THE CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR COIL WHICH WOULD BE ACTING NOW AS A MOTOR COIL TO CREATE MORE ACCELERATION.
http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins?feature=mhee#p/u/23/wOveW0Y4Mok
nilrehob's COMMENT IN HIS VIDEO, "THIS IS FUN" REALLY STARTS TO APPLY WHEN YOU SEE THAT YOU CAN SUPPLY POWER TO A LOAD AND BOOTSTRAP THE SYSTEM TO DRIVE ITSELF... :o
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 16, 2011, 07:33:23 AM
Oh that's right, C can't be attributed to your data because WITHOUT CORES ITS NOT A GENERATOR IT IS JUST A ROUND THING ROTATING IN THIN AIR...
AND BECAUSE ALL GENERATORS IN THIS CONTEXT HAVE:
1) WIRE AND WIRE RESISTANCE
2) BEARINGS AND BEARING RESISTANCE
3) CORES AND CORE RESISTANCE
BUT IF YOU ARE SINCERE AND YOU COMPARE APPLES TO APPLES I.E TWO IDENTICAL GENERATORS ON NO LOAD WITH:
4) THE SAME DRIVE SHAFT AT THE SAME RPM WITH THE SAME DRIVE SHAFT TORQUE SUPPLIED BY THE SAME PRIME MOVER BE IT AN ELECTRIC MOTOR, GAS OR DIESEL ENGINE, WIND, STEAM, WATER, DONKEY, GERBILS OR WHATEVER AS PDI HAS DONE. (SEE OTTAWA UNIVERSITY VIDEO BELOW)
5) THE CONVENTIONAL (REGENERATIVE BRAKING) GENERATOR WILL DECELERATE THE SYSTEM WHEN PLACED ON LOAD. AND THE GREATER THE LOAD THE FASTER THE RATE OF DECELERATION.
6) THE REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION GENERATOR WILL ACCELERATE THE SYSTEM WHEN PLACED ON LOAD AND THE GREATER THE LOAD THE FASTER THE RATE OF ACCELERATION.
7) THE REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION GENERATOR COIL WILL EVEN ACCELERATE WHEN THE LOAD IS ALMOST 7 TIMES GREATER THAN THE CONVENTIONAL LOAD AND
8) THE REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION GENERATOR WILL ALSO ACCELERATE THROUGH THE DECELERATION CAUSED BY THE CONVENTIONAL COIL AS SHOWN HERE WITH A PERFORMANCE ADVANTAGE THAT EXCEEDS 500%: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3JVjbXOssQ
CHEERS
T
Thane C. Heins
President
Potential +/- Difference Inc. R & D
"The Transition of Power"
thaneh@potentialdifference.ca
Linkedin http://linkd.in/iIZyXF
YouTube http://bit.ly/gCRePU
"How do we make the world work for 100% of humanity in the shortest possible time
-through spontaneous cooperation without ecological damage or disadvantage to anyone"
~ Dr. R. Buckminster Fuller
When you demonstrate your generator running itself with no external power supply and motor driver, I'll be happy to applaud your ingenuity. In the meantime your comic relief, aka, yadda yadda, is worthy of a clap or two.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 16, 2011, 07:54:30 AM
DEAR OVERUNITYGUIDE,
FIRST OF ALL THERE IS A VERY BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A CRITIC AND A CYNIC
cyn·i·cal Adjective/ˈsinikəl/
1. Believing that people are motivated by self-interest; distrustful of human sincerity or integrity.
2. Doubtful as to whether something will happen or is worthwhile.
CRITICISM IS POSITIVE AND CAN BE CONSTRUCTIVE CYNICISM IS NOT.
CHEERS
T
Dear Thane,
Actually the word which I was looking for was sceptics instead of critics...
But as you mentioned, cynics is maybe even beter...
But to answer your question, yes I am using a simple steel bolt as a core for now and indeed, the Generator Coil Casing is made out of aluminum...
I agree that this can be done much better, but my problem is that I don't have a machine shop myself, so unfortunately I have to stick with home improvement mechanics for now. And about the Swiveling mechanism, I have tried to run the motor without the generator coil, and it will give me a slightly lower input wattage. But this can be expected due to the eddy currents, and al other disadvantages of my simple setup...
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Quote from: Overunityguide on September 16, 2011, 09:02:27 AM
But to answer your question, yes I am using a simple steel bolt as a core for now and indeed, the Generator Coil Casing is made out of aluminum... Overunityguide
SORRY I DIDN'T MEAN THE ROTOR - WHICH CAN BE ANYTHING INCLUDING LEXAN BUT
NOT PLEXIGLASS AS GOTOLUC FOUND OUT WHEN HE BLEW UP HIS BROTHERS GARAGE! :P
I MEANT THAT CORE/BOLT
MOUNT WHICH IS SECURED TO THE WOOD - IS THAT ALUMINUM?
IF SO IT IS CREATING LENZ DRAG ON NO LOAD JUST BY SITTING THERE.
IF IT WERE "SOFT" STEEEL IT WOULD
ATTRACT ROTOR FLUX AND PERFORM SLIGHTLY BETTER. THAT IS ALL I MEANT.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: hoptoad on September 16, 2011, 08:55:16 AM
When you demonstrate your generator running itself with no external power supply and motor driver, I'll be happy to applaud your ingenuity. In the meantime your comic relief, aka, yadda yadda, is worthy of a clap or two.
NO STORY IS EVER COMPLETE WITHOUT THE ANTAGONIST(S)...
CHEERS
T
Am I the only one who feels that Thane's rant's distract and destroy what were once quality threads? It is sad really...
:'(
Quote from: Shadesz on September 16, 2011, 10:43:42 AM
Am I the only one who feels that Thane's rant's distract and destroy what were once quality threads? It is sad really...
:'(
Well it is a good thing for Thane to show his true colors, people are then better prepared to form their own opinion.
But notice not one shred of, "this is how I achieved a self runner, for you to do the same this is the criteria that must be met, steps 1 to n, etc etc"
Garry Stanley already did the bike thing... romero and mylow already had self runners...
Ron
@i-ron .Garry Stanley already did the bike thing ? Any chance of more info or a link please ?
SSSSOooooo Thane
Needa Hug ??
These guys are gonna eat their words {unsalted}[no sweetner either].
Gotta Job for me? I can Dress Lucs wounds {coil winding]?
Or Ice Packs For Hematomas [when the Magnets fly loose [Ouch]]!
Push A mean broom??
Of course Hugs........
And if someone needs a little "Choke"?? [small ones?]
I'll send you my RES!
Chet
Quote from: ramset on September 17, 2011, 05:51:52 AM
Gotta Job for me? I'll send you my RES!
Chet
YES RAMSET PLEASE DO SEND ME YOUR RESUME,
(as well as anyone else who is interested)
WE ARE COMMERCIALIZING BOTH THE RM AND BiTT AND HAVE:
1) A CANADIAN MOTOR/GENERATOR/TRANSFORMER MANUFATURER ON BOARD WHO IS DESIGNING 1 - 20 KW BiTTs FOR A CLIENT IN EUROPE - THESE BiTTs WILL OPERATE AT A PRACTICAL 30 - 50% POWER CONSUMPTION
REDUCTION OVER CONVENTIONAL TRANSFORMERS AND WE HOPE WILL NOT REQUIRE OIL BATHS FOR COOLING. (ON THE SIDE WE ARE DEVELOPING THE SAME BiTTS WHICH DELIVER 1 - 20 KW BUT
ONLY CONSUME PURE REACTIVE POWER ie NO REAL POWER WHICH WILL BE INTRODUCED TO THE SAME CLIENT LATER ON)
2) A CLIENT IN INDIA WHO WANTS RMs FOR SCOOTERS THERE AND
3) A RUSSIAN CAR COMPANY THAT ALSO WANTS RMs
3) AN AMERICAN COMPANY WHO IS PLANNING TO BUILD HOME AND BUSINESS GENERATORS AND THEIR FIRST CLIENT (WHO WE INTRODUCED THEM TO) IS A COMPANY IN INDIA WHO NEEDS GENERATORS FOR THEIR WATER PURIFICATION SYSTEMS FOR THE POOR AND NEEDY IN RURAL INDIA AND AFRICA.
THIS COMPANT'S MAIN WISH IS TO USE THIS TECHNOLOGY TO PUT AMERICA BACK TO WORK.WE HAVE PROMOTIONAL (SALES) POSITIONS AVAILABLE AND SOON ENGINEER CLIENT REP POSITIONS. WE WILL ALSO HAVE POSITIONS OPENING UP FOR OUR NEW LICENSING COMPANY WHICH GOES ON LINE SOON.
IF YOU HAVE ANY PROFESSIONAL CONNECTIONS IN INDUSTRY THAT YOU THINK COULD BENNEFIT FROM EITHER THE BiTT OR RM AS AND END USER OR DISTRIBUTOR THEN ALLOW US TO SEND YOU A
PROMOTIONAL AGREEMENT WHICH WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH COMPENSATION IN THE EVENT THAT A "FREE" LICENSE IS SIGNED AS A RESULT OF AN INTRODUCTION YOU MAKE.
THERE ARE AT LEAST 4 PEOPLE WHO HAVE INTRODUCED THEMSELVES VIA THIS FORUM WHO NOW HAVE SUCH AGREEMENTS AND AT LEAST 2 INVITATIONS PENDING.
AND OF COURSE WE ALSO HAVE OUR 3000 PROFESSIONAL CONNECTIONS ON LINKEDIN TO STAY IN TOUCH WITH. (SEE ATTACHED)
CHEERS
T
Quote from: neptune on September 16, 2011, 01:19:29 PM
@i-ron .Garry Stanley already did the bike thing ? Any chance of more info or a link please ?
I mentioned that as that was my introduction to FE, way back when.
He did admit that after he changed the wiring it no longer worked and he just sort of faded away. I know of no successful replications.
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on September 17, 2011, 01:58:55 PM
I mentioned that as that was my introduction to FE, way back when.
He did admit that after he changed the wiring it no longer worked and he just sort of faded away. I know of no successful replications.
Ron
I made replication back then in the days of yahoo groups... I used floppy drive coils conected in "no lenz" way and hard drive magnets and bearings. The first time I powered the motor it started to accelerate like crazy and few seconds later magnets were flying all over the room. Later I made more robust motor but the rotor was much smaller and the bearings were from roller-blades. This one was total failure it barely turned so I went on to the newmans motor which become popular in that time...
Both motors can be seen here:
https://picasaweb.google.com/104829786399890053278/GarryStanleyMotor02
Quote from: futuristic on September 17, 2011, 02:17:16 PM
snip...
I used floppy drive coils ..
snip
Nice pancakes. Were they from a 5
1/4 inch floppy drive?
Look the same as early 1970's VCR coils.
Yes the big 5 1/4" floppy drive coils.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 16, 2011, 09:56:07 AM
SORRY I DIDN'T MEAN THE ROTOR - WHICH CAN BE ANYTHING INCLUDING LEXAN BUT NOT PLEXIGLASS AS GOTOLUC FOUND OUT WHEN HE BLEW UP HIS BROTHERS GARAGE! :P
I MEANT THAT CORE/BOLT MOUNT WHICH IS SECURED TO THE WOOD - IS THAT ALUMINUM?
IF SO IT IS CREATING LENZ DRAG ON NO LOAD JUST BY SITTING THERE.
IF IT WERE "SOFT" STEEEL IT WOULD ATTRACT ROTOR FLUX AND PERFORM SLIGHTLY BETTER. THAT IS ALL I MEANT.
CHEERS
T
Dear Thane,
Indeed, the core/bolt mount is made of aluminum... And I agree that by just sitting there it will decrease the performance of the generator coil. But in my case it has to be made from a solid/stiff material, because otherwise it will start vibrating when the rotor magnets are passing by.
But you are right maybe it is better to replace it by a soft steel core mount, instead of using aluminum...
With Kind Regards,
Overunityguide
Quote from: Overunityguide on September 20, 2011, 05:27:53 AM
But you are right maybe it is better to replace it by a soft steel core mount, instead of using aluminum...With Kind Regards,Overunityguide
DEAR OVERUNITYGUIDE,
IF YOU WANT TO AVOID THE "RATH" OF OVERUNITY FORUM ARMCHAIR CRITICS THEN YOU HAVE TO SO SEVERAL THINGS WHICH INCLUDE:
1) BALANCING COGGING TORQUE SO IT EQUALS ZERO,
2) USING CORES THAT HAVE NO HYSTERISIS LOSSES OR CORE LOSSES,
3) USING A PRIME MOVER AND FREQUENCY CONTROLLER THAT ARE 100% EFFICIENT
IF YOU CAN'T DO
ALL THESE THINGS
INSTANTLY THEN YOU WILL BE SHUNNED AND PERHAPS EVEN CRUCIFIED ON THE ALTAR OF PUBLIC HUMILIATION.
OR YOU COULD SIMPLY SAY WHATEVER ... AND MOUNT YOUR MILTIPLE COILS ON GOOD TOROID MATERIAL IN THE FUTURE TO KEEP THE INITIAL LOSSES DOWN.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPMbWzNuMOg
CHEERS
T
Hello you Guys,
Today I have made a new Video about the Thane C Heins, Regenerative Acceleration Effect. This time there were no moving parts involved. This time I was able to show the same effect inside a transformer...
Please see my new video about the regenerative generator effect also taking place in a transformer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbmharDOA3Y
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Good experiment idea and video demonstration Overunityguide
I will try it using my signal generator output on a special toroid core that has an extremely high permeability. As it is I have a winding on it of .8mm wire and it measures 7.5 Henrys and an unbelievably low 4.4 Ohms DC resistance.
I'll have to dig out my signal generator and also do a primary winding on top of the 7.5 Henry winding.
I'll post a video demo in some days
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on September 24, 2011, 11:29:53 PM
I will try it using my signal generator output on a special toroid core that has an extremely high permeability. As it is I have a winding on it of .8mm wire and it measures 7.5 Henrys and an unbelievably low 4.4 Ohms DC resistance.
Hey Luc
Wow. Thats kind of unheard of. What kind of core?
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on September 24, 2011, 11:45:34 PM
Hey Luc
Wow. Thats kind of unheard of. What kind of core?
Mags
Hi Mags,
I also have a hard time believing the Inductance value but it's what my Inductance meter reads.
The the Toroid core was given to me by user Peterae and I think it's this model of FERROXCUBE: http://uk.farnell.com/jsp/search/productdetail.jsp?SKU=3057010
Let me know what you think
Luc
Lonny Like. ;]
Cheap too. What do you have for wire/turns?
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on September 25, 2011, 12:09:55 AM
Lonny Like. ;]
Cheap too. What do you have for wire/turns?
Mags
I did not count the turns. I made this coil over a year ago. Anyways, don't know what it's going to do until I try it.
I'll have to dig some stuff out to test it so it's going to take some days.
Keep a lookout ;)
Luc
Just thinking about it, this may be able to breath some life into a microwave transformer. Just need to find the freq of operation. ;]
Mags
Hello you All,
After a couple of questions about doing a video about scope shots and power factor measurements on my Regenerative Acceleration Generator effect Transformer, here you can find my follow up video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YiRV1SUsgc
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Quote from: Magluvin on September 25, 2011, 12:09:55 AM
Lonny Like. ;]
Cheap too. What do you have for wire/turns?
Mags
The A
L value for the TX36/23/15 3E5 type toroidal core is 11400nH/N
2 This gives about 811 turns for the 7.5 Henry measured inductance
(formula is N=(L/A
L)
1/2811 turns sound very much and probably filled up almost all the inner diameter or the toroid core. The 4.4 Ohm DC resistance for the 0.8mm (I considered 0.812mm for AWG 20 which has 33.31 Ohm resistance for 1000m length) copper wire gives about a wire length of 132 meter. Is this more or less ok, Luc?
Gyula
Quote from: Magluvin on September 25, 2011, 12:26:59 AM
Just thinking about it, this may be able to breath some life into a microwave transformer. Just need to find the freq of operation. ;]
Mags
@Magluvin,
It depends on what Inductance / Impedance your secondary coil of this microwave transformer has... For sure it has to be high... But with my setup I am limited to 950 Hz, because that is the upper limit of my frequency drive controller.
But when you can go higher than 950 Hz, than your inductance / impedance of your secondary can be slightly lower, but still it needs to be way higher than the primary coil. But the laminations for higher frequencies needs to be also be thinner.
Mags, do you know what a normal inductance value would be for the secondary coil of a microwave transformer?
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Most Recent, Regenerative Acceleration Effect inside a Transformer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YiRV1SUsgc
Quote from: Overunityguide on September 25, 2011, 04:52:09 PM
...
do you know what a normal inductance value would be for the secondary coil of a microwave transformer?
...
It must be in the several Henry range. A google search brought this:
primary L=68.2mH
HV secondary L=15.5H
(from this link: http://sci.tech-archive.net/Archive/sci.electronics.cad/2008-02/msg00082.html )
Maybe the laminations could work up to some hundred Hz for the older type transformers (nowadays there are ovens with switch-mode power supply to get the HV too).
Cheers, Gyula
PS: just recall this pdf file member poynt99 uploaded that includes info on oven transformer, page 17:
Primary: R= 0.35 Ohms; L= 44.4mH
Secondary: R= 88 Ohms; L= 19.3H
(from this: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=view;down=209 )
Quote from: gyulasun on September 25, 2011, 05:33:04 PM
It must be in the several Henry range. A google search brought this:
primary L=68.2mH
HV secondary L=15.5H
(from this link: http://sci.tech-archive.net/Archive/sci.electronics.cad/2008-02/msg00082.html )
Maybe the laminations could work up to some hundred Hz for the older type transformers (nowadays there are ovens with switch-mode power supply to get the HV too).
Cheers, Gyula
PS: just recall this pdf file member poynt99 uploaded that includes info on oven transformer, page 17:
Primary: R= 0.35 Ohms; L= 44.4mH
Secondary: R= 88 Ohms; L= 19.3H
(from this: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=view;down=209 )
Ok, thank you very much
With Kind Regards Overunityguide
Most Recent, Regenerative Acceleration Effect inside a Transformer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YiRV1SUsgc
Quote from: gyulasun on September 25, 2011, 03:40:29 PM
The AL value for the TX36/23/15 3E5 type toroidal core is 11400nH/N2
This gives about 811 turns for the 7.5 Henry measured inductance
(formula is N=(L/AL)1/2
811 turns sound very much and probably filled up almost all the inner diameter or the toroid core. The 4.4 Ohm DC resistance for the 0.8mm (I considered 0.812mm for AWG 20 which has 33.31 Ohm resistance for 1000m length) copper wire gives about a wire length of 132 meter. Is this more or less ok, Luc?
Gyula
Hi Gyula,
I had to pickup my Digital Caliper from storage to re-check the diameter of the wire. It is actually 0.50 mm with enamel coating. The DC resistance is correct @ 4.4 Ohms so you should be able to figure out the wire length and approximate amount of turns.
Let me know if something does not look right.
Thanks for your time
Luc
Quote from: gyulasun on September 25, 2011, 05:33:04 PM
It must be in the several Henry range. A google search brought this:
primary L=68.2mH
HV secondary L=15.5H
(from this link: http://sci.tech-archive.net/Archive/sci.electronics.cad/2008-02/msg00082.html )
Maybe the laminations could work up to some hundred Hz for the older type transformers (nowadays there are ovens with switch-mode power supply to get the HV too).
Cheers, Gyula
PS: just recall this pdf file member poynt99 uploaded that includes info on oven transformer, page 17:
Primary: R= 0.35 Ohms; L= 44.4mH
Secondary: R= 88 Ohms; L= 19.3H
(from this: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=view;down=209 )
Hi Gyula,
I have a Microwave oven transformer and the Primary is 69mH and Secondary is not measurable since my Inductance meter can measure 20H max, so it must be just a little over 20H.
I'll give it a try with my Signal Generator to see if I can find a frequency that the load is not reflected to the Primary.
Luc
Hi everyone,
here is a video demo of a possible Delayed Lenz Effect with attached scope shots below.
A Microwave Oven Transformer Primary is connected to the output of my Signal Generator. The Primary of this Transformer is 69mH and the Secondary is around 21H. I tested the Secondary in three different conditions, not connected (open circuit), connected to a Neon bulb and Short circuited.
First scope shot is MOT with no Load on Secondary
Second scope shot is MOT with Neon Bulb Load on Secondary
Third scope shot is MOT with Secondary Shorted
Link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ne-wJqZVDvs
Please post your comments please
Luc
Hey Luc
Good show. ;] Seems like the freq is high for 20h. Maybe try a 1uf or .5uf cap across the sec to lower the freq. Marius and I have seen more power out when using a cap in series with a load. Larger cap, lower freq.
Its very cool that the mot works here as many seem to have them, or can be had easily, and can get to work on these ideas. ;]
Mags
Quote from: gotoluc on September 26, 2011, 10:54:42 AM
Hi Gyula,
I had to pickup my Digital Caliper from storage to re-check the diameter of the wire. It is actually 0.50 mm with enamel coating. The DC resistance is correct @ 4.4 Ohms so you should be able to figure out the wire length and approximate amount of turns.
Let me know if something does not look right.
Thanks for your time
Luc
Well, the 4.4 Ohm coil made from 0.5mm OD copper wire has a wire length of about 49 meter. This has a better chance to fill onto that core. Using the Mini Ring core calculator, for such sized toroid core 142 turns gives a full single layer coil directly on the surface from the 0.5mm OD wire and alltogether roughly 5 to 5.7 times more layers above the first one could give the 811 turns needed for the 7.5 Henry inductance.
( http://www.dl5swb.de/html/mini_ring_core_calculator.htm )
Gyula
Quote from: Magluvin on September 26, 2011, 06:05:32 PM
Hey Luc
Good show. ;] Seems like the freq is high for 20h. Maybe try a 1uf or .5uf cap across the sec to lower the freq. Marius and I have seen more power out when using a cap in series with a load. Larger cap, lower freq.
Its very cool that the mot works here as many seem to have them, or can be had easily, and can get to work on these ideas. ;]
Mags
Hi Mags,
I actually can get the delayed Lenz effect at 900Hz or even lower using a MOT but when I would change the load on the Secondary like I did in the video demo (no load, Neon bulb then shorted) Lenz would appear in one of the condition if I didn't re-adjust the Frequency. Maybe that's why Overunityguide did not demonstrate a short in his Transformer video. However, I found that at 4.9kHz it had no effect what so ever on the primary with what ever I did to the Secondary, so I decide to used that Frequency to make the video demo simple.
I will be experimenting with capacitors but that will be to get the Primary into Resonance and hopefully at a Frequency the Secondary will have Lenz delay. Should be cool 8) when that happens ;D
Luc
Quote from: gyulasun on September 26, 2011, 06:16:55 PM
Well, the 4.4 Ohm coil made from 0.5mm OD copper wire has a wire length of about 49 meter. This has a better chance to fill onto that core. Using the Mini Ring core calculator, for such sized toroid core 142 turns gives a full single layer coil directly on the surface from the 0.5mm OD wire and alltogether roughly 5 to 5.7 times more layers above the first one could give the 811 turns needed for the 7.5 Henry inductance.
( http://www.dl5swb.de/html/mini_ring_core_calculator.htm )
Gyula
Thanks Gyula,
that sounds about right now. All I remember is it took a long time to wind that one by hand :P
Thanks for sharing the calculator link
So what do you think about this Lenz delay?... do you think this could lead to OU?
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on September 26, 2011, 10:58:50 PM
...
So what do you think about this Lenz delay?... do you think this could lead to OU?
...
Hi Luc,
I do not know the answer...
I can only comment a few things. In case of the unloaded / loaded (lamp) tests, there is a few degree phase shift (10-15°) happening between the input voltage and current, while in the shorted / unshorted secondary tests the phase shift increases to 80-85° between the input voltage and current. The amplitudes of the current and voltage change but a very little or quasi nothing as you also noticed in the video. This is what the scopeshots show.
One problem is that the core material is probably a normal laminated core designed for the 50 / 60 Hz mains frequency and its behavior at 4-5 kHz range is rather questionable (thinking of core losses that may influence the whole transformer behavior, phase shifts etc).
I assume this core 'problem' (at least I consider it as a negative factor) would not manifest too much in case of your toroidal core with the 7.5H coil on it, maybe it would be worth testing it at even higher frequencies. Then we shall see... though it might be still unprobable I can give you a correct answer to your above question...
Gyula
Quote from: gotoluc on September 26, 2011, 01:08:17 PM
First scope shot is MOT with no Load on Secondary
Second scope shot is MOT with Neon Bulb Load on Secondary
Third scope shot is MOT with Secondary Shorted
Link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ne-wJqZVDvs
@gotoluc
That is Great. 8.82V on No Load conditions and 9.45V while Shorting...
Keep up the good work.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Transformer Part 2, the Delayed Lenz Effect with Scope Shots:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YiRV1SUsgc
A sincere man / experimenter asking for Help
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/8683-bitoroid-transformer-project-platform.html
Chet
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 14, 2011, 08:29:34 AM
Bi-filar wound series connected generator coils increase coil capacitance by 200% or more...
Hi Thane,
Are you sure about this?
Some time ago I did a comparison by using a newly bought inductance-meter and i couldn't see any difference.
Then i tried to do a calculation on the difference on the stored electric energy within a coil, and my conclusion was that a normally wound coil would store more electric energy because of its relation to the square of the voltage and since the voltage difference between the layers are linear in a normal coil and constant in a bifilar coil?
Its obvious that I have to redo some testing and thinking on this stuff.
Maybe You could elaborate on this?
/Hob
Quote from: ramset on September 28, 2011, 07:45:45 AM
A sincere man / experimenter asking for Help
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/8683-bitoroid-transformer-project-platform.html
Chet
HEY CHET,
PLEASE DEFINE "SINCERE" - IS THAT A NEW CONCEPT? :-X
AT ANY RATE I ALREADY SPOKE TO THAT CHAP (PLEASE SEE BELOW).
I THINK HIS PROBLEM IS HIS CORE CHOICE.
CHEERS
T
Dear Rayongerbil,
Really nice work!
Try to focus on just two things at this point;
1)
Getting a NEUTRAL reaction in your Primary when the two Secondaries are placed On-Load. Or even a current drop as Overunityguide has shown.
2)
Getting a NEUTRAL Power Factor SHIFT from No-Load to On-Load.
If you don't have a scope then you can deduce a PF drop if your current drops from No-Load to On-Load.
Also I would try to stick with just AC IN with pure resistive loads at your earlyish stage.
This is the worst case for a Secondary load and should show the most reaction in your Primary if there is any...
Congratulations on your work!
BTW if you aren't going to speak can we get annotations at least so we (the viewer) don't have to make assumptions about what is going on?
Cheers
Thane
Subject: BiToroid Replication
Date: 09/27/11
Message: This is my replication of your transformer technology utilizing black iron oxide primary core insulation and er70s mig welding wire cores. Dual 555 pulsewidth modulator, 20ohms into primary and 20ohms on load. The iron oxide is not letting a whole lot through... it seems to need an upgrade.
Primary - 5.3mH, 1.8ohm
Secondaries - 4.2mH, 2.1ohm
Secondary coils connected in parallel onto fullwave bridge with 470uf el capacitor.
Quote from: nilrehob on September 28, 2011, 02:29:39 PM
Hi Thane,
Are you sure about this?
Some time ago I did a comparison by using a newly bought inductance-meter and i couldn't see any difference.Its obvious that I have to redo some testing and thinking on this stuff.
Maybe You could elaborate on this?
/Hob
DEAR HOB,
RULE #1 -
DON'T THINK! RULE #2 - DON'T MAKE ANY ASSUMPTIONS, PRE-CALCULATIONS, HYPOTHESISING
THIS WILL ONLY SEND YOU DOWN THE WRONG PATH.
RULE #3 -
JUST DO...
BASE EVERYTHING ON EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE - STUFF YOU CAN SEE RIGHT BEFORE YOUR EYES.
LET THE MATH AND METERING SORT ITSELF OUT LATER ON.
WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS THIS. THE COILS IN THIS PUPPY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_wleUlcMK0 USES 3 OHM COILS AND THEY BEGIN TO CAUSE ACCELERATION AT ABOUT 500 RPM WHEN SHORTED.
WHEN I STARTED OUT WE USED COILS JUST LIKE OVERUNITY USES BIG ASS 150 - 300 OHMERS. BUT THEY WERE NOT REALISTIC AT PRODUCING POWER - NOW WE SACRIFICE A LITTLE ACCELERATION FOR MORE ELECTRICAL POWER FOR THE "REAL" WORLD.
RULE #4 DON'T GO INTO THE BOARDS AGAINST A SWEDE! :P
CHEERS
T
Quote from: nilrehob on September 28, 2011, 02:29:39 PM
Hi Thane,
Are you sure about this?
Some time ago I did a comparison by using a newly bought inductance-meter and i couldn't see any difference.Its obvious that I have to redo some testing and thinking on this stuff.
Maybe You could elaborate on this?
/Hob
@nilrehob about Bi-Filar coils:
Please read the information in the document in the link provided below...
In this document you will find: a Special Case of Voltage Gain in Bi-Filar coils, which shows the differences between only measuring the inductance and then calculate the voltage gain and between hooking up the same coil to a good Network Analyzer... It shows a gain of 929.3% !
So nilrehob please have a look at the following document, and forget your LCR metered values!
http://www.hvlabs.hu/zpe/Gruz/forum_matrix.ru/5/VOLTGN.pdf
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Thane & Overunityguide,
Thanks, I'll look into it agan, different angle this time!
/Hob
Quote from: nilrehob on September 29, 2011, 03:42:00 AM
Thane & Overunityguide,
Thanks, I'll look into it agan, different angle this time!
/Hob
Nilrehob,
Another thing to keep in mind is how to actually connect a bifilar coil.
This can be done in a few different ways.
For maximum capacity one should use the 'tesla coil way'.
I described this elsewhere : http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=11009.75 , reply #88
You can see the estimated increase in capacitance is hugely dependant on the way a bifilar coil is actually 'wired', especially when there is a significant number of windings.
p.s. this is not meant as a pancake coil only. It is applicable for any wired coil.
Quote from: teslaalset on September 29, 2011, 09:46:42 AM
Nilrehob,
Another thing to keep in mind is how to actually connect a bifilar coil.
This can be done in a few different ways.
For maximum capacity one should use the 'tesla coil way'.
I described this elsewhere : http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=11009.75 , reply #88
You can see the estimated increase in capacitance is hugely dependant on the way a bifilar coil is actually 'wired', especially when there is a significant number of windings.
p.s. this is not meant as a pancake coil only. It is applicable for any wired coil.
Thats the way I've done my bifilars as well,
the only way I haven't done yet is a stack of pancake coils (bifilar or not).
The best performing coils that I have done so far is the NEATLY wound coil,
with this I mean each layer perfect without bumps and crossing.
But i will look into it again.
Thanks.
/Hob
I've upped a video of acceleration-under-load rather than just short-circuit.
The rotor speed rises by only a few Hz, and the milliamps only go down by a few but the effect is there and will be amplified with higher impedance coils.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSSOI6Yep_U
Hi everyone,
here is an update on the Delayed Lenz effect in the MOT.
I did some test that give good results by using a Capacitor in Parallel on the Primary of the Transformer.
Please note at one point in the video I say the Primary of the Secondary. I meant to say Primary of the Transformer. This kind of thing happens when I'm doing many things at the same time (shooting video, explaining and thinking of the next thing to do for the test)
I attached the scope shots of the two different Frequencies used.
Green waveform is Current (Voltage across the 1 Ohm Resistor) and Yellow waveform is input Voltage.
First shot is the Transformer @ 2.45kHz no Load or Capacitor
Second shot is the Transformer @ 2.45kHz with Load and .39uf Capacitor in Parallel with Primary
Third shot is the Transformer @ 578Hz no load or Capacitor
Forth shot is the Transformer @ 578Hz with Load and 6.8uf Capacitor in Parallel with Primary
Link to Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9IgCHmZNeo
Please post your comments
Luc
THIS IS AWESOME LUC!
IS THE YELLOW SINE WAVE THE PRIMARY VOLTAGE?
BECAUSE IF IT IS THEN YOU ARE SHIFTING TO POWER FACTOR FROM POSITIVE TO NEGATIVE PRETTY MUCH AT WILL...
AT SOME POINT THE POWER FACTOR IS ZERO WHICH MEANS THE POWER TO THE PRIMATY IS ZERO.
IF THIS IS TRUE THEN YOUR EFFICIENCY IS INFINITE DUDE!
AT YOUR "LOW" CURRENT LEVELS THE POWER FACTOR IS 1 MEANING THE CURRENT AND VOLTAGE ARE BOTH IN PHASE.
BUT THEN IN THE VIDEO YOU SHOW THE POWER FACTOR GOING TO ZERO AND THEN NEGATIVE!
IF THE POWER FACTOR IS NEGATIVE YOUR TRANSFORMER IS POWERING THE LOAD BUT ALSO SENDING POWER TO THE GRID... DUDE! :D
THIS HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY COMPUTER SIMULATION AND ON THE ACTUAL OU BiTT (AT OTTAWA UNIVERSITY),
WHAT IS REALLY COOL IS HOW YOU CAN SHIFT IT LIKE THAT.
PLEASE CHECK TO SEE IF THE YELLOW SINE WAVE IS ACTUALLY CONNECTED TO THE PRIMARY WITH THE GREEN ACROSS A RESISTOR.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 29, 2011, 02:25:19 PM
THIS IS AWESOME LUC!
IS THE YELLOW SINE WAVE THE PRIMARY VOLTAGE?
BECAUSE IF IT IS THEN YOU ARE SHIFTING TO POWER FACTOR FROM POSITIVE TO NEGATIVE PRETTY MUCH AT WILL...
AT SOME POINT THE POWER FACTOR IS ZERO WHICH MEANS THE POWER TO THE PRIMATY IS ZERO.
IF THIS IS TRUE THEN YOUR EFFICIENCY IS INFINITE DUDE!
AT YOUR "LOW" CURRENT LEVELS THE POWER FACTOR IS 1 MEANING THE CURRENT AND VOLTAGE ARE BOTH IN PHASE.
BUT THEN IN THE VIDEO YOU SHOW THE POWER FACTOR GOING TO ZERO AND THEN NEGATIVE!
IF THE POWER FACTOR IS NEGATIVE YOUR TRANSFORMER IS POWERING THE LOAD BUT ALSO SENDING POWER TO THE GRID... DUDE! :D
THIS HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY COMPUTER SIMULATION AND ON THE ACTUAL OU BiTT (AT OTTAWA UNIVERSITY),
WHAT IS REALLY COOL IS HOW YOU CAN SHIFT IT LIKE THAT.
PLEASE CHECK TO SEE IF THE YELLOW SINE WAVE IS ACTUALLY CONNECTED TO THE PRIMARY WITH THE GREEN ACROSS A RESISTOR.
CHEERS
T
Thane, I was drawing the same conclusion at first glance, but.....
to be dead sure, we need the total primary current, while the primary current that Luc is showing is only the current that is going through the primary coil and not the current through the parallel capacitor, at least that is what I observe from it.
The current through the capacitor should be added as well.
So, Luc can you check whether you connected the parallel capacitor before or after the serial resistor?
HEY LUC,
YOU HAVE A RESONANT CIRCUIT THERE... ;)
I STILL WONDER IF THIS (AND OVERUNITYGUIDE'S) TRANSFORMER DELAYED LENZ IS ACTUALLY A CORE HYSTERISIS DELAYED EFFECT OR A BIT OF BOTH?
CHEERS
T
Parallel LC circuit Resonance
Here a coil (L) and capacitor (C) are connected in parallel with an AC power supply. Let R be the internal resistance of the coil. When XL equals XC, the reactive branch currents are equal and opposite. Hence they cancel out each other to give minimum current in the main line. Since total current is minimum, in this state the total impedance is maximum.Resonant frequency given by:
Thanks for the video gotluc. :) I have a question though, did the circuit act differently if you shorted it vs using the led. The reason I ask is, don't led's act as diodes? This wouldn't be the same as a short circuit. Now back to watching the video..
Also, you keep saying current changes when it is the voltage isn't it?
Quote from: teslaalset on September 29, 2011, 04:35:45 PM
Thane, I was drawing the same conclusion at first glance, but.....
to be dead sure, we need the total primary current, while the primary current that Luc is showing is only the current that is going through the primary coil and not the current through the parallel capacitor, at least that is what I observe from it.
The current through the capacitor should be added as well.
So, Luc can you check whether you connected the parallel capacitor before or after the serial resistor?
MY GUESS IS THE SHUNT RESISTOR IS CONNECTED IN SERIES WITH THE TANK CIRCUIT EITHER WAY THOUGH - BEFORE OR AFTER THE CURRENT THROUGH THE SHUNT IS THE TOTAL CURRENT UNLESS MAXWELL'S EQUATIONS ARE WRONG...?
OH WAIT THEY ARE! :-\
AT ANY RATE MY POINT IS THE CURRENT MAGNITUDE IS IRRELIVANT
IF THE POWER FACTOR IS ZERO.
WHAT IS REALLY OF VALUE (TO ME AT LEAST) IS SHIFTING TO PHASE ANGLE AROUND WILLY NILLY LIKE THAT.
LUC, PERHAPS I OUGHT TO COME OVER AND CHECK IT OUT CAN YOU DOCK YOUR BOAT IN CANADA OR ARE THE MIB'S STILL AFTER YOU?
CHEERS
T
BTW A LED IS ESSENTIALLY A SHORT CIRCUIT AND LUC ESTABLISHES THIS IN HIS VID.
Folks,
Luc connected the tuning cap(s) directly in parallel with the primary coil and the series 1 Ohm is placed outside of this parallel circuit, it is not included in it. It means that the current is at its minimum value as is shown when there is resonance (current and voltage gets in phase) while inside a parallel LC circuit the reactive current is at its maximum when tuned to resonance.
The current we see in the video is at its minimum at resonance because the parallel circuit's resonant impedance increases to a maximum value, this is what establishes the minimal current then.
Regarding the LED as a load? it is a diode and gives a near shorting effect in every second half period of the AC wave whenever the LED senses a forward bias from the AC amplitude.
Gyula
BUMP ME !
Sorry to overlap gotoluc's post (i have always admired your videos, in fact i think that was why i joined OU.com) but i just attached a load and got an accelerated rotor with less current draw.
Does that mean anything to anyone or am i overstating the importance of my little experiment ?
I don't have a scope (well, i have a poor maa's soundcard scope just for frequency measurements) so i can't comment on luc's results.
But i would greatly appreciate knowledgeable comments on my results.
BTW Thane, i am DeepCut66 who sent you a video today.
*** EDIT ADD ***
This is all my data so far :
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1130.0
*** EDIT ADD ***
YA BABY!
WAY TO GO DC.
CAN YOU POST YOUR MOTOR CIRCUIT PLEASE?
ALSO YOU NEED TO SWITCH TO BI-FILAR WINDINGS. 8)
CHEERS
T
Progress of my experiments with the effect of acceleration-under-load, an effect discovered by Thane C Heins.
Thane's youtube channel is here :
http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins
To test for the effect i first tried to get acceleration under short-circuit. This was using a typical pulse-motor, using the standard SSG circuit to power the bifilar drive coil which pulses the magnets and turns the rotor. The magnets on the rotor then induce power into the generator coil, which has a masonry-anchor-shield bolt as it's core.
The coils properties :
L = 15.3 mH
R = 8 Ohms
Here is a picture of that setup :
http://www.mediafire.com/?b5thxa448at0dz6
At each stage of the test, the input current and frequency of the rotor were noted when the gen coil was open.
The gen coil was then shorted and the input current and rotor frequency were noted again.
The results of that test are here :
http://www.mediafire.com/?p4mw890t8unwc75
I then performed the same test using a diametrically magnetised magnet as a rotor, the advantages of which are that magnets don't come flying off and higher frequencies are easily achieved.
Here is a picture of that setup :
http://www.mediafire.com/?9pj521hbmk0cm4e
The results of that test are here :
http://www.mediafire.com/?v0hlb9ellahmu50
I then wound a new coil :
L : 250 mH
R : 120 Ohms
I performed the same test on the new coil with the standard rotor setup (not the diametric), the results of which are here :
http://www.mediafire.com/?yx6rttz533a6x7n
I then wanted to see what happened when using an actual load rather than a short-circuit, with the new coil.
I tested for this using the diametric setup, as the magnet has more flux and much higher RPM's therefore better inductive power.
I attached a miniature light bulb as a load. The result was that the light shone brightly while the rotor sped up and the current draw went down.
The rotor only sped up by a few Hz and the input current dropped by only a few mA but the effect is there.
Here is a video of that test :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSSOI6Yep_U
Although i have only tested two coils so far, it seems that a higher impedance coil exhibits a stronger effect and can support a higher load.
The first coil would drag the rotor with only a 15 Ohm load, whereas the new coil accelerates the rotor with loads up to 620 Ohms, anything higher than that and rotor drag starts.
Peterae had me do some simple, fixed-RPM tests with the first coil, these were the results :
CASE 1 - Rotor with no gen coil.
V = 8 VDC
I = .290 A
P = 2.32 W
CASE 2 - Rotor with gen coil, unshorted.
V = 9.8 VDC
I = .365 A
P = 3.577 W
CASE 3 - Rotor with gen coil, shorted.
V = 9.1 VDC
I = .336 A
P = 3.0576
Obviously the core introduces drag, while the effect introduces acceleration.
I am hoping that, with a higher impedance coil, the net effect will be acceleration.
The next step is to wind a higher impedance coil and do load-testing to confirm that the higher impedance does amplify the effect and can support a higher load.
If that is confirmed, the next step is to wind multiple coils and do further load-testing.
Thanks for reading,
DC.
LOOK WHO'S WATCHING THIS SUBJECT... 8)
CHEERS
T
Oh god thanks Thane !
I've posted this on four forums with no effing reply ! (sorry, us brits like to swear when we're frustrated).
The drive circuitry for the coil that pushes the magnet is the standard SSG, the magnet spins, induces a voltage into the trigger wire which gets the transistor to pull power from the PSU which pushes the magnet around etc ...
I know literally nothing about electronics, i just learn what i need to know in order to build things but i assume that you know what the standard Bedini SSG circuit is. It's what Robert Adams referred to as an inductive driver.
Funny you should mention bifilar coils, because, the drive coil being bifilar, even when i spin that diametrically-magnetised magnet on it's own with no gen coil, for the first 50% of it's acceleration the current draw goes up, as you would expect as the frequency rises and more pulses are delivered, but for the last 50%, on it's way to maximum RPM, the current draw drops hugely, so even the drive coil is experiencing this effect.
As i said, i am an electronics noob, but from the little i understand, this is an amazing effect and it's the only one i've seen succesfully replicated.
I have some mild steel round bar on order so i can try the same effect on a simple transformer.
I'm confused as to why not a lot of people seem to be replicating this, with a diametric magnet it's not an expensive setup.
Add a load and get more RPM with less current draw !!! Please peeps give it a go !
Also, when you say bifilar, do you mean two seperate windings or one loop winding ?
Sorry but bifilar seems to have as many definitions as B/CEMF so i like to be clear (because i know nothing !).
All the best,
Gary.
Quote from: DeepCut on September 29, 2011, 08:09:23 PM
Oh god thanks Thane !
I've posted this on four forums with no effing reply ! (sorry, us brits like to swear when we're frustrated).
Also, when you say bifilar, do you mean two separate windings or one loop winding ?
Sorry but bifilar seems to have as many definitions as B/CEMF so i like to be clear (because i know nothing !).
All the best,
Gary.
DO YOU MEAN GARY THE
"SLEEP TALKING MAN" GARY? http://sleeptalkinman.blogspot.com/
Sept 26 2011
"Okay, everybody! Anyone who hasn't eaten, put their arms in the air!... That's not YOUR arm! Stupid fucking zombies."
Sept 24 2011
"I need a human pyramid. And it's got to be a naked human pyramid. No other kind will do."
Sept 23 2011
"Why the fuck do you have to keep acting like an arsehole? You must have Imitation Bowel Syndrome."
BI-FILAR = TWO WIRES WOUND SIMULTANEOUSLY IN PARALLEL AND SERIES CONNECTED.CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 29, 2011, 02:25:19 PM
THIS IS AWESOME LUC!
IS THE YELLOW SINE WAVE THE PRIMARY VOLTAGE?
BECAUSE IF IT IS THEN YOU ARE SHIFTING TO POWER FACTOR FROM POSITIVE TO NEGATIVE PRETTY MUCH AT WILL...
AT SOME POINT THE POWER FACTOR IS ZERO WHICH MEANS THE POWER TO THE PRIMATY IS ZERO.
IF THIS IS TRUE THEN YOUR EFFICIENCY IS INFINITE DUDE!
AT YOUR "LOW" CURRENT LEVELS THE POWER FACTOR IS 1 MEANING THE CURRENT AND VOLTAGE ARE BOTH IN PHASE.
BUT THEN IN THE VIDEO YOU SHOW THE POWER FACTOR GOING TO ZERO AND THEN NEGATIVE!
IF THE POWER FACTOR IS NEGATIVE YOUR TRANSFORMER IS POWERING THE LOAD BUT ALSO SENDING POWER TO THE GRID... DUDE! :D
THIS HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY COMPUTER SIMULATION AND ON THE ACTUAL OU BiTT (AT OTTAWA UNIVERSITY),
WHAT IS REALLY COOL IS HOW YOU CAN SHIFT IT LIKE THAT.
PLEASE CHECK TO SEE IF THE YELLOW SINE WAVE IS ACTUALLY CONNECTED TO THE PRIMARY WITH THE GREEN ACROSS A RESISTOR.
CHEERS
T
Hi Thane,
sorry for the delay in reply. I went to work after I posted this and got back in late.
Yes correct... THE YELLOW SINE WAVE IS CONNECTED TO THE PRIMARY WITH THE GREEN ACROSS A 1 OHM RESISTOR.
Glad ;D you like it
Tomorrow I'm going to my storage to pickup some large AC Capacitors. Going to see how far down I can drop the Frequency. It would be nice if I can get it down to 60Hz.
Luc
Quote from: teslaalset on September 29, 2011, 04:35:45 PM
Thane, I was drawing the same conclusion at first glance, but.....
to be dead sure, we need the total primary current, while the primary current that Luc is showing is only the current that is going through the primary coil and not the current through the parallel capacitor, at least that is what I observe from it.
The current through the capacitor should be added as well.
So, Luc can you check whether you connected the parallel capacitor before or after the serial resistor?
Hi teslaalset,
the Capacitor is connected after the series Resistor, directly in Parallel at the Primary Coil.
Thanks for your interest
Luc
Quote from: Shadesz on September 29, 2011, 04:52:06 PM
Thanks for the video gotluc. :) I have a question though, did the circuit act differently if you shorted it vs using the led. The reason I ask is, don't led's act as diodes? This wouldn't be the same as a short circuit. Now back to watching the video..
Also, you keep saying current changes when it is the voltage isn't it?
Hi Shadesz,
thanks for your interest.
The results are the same if I short the Secondary.
Technically the Green waveform is a Probe measuring the Voltage across a 1 Ohm Resistor that is connected in Series on the Ground of the Signal Generator lead. The Yellow waveform is a Probe measuring the voltage between the Hot lead of the SG and the Ground of the SG. All probe Grounds are connected together on the same side of the resistor which is closest to the SG ground.
From what I understand when a Dual trace Scope is connected in this configuration the Probe connected between the Resistor is a representation of Current being consumed. Also, one can observe Phase Shift.
Please correct me if I am not doing this correctly or miss understanding something.
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on September 29, 2011, 11:44:35 PM
Tomorrow I'm going to my storage to pickup some large AC Capacitors. Going to see how far down I can drop the Frequency. It would be nice if I can get it down to 60Hz.
@gotoluc, Great work so far. My compliments, of course when there is only reactive power going to a primary coil you can power factor correct this by putting a parallel capacitor to your primary. But for now please don't forget that when you try to lower your frequency to the 60 Hz you mentioned that you will kill the desired Delayed Lenz effect at your secondary side. So as a result of this I would expect that you cannot run your load purely reactive again. Because if the only important thing to this was primary power factor correction related, than every manufacturer of microwave oven transformers would be doing this.
So my advice is
to not go below a certain frequency... lets say not below 700 Hz or something like that...
Please see my videos in where I get totally different results for 200 Hz and for 950 Hz:
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbmharDOA3Y
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YiRV1SUsgc&feature=related
Keep up the good work, and With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Quote from: gyulasun on September 29, 2011, 05:14:02 PM
Regarding the LED as a load? it is a diode and gives a near shorting effect in every second half period of the AC wave whenever the LED senses a forward bias from the AC amplitude.
I guess it is a single LED, so, indeed it kind of shorts one half of the cycle.
Because it's shown in resonance, it doesn't show a clear distorted current waveshape (a not symmetric sinus).
Would be interesting to see what happens if there are 2 anti-parallel connected LED's are applied, so both sinus halves periods are performing shorting.
I would expect a more explicit phase shift in that case.
Quote from: teslaalset on September 30, 2011, 02:50:14 AM
I guess it is a single LED, so, indeed it kind of shorts one half of the cycle.
Because it's shown in resonance, it doesn't show a clear distorted current waveshape (a not symmetric sinus).
Would be interesting to see what happens if there are 2 anti-parallel connected LED's are applied, so both sinus halves periods are performing shorting.
I would expect a more explicit phase shift in that case.
Well, I think we have to consider how good the shorting effect is the LED(s) represents with respect to the effect of a real short like a piece of wire?
The green LED needs about 2V forward voltage and assuming a 15mA current for the brightness in Luc's video, this LED represents a loading resistor of 2V/0.015A=133 Ohm, very far from a short circuit case.
By putting two LEDs anti-parallel then both half waves of a cycle would be symmetricall loaded (i.e. clamped) by the LEDs indeed but their loading effect still would be in the one to two hundred Ohm range.
This way I think the phase shift would not change too much either in this respect. So a heavier load (like a few watt incandescent light bulb or even a few Ohm resistor may represent) is to be used.
Quote from: gyulasun on September 30, 2011, 05:28:20 AM
Well, I think we have to consider how good the shorting effect is the LED(s) represents with respect to the effect of a real short like a piece of wire?
The green LED needs about 2V forward voltage and assuming a 15mA current for the brightness in Luc's video, this LED represents a loading resistor of 2V/0.015A=133 Ohm, very far from a short circuit case.
I am not sure this is true.
The shorting resistance will be delta V
LED / delta I
LED in my view, looking at common diode I/U characteristics. Normally this is a quite steep curve.
Attached an example of a fairly common LED.
Going to the U/I curve the delta U/ Delta I is around 0.2/0.035 => approx. 6 Ohms
Hi all
Special thank's to Gotoluc for his experiment.
So i tried a replication and it seems to work very well.
I wonder if ,( as it has already been proposed by a user i don't remember the name sorry), we placed an amplificator (for example a HI FI ampli) between the signal generator and the Mot if we could increase the effect and test more power. What do you think ? Any idea Thane ?
Thank's to all for sharing this very interesting stuff.
Good luck at all
Laurent
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vt9tqQfYpmk
Quote from: Overunityguide on September 30, 2011, 02:24:54 AM
please don't forget that when you try to lower your frequency to the 60 Hz you mentioned that you will kill the desired Delayed Lenz effect at your secondary side. So as a result of this I would expect that you cannot run your load purely reactive again. Because if the only important thing to this was primary power factor correction related, than every manufacturer of microwave oven transformers would be doing this.
Hi Overunityguide,
I was also thinking like you on lowering the Frequency would eventually null the effect. However, last night I paralleled all the AC Capacitors I have available on my boat and it makes a 37.4uF value.
Using this value I was able to drop the Frequency down to 250Hz and to my surprise the effect is still there and the bonus is the Secondary is now delivering about twice the Current at this lower Frequency. I connected 2 LED's in Parallel and each are in Reverse polarity to each other so both sides of the Sine Wave gets Shorted.
Below are the scope shots:
First Shot is @ 250Hz no Load on Secondary and no Capacitor on Primary (idle transformer)
Second Shot is @ 250Hz with Dual LED as Load and 37.4uf Capacitor on Primary
Later today I will get my larger AC Capacitors out from the storage to further drop the Frequency.
Stay tuned ;D
Luc
Quote from: teslaalset on September 30, 2011, 02:50:14 AM
I guess it is a single LED, so, indeed it kind of shorts one half of the cycle.
Because it's shown in resonance, it doesn't show a clear distorted current waveshape (a not symmetric sinus).
Would be interesting to see what happens if there are 2 anti-parallel connected LED's are applied, so both sinus halves periods are performing shorting.
I would expect a more explicit phase shift in that case.
Hi teslaalset,
I thought of doing this last night so there is now 2 anti-parallel connected LED's.
Results are the same and since I dropped the Frequency down to 250Hz the current is double so both LED's are fully lit.
Luc
Quote from: teslaalset on September 30, 2011, 05:54:08 AM
I am not sure this is true.
The shorting resistance will be delta VLED / delta ILED in my view, looking at common diode I/U characteristics. Normally this is a quite steep curve.
Attached an example of a fairly common LED.
Going to the U/I curve the delta U/ Delta I is around 0.2/0.035 => approx. 6 Ohms
hi teslaalset,
Yes, you are correct in that I should have considered dynamic resistance for the LED just like it were a Zener diode and I agree that the loading effect corresponds to a non-linearly changing resistor with an average r=6 Ohm value in the case you picked from the data sheet graph.
But still I think we should not omit the fact that the AC sine wave amplitude coming from the secondary cannot drive any current through the LED whenever the instanteneus voltage amplitude is lower than or opposite to the forward voltage of the LED. So considering one AC cycle and only one LED (Luc used only one), the loading effect from a LED comes as a resistor-change from a few Ohms to a near open circuit during a certain part within one half cycle of a full cycle. In case of two anti-parallel LEDs the loading effect widens with a certain part within the other half cycle and thus current cannot flow at and near to the zero crossings till the voltage amplitude reaches near +/- 2V or whatever the forward bias need for the LEDs.
And even with as small dynamic resistance as a LED may manifest you still have to consider the microwave transformer secondary coil copper resistance in Luc's setup as being much higher than the 6 Ohm, so the ruling effective resistance to consider for phase shifting when talking about shorts is that of the secondary coil, having a 80-100 Ohm DC resistance for a oven transformer secondary.
rgds, Gyula
FYI TO ALL,
PLEASE WRITE TO THE MEDAI (TYLER HAMILTON & OTHER EMAILS BELOW) TO TRY TO HELP GET THEM TO ATTEND THE DEMOS? :-\
THANKS & CHEERS
Thane
PS, THE ATTACHED DEMO PHOTOS WERE FOR THE US ARMY AND ELECTRON ENERGY CORPORATION LAST SUMMER IN PA.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: University of Toronto Professors Regenerative Acceleration Generator Technology Demonstration Invitation
From: <thaneh@potentialdifference.ca>
Date: Fri, September 30, 2011 9:42 am
To: robmac@yorku.ca, jackel@yorku.ca, lehn@ecf.utoronto.ca,
chair@physics.utoronto.ca
Cc: tyler@cleanbreak.ca, jackiesyrett@rogers.com, editor@thevarsity.ca,
scott.anderson@utoronto.ca, stacey.gibson@utoronto.ca, city@thestar.ca,
tepeditors@thestar.ca, wheels@thestar.ca
Hello University of Toronto Professors,
My name is Thane Heins and I am the President of Potential Difference Inc. an Ottawa based energy R&D company. We will be in Toronto this weekend demonstrating our Regenerative Acceleration Generator (ReGenX) Technology and I would like to personally invite all your Physics & Energy Systems Groups students and professors to a live technology demonstration.
I know it is short notice but it's not every day that you get an invitation to view a generator that violates the Law of Conservation of Energy and produces over a million percent more power than a conventional generator under identical conditions.
The ReGenX generator technology is unique because the generator causes acceleration under load rather than deceleration while violating the "Theory of Conservation of Energy" in the process.
The media enjoy manipulating their audience (to sell more advertising) by referring to the technology as a Perpetual Motion Machine which it is not BTW. Tyler Hamilton, formerly of the Toronto Star (now adjunct professor at U of T) and Richard Syrett of the CBC are also invited to attend.
ReGenX technology is simply a generator which creates a complimentary-electromotive force when supplying power to a load rather than a counter-electromotive force as is the conventional generator paradigm. Lab tests at the University of Ottawa by a NRC scientist showed the ReGenX generator producing 1,019,900% more electrical output over the conventional generator under identical operating conditions.
When Dr. Stanley Townsend reviewed the technology he said the following:
"Thane, Your Press Release was most interesting to me as a physicist & an engineer.
The level of technical detail was adequate to tell me that you probably have made a very significant advance
in applied physics & in safely & successfully handling a new source of electric power.
Congratulations!"
~ UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO
Dr. Stanley Townsend, University of Toronto & Former Managing Editor of the Canadian Journal of Physics
We have recently been invited to demonstrate the technology to Chrysler in Detroit and we have a meeting in Toronto this weekend with the largest bicycle manufacturer in India to put the technology into their scooter line for India and North America. Nissan has even broached the subject about having us put a prototype in the Nissan Leaf.
Enclosed is some information on EV Regenerative Acceleration Generator (ReGenX) Technology for your records.
Regenerative Acceleration Generator (ReGenX) Technology represents major breakthrough in EV and HEV generator design by reversing the regenerative braking paradigm. ReGenX Technology now allows all EVs to CONTINUALLY RECHARGE THEIR BATTERIES and may ultimately provide EVs with UNLIMITED RANGE.
Below are a couple of video demonstrations PDI provided for a Michigan based OEMs.
Kind Regards
Thane
Regenerative Braking Reversal Video - University of Ottawa
http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins?feature=mhee
ReGenX generator provides 1,019,900% more electrical output over the conventional generator under identical operating conditions.
NRC scientist test data attached.
BIONX Electric Vehicle Test Video - University of Ottawa
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGvOBDCh7sA
ReGenX generator reverses regenerative braking paradigm and accelerates bike motor while delivering 15+ Watts to a load.
Industry comments;
CHRYSLER ELECTRIFIED POWERTRAINS
- The technology looks really interesting and is revolutionary. I would like to learn more about the technology. Is it possible to organize a demo or a lecture in the USA?"
GENERAL MOTORS
- "This sounds interesting. I'd like you to connect with our Fuel Economy Learning Program manager, to schedule a time for you to come in
and share the technology with us. We need to know more about the Physics behind it".
"I have talked with my colleagues in GM US about your solution for vehicles. So, we would like more details about fuel economy and emissions regarding it
Do you have any company that use this approach in vehicles? I am open for discussion".
MERCEDES-BENZ
- "It would be fitting for the inventor of the automobile to be first with your revolutionary technology and for me to play a role in that would be awesome!"
NISSAN Japan
- "Thanks for providing technical information. If the effect of your invention is really true, I am sure there will be strong needs in the market.
How can you prove this on an actual electric vehicle, for example by making a prototype using our Nissan Leaf?
I would like to discuss your business model and financial requirements, investment needs, business plan."
NEIL YOUNG
- "We would like to find a way to use your technology in our LincVolt Project".
EV WORLD
Mike Brace, EV World Tech Editor
- "When we finally understand what Thane Heins has discovered, we likely will have to rewrite the laws of electromagnetism." http://evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=1890
NASA
Erik Clark NASA-Goddard Space Flight Center
- "The magnetics lab here at Goddard expressed some interest in having you come down to do a colloquium"
US AIR FORCE
Omar Mendoza, Program Manager Energy & Environmental Quality Air Force Research Laboratory Wright Patterson
- "We really are more interested in developing its use and application for military power requirements"
CANADIAN SPACE AGENCY
Gilles Leclerc, Canadian Space Agency Space Technologies
- "I have asked Mr. Gilles Brassard, A/Director, Spacecraft Payload here at the Canadian Space Agency to look at your technologies and to visit your laboratory"
ELECTRIC MOBILITY CANADA
Mike Elwood, Chairman Electric Mobility Canada and Vice President of Azure Dynamics
"This is a freakin game changer!"
ELECTRIC MOBILITY CANADA
Al Cormier, Executive Director Electric Mobility Canada
- "I am writing to ask you to submit what you feel would be an appropriate document to describe your regenerative acceleration technology for circulation to our Committee members"
OTTAWA UNIVERSITY
Dr. Habash, University of Ottawa
- "Of course it accelerates... this represents several new chapters in physics, that is why we are consulting MIT"
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO
Dr. Stanley Townsend, University of Toronto & Former Managing Editor of the Canadian Journal of Physics
- "Thane, Your Press Release was most interesting to me as a physicist & an engineer.
The level of technical detail was adequate to tell me that you probably have made a very significant advance
in applied physics & in safely & successfully handling a new source of electric power.
Congratulations!"
MIT
Dr. Marcus Zahn
- "It works and it is not something I would have expected, now I am just trying to figure it out"
RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCE
Dr. Evstigneev N.M., Institute for System Analysis, Russian Academy of Science
- " A number of your experiments are not lying in the field of Maxwellian electrodynamics"
UNIVERSITY OF CONCORDIA
Professor Joseph Shin, Concordia University
- "This is absolutely fascinating stuff you are doing"
ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE
Mike Simpson, Transportation Analyst Rocky Mountain Institute
- "You seem to have made an interesting discovery. Our internal physics experts review this information and have determined that it is very interesting work"
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS OF ONTARIO
Donald Wallace, Executive Director Ontario Centre for Engineering and Public Policy
- "Would you be willing to contribute an article on this technology to the Journal for Engineering and Public Policy?"
CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE
David Mann, Canadian Association for the Advancement of Science
- "If possible would like to meet with you to discuss your approach to the Association and of course to get a better feel about the physics behind your invention. I would still like to see what you are doing and perhaps we can include some of your material on our website newsletter?"
PDI Media Press
http://www.oneradionetwork.com/new-technologies/thane-heins-inventor-of-the-infinity-generator-just-imagine-no-more-energy-exploitation-september-1-2011/ http://pesn.com/2011/08/28/9501905_Thane_Heins_Regenerative_Acceleration_Generator/
http://www.mevio.com/episode/293349/fen-110824
http://www.cbc.ca/outoftheirminds/2011/07/26/episode-5---thane-heins/
http://www.cbc.ca/outoftheirminds/2011/08/29/episode-10---what-makes-them-tick/
http://thetechjournal.com/tech-news/major-breakthrough-in-ev-technology-to-recharge-batteries-conitually-with-infinite-range.xhtml
http://evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=1890
http://www.thestar.com/Business/article/300042
http://www.canadianbusiness.com/article/17096--the-next-great-canadian-idea-peripiteia-generator
http://thefulcrum-research.blogspot.com/2011/01/truly-unbelievable.html
http://keyrecords.com/designers/thanes.html
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=31887883-be00-4d3c-8763-d96564794cae
http://www.physorg.com/news121610315.html
Latest Press Releases By "Potential Difference Inc."
http://www.prlog.org/11580189-canadian-inventor-offers-patented-energy-breakthrough-to-fight-climate-change.html
Canadian Energy R & D Company Proves ENERGY (and PEACE) CAN BE CREATED in our Time.
Sep 21, 2011
International Day of Peace 9/21/11 Video Presentation ~ Law of Conservation of Energy is False... Revisions Required.
Regenerative Acceleration Generator Technology Confirmed in The Netherlands, Sweden, USA And Canada
Sep 17, 2011
New Electric Vehicle Battery Recharge Technology Being Scientifically Validated by Independent Researchers Worldwide. Has the capacity to eliminate EV roadside recharge requirements and allow immediate EV market integration.
Potential +/ Difference Inc. Invitation (KEGS) Proof Of Concept Electric Vehicle Project
Aug 20, 2011
KINETIC ENERGY GENERATING SYSTEM (KEGS) OBJECTIVE OVERVIEW: To create an electric vehicle which has the capacity to provide motive force in the absence of any external power supply.
Electric Vehicle Range Anxiety Eliminated by New Generator Innovation - PDI VIDEO DEMONSTRATION
Aug 06, 2011
Extended range generator innovation eliminates EV range limitations, lack of performance issues while also reducing battery weight and costs. Free worldwide licensing to accelerate market integration and reduce technology acquisition costs.
UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA - Researched Generator Could Open a 'New Chapter of Physics' for EVs
Jul 29, 2011
PHYSICS, WITH A POLITICAL TWIST. New electric vehicle generator technology reverses regenerative braking paradigm and accelerates EV while recharging batteries. Early tests show more than double range extension over conventional technology.
Why the Law of Conservation of Energy is FALSE and has NEVER Applied in an Electrical System
Jul 26, 2011
How the Regenerative Acceleration Generator Technology VIOLATES the "Theory" of Conservation of Energy along with Newton's Third law, Lenz's Law and the Work Energy Principle as Easy as 1, 2, 3.
Is USA Bankruptcy Imminent? - Here's How To Avoid It...
Jul 16, 2011
Regenerative Acceleration Generator Technology when employed with wind and solar technologies could easily reduce US energy costs down to NIL while eliminating the need for perpetual and financially crippling oil wars and any foreign oil sources.
Thane C. Heins
President
Potential +/- Difference Inc. R & D
"The Transition of Power"
613.256.4684 (cell)
thaneh@potentialdifference.ca
Linkedin http://linkd.in/iIZyXF
You Tube http://bit.ly/gCRePU
613.795.1602
"How do we make the world work for 100% of humanity in the shortest possible time
-through spontaneous cooperation without ecological damage or disadvantage to anyone?"
-- Dr. R. Buckminster Fuller
Quote from: gyulasun on September 30, 2011, 05:28:20 AM
Well, I think we have to consider how good the shorting effect is the LED(s) represents with respect to the effect of a real short like a piece of wire?
The green LED needs about 2V forward voltage and assuming a 15mA current for the brightness in Luc's video, this LED represents a loading resistor of 2V/0.015A=133 Ohm, very far from a short circuit case.
By putting two LEDs anti-parallel then both half waves of a cycle would be symmetricall loaded (i.e. clamped) by the LEDs indeed but their loading effect still would be in the one to two hundred Ohm range.
This way I think the phase shift would not change too much either in this respect. So a heavier load (like a few watt incandescent light bulb or even a few Ohm resistor may represent) is to be used.
Hi Gyula,
I did this last night. I used a light bulb that the Secondary could not light and the result is the same.
Here is the scope shot with an unlit 12v auto bulb measuring 10 Ohm's as load on Secondary and the next scope shot I moved the Voltage Probe (Yellow) across the bulb.
Luc
Quote from: woopy on September 30, 2011, 08:45:05 AM
Hi all
Special thank's to Gotoluc for his experiment.
So i tried a replication and it seems to work very well.
I wonder if ,( as it has already been proposed by a user i don't remember the name sorry), we placed an amplificator (for example a HI FI ampli) between the signal generator and the Mot if we could increase the effect and test more power. What do you think ? Any idea Thane ?
Thank's to all for sharing this very interesting stuff.
Good luck at all
Laurent
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vt9tqQfYpmk
Excellent replication job Laurent ;)
I suspect you are able to drop your Frequency much more with less uf value since you are using a MOT that the Primary is wound for 220VAC compared to me with a Primary made for 120VAC. So your Primary maybe twice the Inductance value as mine.
Find yourself some more AC Capacitors to drop it down to your 50Hz grid Frequency. You are not so far off. You can Parallel as many of them as you need. I have 15 of them now ;D
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Just a more practical question that bugs me regarding this MOT experiment:
Why is a single LED surviving in this setup up?
I would expect the voltage at the secondary to be a few KVolt if I look at the difference in inductance between primary and secondary impedance.
Probably due to the high resistance of the secondary winding?
Quote from: gotoluc on September 30, 2011, 09:44:31 AM
Hi teslaalset,
I thought of doing this last night so there is now 2 anti-parallel connected LED's.
Results are the same and since I dropped the Frequency down to 250Hz the current is double so both LED's are fully lit.
Luc
Thanks Luc!
I still trying to understand why your results are similar when you change from one LED to two anti-parallel.
I thought is had to deal with average load resistance over one cycle, so 2 LEDs in antiparallel connection would half the load resistance.
Quote from: teslaalset on September 30, 2011, 10:38:40 AM
Just a more practical question that bugs me regarding this MOT experiment:
Why is a single LED surviving in this setup up?
I would expect the voltage at the secondary to be a few KVolt if I look at the difference in inductance between primary and secondary impedance.
Probably due to the high resistance of the secondary winding?
Keep in mind that the Input to the Primary is in the 10 to 12 Volts RMS AC range (Signal Generator Output) so the Secondary should also output much less. I would also agree that much power is lost in the High Resistance of the Secondary.
Luc
Quote from: woopy on September 30, 2011, 08:45:05 AM
Hi all
Special thank's to Gotoluc for his experiment.
So i tried a replication and it seems to work very well.
I wonder if ,( as it has already been proposed by a user i don't remember the name sorry), we placed an amplificator (for example a HI FI ampli) between the signal generator and the Mot if we could increase the effect and test more power. What do you think ? Any idea Thane ?
Thank's to all for sharing this very interesting stuff.
Good luck at all
Laurent
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vt9tqQfYpmk
DEAR LAURENT,
GREAT JOB!
CAN YOU REDO YOUR VIDEO BUT EXPAND YOUR SCOPE WINDOW SO WE ONLY SEE 1/2 OF THE SINE WAVE SO WE CAN SEE WHAT THE PHASE SHIFT IS AT 2:23 IN YOUR VIDEO?
ALSO EXPAND THE VOLTS / DIV SO THE LINES ARE STARIGHT UP AND DOWN PLEASE.
I WANT TO SEE IF THE SHORT PRODUCES A 180 DEGREE PHASE SHIFT WITH A ZERO POWER FACTOR SINCE A SHORT IS AN INFINITE PURELY RESISTIVE LOAD?
THEN TRY TO "TUNE" YOUR FREQUENCY TO SEE IF YOU CAN GET 90 DEGREES OUT OF PHASE?
BTW ANYONE MEASURING POWER FACTOR OR PHASE SHIFTS SHOULD ALL BE DOING IT THIS WAY SINCE WE DON'T NEED TO SEE THE TOPS OF THE SINE WAVES. ;)
http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins?feature=mhee#p/u/17/5KfwiXJ8apk
CHEERS
T
Hi All,
Some good work going on here. Could you please try a 10ohm power resistor for measuring the current. I've been fooled too many times when measuring output with LEDs.
Hi DeepCut,
That is a great setup and can clearly see the current drop. You're right diametric magnets are the way to go one shaft can hold multiple of them, lets say 6, pulse 2 of them and collect off 4. ;)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 30, 2011, 11:00:34 AM
DEAR LAURENT,
GREAT JOB!
CAN YOU REDO YOUR VIDEO BUT EXPAND YOUR SCOPE WINDOW SO WE ONLY SEE 1/2 OF THE SINE WAVE SO WE CAN SEE WHAT THE PHASE SHIFT IS AT 2:23 IN YOUR VIDEO?
ALSO EXPAND THE VOLTS / DIV SO THE LINES ARE STARIGHT UP AND DOWN PLEASE.
I WANT TO SEE IF THE SHORT PRODUCES A 180 DEGREE PHASE SHIFT WITH A ZERO POWER FACTOR SINCE A SHORT IS AN INFINITE PURELY RESISTIVE LOAD?
THEN TRY TO "TUNE" YOUR FREQUENCY TO SEE IF YOU CAN GET 90 DEGREES OUT OF PHASE?
BTW ANYONE MEASURING POWER FACTOR OR PHASE SHIFTS SHOULD ALL BE DOING IT THIS WAY SINCE WE DON'T NEED TO SEE THE TOPS OF THE SINE WAVES. ;)
http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins?feature=mhee#p/u/17/5KfwiXJ8apk
CHEERS
T
Hi Thane,
here are a few more Shots to better see the shift. I tuned to Less current and expanded Volts Division to Max.
First shot is Normal Probe setup on Primary input and Second Shot I Only moved the Voltage probe across the 10 Ohm bulb.
Interesting to see that there is not much Phase Shift on the Primary when the Current is at Minimum but when you see the Second Scope shot with the Voltage Probe connected across the load it is perfect 90 Degrees Shift... or is that 180 Degrees Shift?
Anyways, I think that is what is important!... don't you think?
Luc
Quote from: DreamThinkBuild on September 30, 2011, 11:26:21 AM
Hi All,
Could you please try a 10ohm power resistor for measuring the current. I've been fooled too many times when measuring output with LEDs.
Hi DreamThinkBuild,
I also tested with a 10 Ohm Resistor and the result is the same.
Please read my new Posts and you will see
Luc
Hi Luc,
I see your new post, good job. Thanks for taking the time to share your results.
Hi Thane,
here are a few more Shots to better see the shift. I tuned to Less current and expended Volts Division to Max.
First shot is Normal Probe setup on Primary input and Second Shot I Only moved the Voltage probe across the 10 Ohm bulb.
OKAY IF YOU MOVED YOUR PROBE TO THE 10 OHM LOAD THEN YOU ARE MEASURING THE CURRENT THROUGH THAT LOAD WHICH IS NOT CORRECT.
Anyways, I think that is what is important!... don't you think?
Luc
EVERYTHING IS IMPORTANT BUT LET'S JUST TRY TO FOCUS ON JUST PHASE SHIFT FOR NOW.
PLEASE DO THIS:
1) PUT YOUR CURRENT PROBE ACROSS THE SHUNT RESISTOR.
2) PUT YOUR VOLTAGE PROBE ACROSS THE PRIMARY.
3) DO WHATEVER YOU NEED TO DO (WITH CAPS AND FREQUENCY) TO GET A 90 DEGREE PHASE SHIFT ON LOAD.
4) SHOW NO LOAD...
5) THEN SHOW ON-LOAD (WITH 90 DEGREE PHASE SHIFT) IE ZERO POWER FACTOR! 8)
6) IF YOU CAN DO #5 WITH REAL POWER THROUGH YOUR LOAD THEN ALL THE POWER IN THE PRIMARY IS REACTIVE IE NO REAL POWER = 0.0 WATTS.
7) EFFICIENCY WOULD EQUAL INFINITY IF YOUR PRIMARY HAD ZERO DC RESISTANCE BUT BECAUSE IT DOES DOES NOT THE HEAT DISSIPATION IS:
I^2 x Rdc
8) NOW IF SOMEONE (ELSE) IS ABLE TO SHOW A NEGATIVE POWER FACTOR I.E. POWER BEING SENT BACK TO THE GRID THEN WE HAVE A WHOLE NEW BALL GAME HERE! :D
ATTACHED IS THE TEST DATA FROM DR. FUSINA OF DEFENSE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CANADA WHO CAME TO OTTAWA UNIVERSITY TO TEST THE BiTT.
HE FREAKED OUT WHEN HE SAW 0.0 POWER FACTOR SO I TOLD HIM TO APPLY A FUDGE FACTOR - WHICH HE DID.
WE HAVE SINCE FOUND OUT THAT THE PF CAN BE NEGATIVE AND I AM HOPING YOU GUYS CAN ALSO VERIFY THAT?
THIS MIGHT HELP ME GET THAT "LAZY" ENGINEER AT PHILLIPS TO MOVE HIS ASS?
CHEERS
T
Hi Luc and Thane
thank's for advices
I have redo the video to better see the phase shift.
Hope this is what Thane suggested. But my sig gen is very basic and i cannot tune progressively, so it is very difficult to to get very fine results. So i tested 2 frequency to get with 150 Hz the max phase shift (something less than 180 degree ) and to get 90 degree with 190 Hz (the cap value is always 12 micro F).
hope this helps
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fa7IsQe0jfc
Laurent
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 30, 2011, 12:16:41 PM
OKAY IF YOU MOVED YOUR PROBE TO THE 10 OHM LOAD THEN YOU ARE MEASURING THE CURRENT THROUGH THAT LOAD WHICH IS NOT CORRECT.
You are not understanding what I'm doing. Like I said above the First shot is done like you say:
1) PUT YOUR CURRENT PROBE ACROSS THE SHUNT RESISTOR.
2) PUT YOUR VOLTAGE PROBE ACROSS THE PRIMARY.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 30, 2011, 12:16:41 PM
3) DO WHATEVER YOU NEED TO DO (WITH CAPS AND FREQUENCY) TO GET A 90 DEGREE PHASE SHIFT ON LOAD.
As I said above, I tuned to minimum Current draw on the Primary and not to 90 Degrees Phase Shift. I can easily tune to 90 Degrees Phase Shift (ON PRIMARY) but the Current draw will go up. So we have to wonder why is this happening in a MOT?... maybe the Primary does not need to be at 90 Degrees Phase Shift for the Secondary LOAD to not effect it if we are working with a Possible LENZ DELAY.
This is what made me think to probe the Secondary with the Voltage Probe but leaving the current Probe on the Primary and use the Primary's Current Phase Reference and compare it's Phase Reference with the Secondary Phase.
As we can see from the Second Scope Shot they are Exactly 90 Degrees out Phase with each other. So my thought is, who knows what is going on in a MOT under these conditions. if the Secondary is 90 Degrees out of Phase when the Current at the Primary is at MINIMUM then maybe this is where this Puppy is Happy.
Just my way of thinking. I know it is not conventional EE but I don't care as long as the load on the Secondary is not reflected on the Primary I'm Happy ;D
Luc
PS I'll be out for a while
Quote from: teslaalset on September 30, 2011, 10:38:40 AM
Just a more practical question that bugs me regarding this MOT experiment:
Why is a single LED surviving in this setup up?
I would expect the voltage at the secondary to be a few KVolt if I look at the difference in inductance between primary and secondary impedance.
Probably due to the high resistance of the secondary winding?
Yes I think also the DC resistance (86 Ohm or so in Luc's case) serves also as current limiting 'bias' resistor for the LED.
We can estimate how big the unloaded secondary voltage could be in its unloaded case. Consider when normal input is designed 120V AC rms primary input and about 2000V rms secondary output, the ratio is 16.6 so for a 10V rms input the open voltage should be around 166V.
Then there is a voltage divider created whenever you connect a load to the secondary: the upper member of the divider is the coil DC resistance, 86 Ohm and the lower member of the divider is the load itself, when this is a LED or anti-parallel LEDs their dynamic AC resistance can be under 10 Ohm as you pointed out, so the significant part of the 166V is dissipated in the coil resistance and the rest can go only to the load.
This latter is an answer also to Luc why he did not see any light from the 12V car bulb: simply the divided voltage is not enough to light it. When I suggested to Luc to use low value resistors as loads I forgot to consider the rather high secondary coil resistance in this case.
Perhaps a LED lamp of a few Watts designed for normal 120V AC mains could be used? But the output power from the signal generator is limited to half or 1W or so? (its output impedance surely is 50 Ohm).
Gyula
Quote from: gotoluc on September 30, 2011, 10:04:57 AM
Hi Gyula,
I did this last night. I used a light bulb that the Secondary could not light and the result is the same.
Here is the scope shot with an unlit 12v auto bulb measuring 10 Ohm's as load on Secondary and the next scope shot I moved the Voltage Probe (Yellow) across the bulb.
Luc
Thanks Luc, this confirms the voltage divider is in full action and I answered this to you in my above post.
Hi everyone,
I pickup my Two 60uf AC Capacitors from storage but unfortunately it is not enough to drop the Primary Resonant Frequency down to 60Hz.
Using all the AC Capacitors I now have and connecting them in Parallel I have 165uf.
With this 165uf connected to the primary it will Resonate @115Hz.
The good news is the Transformer still shows the same results.
@115Hz with 10 Ohm Bulb Load on Secondary and 165uf Capacitor on Primary it uses the same amount of current as just the transformer idling @115Hz with no Load on Secondary and no Capacitor on Primary. So this is good.
Also, an extra bonus is @115Hz the Voltage across the 10 Ohm Bulb is now up to 1.90 Volts RMS compared to @250Hz the 10 Ohm Bulb was at 0.62 Volts RMS. Things are looking better as the Frequency is dropping.
I'm just going to need around or over 200uF of AC Capacitance to get this Mot down to the 60Hz range. Then I'll be able to hook this puppy to Grid Power and see what happens ;D
Below are the 115Hz Scope shots: Green is Primary Current and Yellow is Voltage
First Scope Shot: @115Hz with no Load on Secondary and no Capacitor on Primary (transformer idling)
Second Scope Shot: @115Hz with 10 Ohm Bulb Load on Secondary and 165uf Capacitor on Primary
Third Scope Shot: @115Hz with 10 Ohm bulb Load on Secondary and 165uf Capacitor on Primary but with Yellow Probe across Bulb
I will try to find some more AC Capacitors and post the results
Stay tuned
Luc
Hey Luc
Good stuff. ;]
About hooking it up to the grid(wall current)
Have you ever done this? Without the cap its dangerous.
Just checking. ;]
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on September 30, 2011, 09:17:53 PM
Hey Luc
Good stuff. ;]
About hooking it up to the grid(wall current)
Have you ever done this? Without the cap its dangerous.
Just checking. ;]
Mags
Hey Mags,
not to worry :o... once I have it tuned to 60Hz I'll use my Variac and slowly bring her to life ;)
Thanks for your post and concern
Luc
QuoteHi everyone,
The good news is the Transformer still shows the same results.
@115Hz with 10 Ohm Bulb Load on Secondary and 165uf Capacitor on Primary it uses the same amount of current as just the transformer idling @115Hz with no Load on Secondary and no Capacitor on Primary. So this is good.
THIS IS NOT DELAYED LENZ EFFECT - THIS IS SOMETHING ELSE WHICH MAY BE USEFUL BUT AT 4:45 AM I CAN'T COME UP WITH A GOOD NAME :P
QuoteBelow are the 115Hz Scope shots: Green is Primary Current and Yellow is Voltage
First Scope Shot: @115Hz with no Load on Secondary and no Capacitor on Primary (transformer idling)
YOU CAN SEE THAT THE QUALITY OF THIS TRANSFORMER IS NOT VERY GOOD BECAUSE EVEN ON IDLE TO PF IS NOT 0.
QuoteSecond Scope Shot: @115Hz with 10 Ohm Bulb Load on Secondary and 165uf Capacitor on Primary
THIS IS NORMAL TRANSFORMER OPERATION NOW... LOAD PF IS BEING TRANSFERRED BACK TO SECONDARY AND THEN TO PRIMARY. HOWEVER THE PRIMARY IMPEDANCE HAS NOT BEEN LOWERED DUE TO THE CAP SO THE PRIMARY CURRENT DOES NOT INCREASE (APPARENTLY).
QuoteThird Scope Shot: @115Hz with 10 Ohm bulb Load on Secondary and 165uf Capacitor on Primary but with Yellow Probe across Bulb
NOW YOU ARE MEASURING THE PF ACROSS A SHUNT, PF = 1 AND A LIGHT BULB, PF = 1.
YOU REALLY NEED A 4 CHANNEL SCOPE SO YOU CAN SEE EVERYTHING THAT IS GOING ON HERE.
PERHAPS YOU CAN COME OVER TO MY PLACE NEXT WEEK AND WE CAN PUT YOUR SETUP ON MY 4 CHANNEL SCOPE AND YOU CAN HELP ME GET MY MOTOR WORKING? :-\ ALL YOU NEED TO DO IS SAIL UP THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER.
QuoteI will try to find some more AC Capacitors and post the results
Stay tuned
Luc
STAY "TUNED" ACTUALLY MEANS TO KEEP RESONATING (AT THE SAME VIBRATIONAL FREQUENCY)
OR KEEP "RECEIVING" COMMUNICATIONS
AND WE ARE ONLY WILLING TO "ACCEPT" INFORMATION THAT RESONATES WITH US (ACTUALLY THAT WHICH RESONATES WITH OUR SOUL).
THAT IS PROBABLY WHY MOST OF US ARE HERE - WE WOULDN'T BE HERE IF WE COULDN'T
HEAR THE PRIMARY MESSAGE OF WANTING TO CREATE A BETTER WORLD. 8)
SORRY I JUST THOUGHT THAT "STAY TUNED" STATEMENT WAS INTERESTING.
CHEERS
T
Waxing Spiritual and a Bit poetic,?
Mr. T
You are such an interesting man,Inspiring Too..........
Very Inspiring ,You make me wanna grab my swim trunks And swim
Up old Miss [issippi [] Yeah that sounds funny but I'm leaving it anyway]
Chet
@ DreamThinkBuild,
Hi DTB :)
What a great idea, and simple too !
I have another magnet just like that and will attach it, i suppose the rotation will be slightly slower due to extra mass but the flux will be doubled.
Thanks,
Gary.
:(
I tried it and it doesn't have the push, but my PSU only does 18 V @ 2 A so ...
I added a small, ferrite core to the drive coil to get extra push and it helps but still can't get up to the right frequency for the effect to kick in.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 01, 2011, 05:09:32 AM
THIS IS NOT DELAYED LENZ EFFECT - THIS IS SOMETHING ELSE WHICH MAY BE USEFUL BUT AT 4:45 AM I CAN'T COME UP WITH A GOOD NAME :P
YOU CAN SEE THAT THE QUALITY OF THIS TRANSFORMER IS NOT VERY GOOD BECAUSE EVEN ON IDLE TO PF IS NOT 0.
THIS IS NORMAL TRANSFORMER OPERATION NOW... LOAD PF IS BEING TRANSFERRED BACK TO SECONDARY AND THEN TO PRIMARY. HOWEVER THE PRIMARY IMPEDANCE HAS NOT BEEN LOWERED DUE TO THE CAP SO THE PRIMARY CURRENT DOES NOT INCREASE (APPARENTLY).
NOW YOU ARE MEASURING THE PF ACROSS A SHUNT, PF = 1 AND A LIGHT BULB, PF = 1.
YOU REALLY NEED A 4 CHANNEL SCOPE SO YOU CAN SEE EVERYTHING THAT IS GOING ON HERE.
PERHAPS YOU CAN COME OVER TO MY PLACE NEXT WEEK AND WE CAN PUT YOUR SETUP ON MY 4 CHANNEL SCOPE AND YOU CAN HELP ME GET MY MOTOR WORKING? :-\ ALL YOU NEED TO DO IS SAIL UP THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER.
STAY "TUNED" ACTUALLY MEANS TO KEEP RESONATING (AT THE SAME VIBRATIONAL FREQUENCY)
OR KEEP "RECEIVING" COMMUNICATIONS
AND WE ARE ONLY WILLING TO "ACCEPT" INFORMATION THAT RESONATES WITH US (ACTUALLY THAT WHICH RESONATES WITH OUR SOUL).
THAT IS PROBABLY WHY MOST OF US ARE HERE - WE WOULDN'T BE HERE IF WE COULDN'T HEAR THE PRIMARY MESSAGE OF WANTING TO CREATE A BETTER WORLD. 8)
SORRY I JUST THOUGHT THAT "STAY TUNED" STATEMENT WAS INTERESTING.
CHEERS
T
Hi Thane,
thanks for the invitation to use your 4 Channel Scope. I may take you up on your offer to go to your lab but I'll drive there instead ;)
Would also like to see your motor and would be happy to help.
Glad you picked up on the stay tuned ;D
Luc
Hello You All,
Finally I have hooked up a Second Hand MOT (Microwave Oven Transformer)
Directly to my frequency drive controller. To be more precise, it is connected to the frequency drive controller by a 2.2 Ohms resistor, so that I can show the primary amperage going to my primary. And that I am able to show the phase angle between the voltage and the amperage on the primary side of my MOT.
I found that the results obtained are exactly the same as in my previous experiment about the home made transformer with a very high impedance secondary coil.
So this time I only have used normal Off-The-Shelf components. So please see my New Video about the Delayed Lenz effect on:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-j3-x3JJDA4
It looks like my LED Light Bulb (load) on the secondary is running purely on reactive power by now!
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
I think this video is very relevant to this research.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHyPniI1bS0
Fausto.
Quote from: Overunityguide on October 02, 2011, 02:40:25 PM
Hello You All,
Finally I have hooked up a Second Hand MOT (Microwave Oven Transformer)
Directly to my frequency drive controller. To be more precise, it is connected to the frequency drive controller by a 2.2 Ohms resistor, so that I can show the primary amperage going to my primary. And that I am able to show the phase angle between the voltage and the amperage on the primary side of my MOT.
I found that the results obtained are exactly the same as in my previous experiment about the home made transformer with a very high impedance secondary coil.
So this time I only have used normal Off-The-Shelf components. So please see my New Video about the Delayed Lenz effect on:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-j3-x3JJDA4
It looks like my LED Light Bulb (load) on the secondary is running purely on reactive power by now!
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Hmm, if we had another secondary in there, on the other side of the primary, the input should go down even more, but will the combined outputs be more than 1. ;]
Thanks for doing these tests. Im sure everyone agrees this is good stuff.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on October 02, 2011, 04:40:57 PM
... but will the combined outputs be more than 1. ;]
Mags
HELLO MAGS,
I WOULD NOT BE SURPRISED IF OUG IS ALREADY AT OU? :o
MAYBE NOW WE CAN GET HIM A NEW JOB...
CHEERS
T
YouTube Message: Subject Efficiency % Hey Overunityguide,
Really nice job!
Can you measure the power going to your LEDS?
I am assuming the PF is 1 so just Current and Voltage.
Lets say the power is 1.5 Watts for example.
Now assuming your MOT is purely reactive the power dissipated as heat should be primary I^2 x Rdcprimary.
You may be at OU already!?
Now people will say your FDG is part of the circuit but in reality it is not because the FDG can actually be replaced by a conventional generator running at 950 Hz and when combined with your MOT the CONVENTIONAL generator will be isolated from the load so NO armature reaction will take place.
Cheers
Thane
Sent to: overunityguide
PS WITH THIS IN MIND CAN YOU...
CONNECT YOUR GENERATOR TO YOUR MOT AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS AT 200 HZ AND 950 HZ COMING FROM THE GENERATOR INSTEAD OF THE F.D.C. - JUST CURIOUS?WITH THIS SETUP YOU CAN HONESTLY SAY THE
INPUT TO THE TRANSFORMER IS MEASURED RIGHT BEFORE THE PRIMARY AND THE
OUTPUT IS THE POWER THROUGH THE LOAD.
BTW VARY THE LOADS BECAUSE YOU OUGHT TO FIND AN IDEAL LOAD WHICH PROVIDES MAX OUTPUT?
Boss
The Perfect Venue!!
We strap your Crankybut to one of these and you soar into the reccord books?? [2 min 10 sec we can beat that......]
OU Link http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=11446.msg301687#new
From
Nul Points
Maxwell's Daemon ...my drinking buddy
Manned electric helicopter
« on: October 02, 2011, 12:01:00 PM »QuoteOn August 12, electrical/aerospace engineer and helicopter pilot Pascal Chretien took to the air in the world's first untethered, fully electric manned helicopter flight in a prototype machine that he designed and built almost entirely by himself within a 12 month development period. In his 2 minute, 10 second test flight, Chretien beat aviation giant Sikorsky into the record books...
...Chretien was able to achieve an 87.5% energy efficiency between the battery terminals and the rotor shafts...
link-->http://www.elektor.com/news/world-s-first-untethered-manned-electric.1959672.lynkx?utm_source=UK&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news
Vive la France!
...Thane Heins version anyone?
cordialement
np
.................
Think of all the Guiness reccords you'll be breakin!!
VIVA LA EARTH !!!!
Chet
Quote from: Magluvin on October 02, 2011, 04:40:57 PM
Hmm, if we had another secondary in there, on the other side of the primary, the input should go down even more, but will the combined outputs be more than 1. ;]
Thanks for doing these tests. Im sure everyone agrees this is good stuff.
Mags
Adding more secondary coils is more complex as assumed by some.
Those multiple secondaries will also interact amongst each other.
Example: a transformer with one primary and two secondary windings:
Instead of having independant primary-secondary(1) and primary-secondary(2) interactions there will also be secondary(1)-secondary(2) interactions.
I agree that those that share their experiments deserve credits though!
Quote from: gotoluc on October 02, 2011, 12:42:16 AM
Hi Thane,
thanks for the invitation to use your 4 Channel Scope. I may take you up on your offer to go to your lab but I'll drive there instead ;)
Would also like to see your motor and would be happy to help.
Glad you picked up on the stay tuned ;D
Luc
DEAR LUC,
IF YOU CAN HELP ME GED RID OF "SPARKY" THAT WOULD BE GOOD: 8) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaanVJxqyXQ
THE ELECTRONIC RELAY YOU GAVE ME WORKED WELL FOR 5 MINUTES. :P
CHET,
"I want to know God's thoughts; the rest are details." ~ EinsteinIT'S TOO BAD EINSTEIN ISN'T PART OF THIS FORUM BECAUSE THE ANSWER TO THE ABOVE QUESTION IS SIMPLY TO TUNE INTO (RESONATE AT) THE FREQUENCY OF LOVE WHICH IS CRAZY SIMPLE, BUT ALSO CRAZY DIFFICULT... FIRST STEP; GET RID OF EGO (RESISTANCE), SECOND STEP; APPLY ME TO WE. (THIS IS HOW THE BiTT WORKS WHERE THE SECONDARY COILS ARE THEIR "BROTHERS KEEPERS").
INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH THESE ARE THE SAME STEPS REQUIRED TO CREATE AN OVERUNITY DEVICE... WHICH IS ACTUALLY JUST A
MECHANICAL REPRESENTATIONS OF LOVE. IF HUMANITY WANTS TO EVOLVE WE NEED TO LEARN TO INVOLVE LOVE WHICH IS NON-EXPLOITATION AND THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF WHAT WE ARE CURRENTLY DOING WHICH (AS WE ALL KNOW INTUITIVELY) WILL DESTROY US IF WE CONTINUE.
http://www.oneradionetwork.com/new-technologies/thane-heins-inventor-of-the-infinity-generator-just-imagine-no-more-energy-exploitation-september-1-2011/
CHEERS
T
Hi everyone,
this is my last update on using Capacitors on the Primary of the MOT.
I did manage to find another 60uf AC Capacitor and I thought I would be able to drop the Frequency down to 60Hz but it's not the case. It only dropped to 100Hz from the previous 115Hz. So imagine how much more Capacitance would take to drop it another 40Hz
The problem with MOT from Canada and the US (120vac) is the Henry value of the Primary. It's way to small compared from the ones from Europe. Overunityguide's last video shows his MOT Primary at 231mH compared to my highest Henry selected Mot at 76mH.
This is probably why he can get the effect as low as 950Hz without capacitors compared to me at 4,800Hz
So I find it's pointless to continue with these 120vac Primary MOT's. I will need to wind my own Transformer to continue the experiments. This will take some time as I have another job to complete.
I will post in a week or so
Luc
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 03, 2011, 07:27:04 AM
DEAR LUC,
IF YOU CAN HELP ME GED RID OF "SPARKY" THAT WOULD BE GOOD: 8) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaanVJxqyXQ
THE ELECTRONIC RELAY YOU GAVE ME WORKED WELL FOR 5 MINUTES. :P
CHEERS
T
Hi Thane,
won't be able this week. I also would suggest building a miniature version first.
Also, I don't understand what the advantage would be (at this time) to make a Motor Generator in one. I know it's possible to do but why not focus the energy on making more coils to demonstrate a higher Current Output and just use an already working Prime Mover?
Sorry if I don't understand the advantage here.
Luc
Luc
Quote:
So I find it's pointless to continue with these 120vac Primary MOT's. I will need to wind my own Transformer to continue the experiments. This will take some time as I have another job to complete.
----------------
Can not some good Soul from Europe Take pitty on the poor fingers of Luc""
And send him a Mot ??
Please
Chet
Hi Thane,
One thing I found good for spark suppression and switching are pressure switch contacts.
http://www.austsun.com.au/overview-1.html
http://www.catskillhouse.us/blog/well-pump-pressure-switch/
Hi DeepCut,
If you have a small motor and put a rubber wheel on it see if you can try to get the magnets up to speed. It might catch, if not you need more power either amps or by adding flywheel.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 02, 2011, 05:31:42 PM
Hey Overunityguide,
Really nice job!
Can you measure the power going to your LEDS?
I am assuming the PF is 1 so just Current and Voltage.
Lets say the power is 1.5 Watts for example.
Hello Thane,
Thank you, I have measured it, and my LED light bulb runs at about: 0.94 Watts by now.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Hi Luc,
When you started the MOT transformer tests with a neon bulb load across the secondary and no capacitor across the primary, you wrote the transformer primary inductance was about 68mH.
Then you started using parallel caps across the primary and gradually came down from the 4-5kHz no cap test to 2.45kHz (C=0.39uF), then to 578Hz (C=6.8uF), then to 250Hz (C=37.4uF) and now to 115Hz (C=165uF).
By checking these data pairs with the resonance formula the primary inductance of the trafo used for these tests comes out as 10.8 to 11.6mH range, this is rather far from the 68-76mH you seem to be aware of you have primaries.
The tuning cap for 60Hz in case of the 68mH primary coil should be around 103.5uF and in case of a 76mH primary coil it would be around 92.6uF.
IF you have got a 11mH primary only (taking this average value from my above calculations), then the needed tuning cap for 60Hz would be around 639.6uF, a huge value indeed.
So a primary inductance check is in order?
One more thing: why do not you use your 7.5H ferrite core coils for these tests? (just to save you from winding transformer...)
Gyula
Quote from: gotoluc on October 03, 2011, 11:49:41 AM
Hi everyone,
this is my last update on using Capacitors on the Primary of the MOT.
I did manage to find another 60uf AC Capacitor and I thought I would be able to drop the Frequency down to 60Hz but it's not the case. It only dropped to 100Hz from the previous 115Hz. So imagine how much more Capacitance would take to drop it another 40Hz
The problem with MOT from Canada and the US (120vac) is the Henry value of the Primary. It's way to small compared from the ones from Europe. Overunityguide's last video shows his MOT Primary at 231mH compared to my highest Henry selected Mot at 76mH.
This is probably why he can get the effect as low as 950Hz without capacitors compared to me at 4,800Hz
So I find it's pointless to continue with these 120vac Primary MOT's. I will need to wind my own Transformer to continue the experiments. This will take some time as I have another job to complete.
I will post in a week or so
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on October 03, 2011, 11:49:41 AM
Hi everyone,
this is my last update on using Capacitors on the Primary of the MOT.
I did manage to find another 60uf AC Capacitor and I thought I would be able to drop the Frequency down to 60Hz but it's not the case. It only dropped to 100Hz from the previous 115Hz. So imagine how much more Capacitance would take to drop it another 40Hz
The problem with MOT from Canada and the US (120vac) is the Henry value of the Primary. It's way to small compared from the ones from Europe. Overunityguide's last video shows his MOT Primary at 231mH compared to my highest Henry selected Mot at 76mH.
This is probably why he can get the effect as low as 950Hz without capacitors compared to me at 4,800Hz
So I find it's pointless to continue with these 120vac Primary MOT's. I will need to wind my own Transformer to continue the experiments. This will take some time as I have another job to complete.
I will post in a week or so
Luc
Hi Luc, I still don't see why you would run your MOT at 50/60Hz. I say this because: the thing which is really important to get a proper Lenz Delay, is a very high impedance coil in combination with a higher frequency. So in your case, I don't see a problem in your low inductance primary coil at all. It is the secondary coil on your MOT which is important. Please see my video about: How to Calculate the Delayed Lenz effect. On my Youtube Channel. Than I think you will understand what I mean...
But for now, I don't want to discourage you.
So please keep up the good work, and with Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Quote from: Overunityguide on October 03, 2011, 05:29:22 PM
Hello Thane,
LED light bulb runs at about: 0.94 Watts by now.
DEAR OUG, PLEASE FILL IN THE
?'s BELOW...
OUTPUT = 0.94 WATTS
INPUT = [(INPUT AMPS) x2] x PRIMARY DC RESISTANCE =
? EFFICIENCY = OUTPUT / INPUT x100 =
?NOW IF YOU CHECK THE EFFICIENCY OF YOUR MOT AT 50 HZ, I BET IT WILL BE ABOUT 60 - 70% EFFICIENCY.
YOUR PROCESS CREATES A MOT WHICH IS
?% EFFICIENT...
AND THIS REPRESENTS
? % EFFICIENCY INCREASE JUST BY INCREASING THE FREQUENCY...!
THIS GUY HAS A SIMPLE FREQUENCY GENERATOR http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpH0FQTXgX8
MY POINT IS THIS; IF YOUR EFFICIENCY INCREASE PERCENTAGE JUSTIFIES THE ADDED EXPENSE OF ADDING A SIMPLE FREQUENCY MULTIPLIER THEN YOU HAVE A COMMERCIALLY VIABLE PRODUCT WHICH CAN BE ADDED TO MICROWAVE OVENS, MICROWAVE TRANSMITTERS, LIGHTS AND ON AND ON TO REDUCE POWER CONSUMPTION. 10% WOULD BE HUGE! ;) DO YOU GET IT DUDE? IF THIS IS TRUE PDI's LICENSING COMPANY WILL COMMERCIALIZE IT ON YOUR BEHALF AND PAY YOU FOR IT SO YOU CAN GET A NEW DAY JOB.
IF YOU CAN GET A CHEAP CHINESE MADE MOT TO INCREASE ITS EFFICIENCY BY 10 - 20% AND THIS CAN BE APPLIED TO EVERY CONVENTIONAL TRANSFORMER IN THE WORLD - LIKE RIGHT NOW -THEN WATCH OUT! 8)
NOW PLEASE GO BACK AND ANSWER THE QUESTIONS ABOVE SO WE CAN DO A PROPER EVALUATION.
THANKS
Thane
Quote from: gyulasun on October 03, 2011, 05:37:18 PM
Hi Luc,
When you started the MOT transformer tests with a neon bulb load across the secondary and no capacitor across the primary, you wrote the transformer primary inductance was about 68mH.
Then you started using parallel caps across the primary and gradually came down from the 4-5kHz no cap test to 2.45kHz (C=0.39uF), then to 578Hz (C=6.8uF), then to 250Hz (C=37.4uF) and now to 115Hz (C=165uF).
By checking these data pairs with the resonance formula the primary inductance of the trafo used for these tests comes out as 10.8 to 11.6mH range, this is rather far from the 68-76mH you seem to be aware of you have primaries.
The tuning cap for 60Hz in case of the 68mH primary coil should be around 103.5uF and in case of a 76mH primary coil it would be around 92.6uF.
IF you have got a 11mH primary only (taking this average value from my above calculations), then the needed tuning cap for 60Hz would be around 639.6uF, a huge value indeed.
So a primary inductance check is in order?
One more thing: why do not you use your 7.5H ferrite core coils for these tests? (just to save you from winding transformer...)
Gyula
Hi Gyula,
thanks for looking over my test data.
I bought my Inductance meter over 2 years ago on eBay from China. I was cheap $18. (delivered). The selector dial doesn't always have a consistent contact so the readings vary a little. I rechecked it many times and it does seem to be in the 75mH range and I'm quite positive it would not be as low as 10mH range.
Looks like we have something going on in the MOT that a normal LCR Calculator is not able to accurately calculate. My Total Capacitance is 213uF and I can only get down to 100Hz.
It blew me away :o when I added a 60uF Cap and it only dropped by 15Hz.
My data is accurate enough that there cannot be such a difference. Maybe one day we will understand why this is ???
When I said I would have to wind a transformer I meant using the Ferrite Toroid with the 7.5H coil already on it. I guess I'll just wind the Primary over top of the 7.5H coil.
The bonus with a Ferrite would be that it would be more Efficient at higher Frequencies then the Steel Laminations of a MOT.
Please let me know what you think of this.
Thanks for your time
Luc
Quote from: Overunityguide on October 03, 2011, 05:47:21 PM
Hi Luc, I still don't see why you would run your MOT at 50/60Hz. I say this because: the thing which is really important to get a proper Lenz Delay, is a very high impedance coil in combination with a higher frequency. So in your case, I don't see a problem in your low inductance primary coil at all. It is the secondary coil on your MOT which is important. Please see my video about: How to Calculate the Delayed Lenz effect. On my Youtube Channel. Than I think you will understand what I mean...
But for now, I don't want to discourage you.
So please keep up the good work, and with Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Hi Overunityguide,
correct me if I'm wrong but if you had a low 76mH Primary MOT you would not see this possible Lenz Delay Effect by using your low 950Hz Frequency limit since you could not see the effect until you reached 4,800Hz. So how can you say you don't see a problem?
You should also know that a Steel Lamination Transformer do not operate efficiently at such high Frequencies. So again, how could you say you don't see a problem?
The reason I would like to get this effect using 60Hz Grid Power is I would be able to observe the effect of increased voltage delivered to the Primary and how it effect the Transformer.
Don't you think eliminating your power hog Frequency Controller and connecting to Grid with clean Sine Waves on your Scope would make a more convincing presentation?
Maybe it's just me but I'm not convinced yet of this effect with the information presented. How does everyone else feel?
Yes, I already seen your video "How to Calculate the Delayed Lenz effect"
Thanks for sharing
Luc
It makes sense to want it to operate at 60hz, or 50hz. ;]
I the case of redesigning a new transformer with additional circuitry, just add a cap to the primary of an existing transformer in the MW.
So I guess we will find out if it just uses less input to run a MW, or if we have to tone it down a bit due to too much output.
You have been around a while Luc. Your doin the right thing(s). ;]
Mags
Quote from: gotoluc on October 03, 2011, 07:44:51 PM
Hi Overunityguide,
correct me if I'm wrong but if you had a low 76mH Primary MOT you would not see this possible Lenz Delay Effect by using your low 950Hz Frequency limit since you could not see the effect until you reached 4,800Hz. So how can you say you don't see a problem?
Hello Luc,
Why do you keep going on about your inductance value at your primary coil? In my opinion this value really don't matters. So saying that you need at last 4800 Hz based on your primary inductance value doesn't make sense to me at all. What is your secondary inductance value? Because this is the value what you need to do your calculations on... The primary coil is on case of the MOT only a secondary exciter... ;)
And of course I agree with you that less components would be better, read eliminating my frequency drive controller. But personally I don't think that the delay is big enough at the low grid frequencies... Because otherwise each microwave oven company should be power factor correcting there primary coils of their MOT transformers..
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 03, 2011, 06:09:16 PM
DEAR OUG, PLEASE FILL IN THE ?'s
THANKS
Thane
Hello Thane,
By now I unfortunately can't answer your questions, because I am on a business trip right now, so I can only do some remote commenting on my mobile device... I will get back on this next saturday.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
OUG, Thane,
Can I propose the following measurement procedure to get precise figures on Power Factor and COP:
Attached power vectors include VAR and Watt measurement.
If I am not mistaken, the power meter of OUG should be able to measure VARs as well.
It's important to include VAR measurements to understand the overall picture.
Six situations, depicted in the first graph:
1) Controller only, high frequency (A)
2) Controller only, low frequency (B)
3) MOT connected to controller, no load, low frequency (C)
4) MOT connnected to controller, no load, high frequency (E)
5) MOT connnected to controller, load, low frequency (D)
6) MOT connnected to controller, load, high frequency (F)
A and B are measurements to check the controller power without the MOT connected, B at low frequency, A at high frequency
(I suppose they have different values)
C and D are measurements at low frequency only, C is to check no load power, D is to check power including load
E and F are measurements at high frequency only, E is to check no load power, F is to check power including load
Most important values to understand correctly are E and F.
As you can see in the below depicted example, first picture, F has a lower Watt value as E, due to the reduced Lenz impact, while with C and D no decrease of the Watt value can be observed.
The second illustration indicates possible scenarios for the PF of the MOT at the high frequency situation. F1, F2 and F3 indicate power under load in this example.
(PF < 0 is very unlikely to happen, but necessary for MOT COP > 1)
Just to make everyone aware who watched Overunityguide's Youtube videos sofar:
In none of his measured situations PF < 0 happened, so no COP>1 !!
Nevertheless, great series of demo's.
Quote from: Overunityguide on October 04, 2011, 03:01:14 AM
Hello Thane,
I will get back on this next saturday.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
DEAR OUG,
IT WOULD BE GOOD TO HAVE THOSE ANSWERS BECAUSE WE HAVE 3000 CONNECTIONS ON LINKEDIN AND ABOUT A THIRD OF THOSE ARE TRANSFORMER COMPANIES. ANOTHER THIRD ARE GENERATOR COMPANIES AND MANY WIND GENERATOR ENGINEERS AS WELL.
MY POINT AGAIN: IF WE TAKE A CONVENTIONAL WIND GENERATOR DESIGN OPERATING AT 950 HZ AND WE CAN STEP UP THE VOLTAGE TO THE GRID WITH A "
OUG DELAYED LENZ TRANSFORMER"
AND THEN ANOTHER "
OUG STEP DOWN TRANSFORMER" AT THE POINT OF USE IE THE CONSUMER'S RESIDENCE - THEN WE HAVE A;
COMPLETELY REACTION FREE ELECTRICITY DELIVERY PARADIGM WHERE ONE WIND GENERATOR CAN SUPPLY MANY MORE HOUSES WHICH ARE ALL ONLY
BORROWING REACTIVE POWER.
OUG, YOU NEED TO CHECK IF YOUR TRANSFORMER WORKS IN REVERSE AS A STEP DOWN TRANSFORMER ONCE YOU GET BACK FROM YOUR BUSINESS TRIP... :P
EVEN IF IT DOESN'T (STEP DOWN) IT IS STILL POTENTIALLY A VERY VIABLE COMMERCIAL PRODUCT - WHEN YOU CONSIDER THAT A COMMERCIAL WIND TURBINE PLACES ITS TRANSFORMER IN A SEALED FIRE PROOF ROOM WITH AIR CONDITIONING AND FIRE SUPRESSION EQUIPMENT AT GREAT EXPENSE ALL BECAUSE OF SECONDARY INDUCED BEMF INCREASING THE PRIMARY CURRENT AND HEATING UP AND EVENTUALLY BURNING UP THE VERY EXPENSIVE TRANSFORMER PRIMARY. :(
CHEERS
Thane
Saturday!??
So what are we supposed to do till saturday??
Anybody have some "Cards"?
Maybe we could Play Pee Knuckle ??
Do we even work on Saturday??
Chet
Quote from: gyulasun on October 03, 2011, 05:37:18 PM
Hi Luc,
When you started the MOT transformer tests with a neon bulb load across the secondary and no capacitor across the primary, you wrote the transformer primary inductance was about 68mH.
Then you started using parallel caps across the primary and gradually came down from the 4-5kHz no cap test to 2.45kHz (C=0.39uF), then to 578Hz (C=6.8uF), then to 250Hz (C=37.4uF) and now to 115Hz (C=165uF).
By checking these data pairs with the resonance formula the primary inductance of the trafo used for these tests comes out as 10.8 to 11.6mH range, this is rather far from the 68-76mH you seem to be aware of you have primaries.
The tuning cap for 60Hz in case of the 68mH primary coil should be around 103.5uF and in case of a 76mH primary coil it would be around 92.6uF.
IF you have got a 11mH primary only (taking this average value from my above calculations), then the needed tuning cap for 60Hz would be around 639.6uF, a huge value indeed.
So a primary inductance check is in order?
One more thing: why do not you use your 7.5H ferrite core coils for these tests? (just to save you from winding transformer...)
Gyula
Hi Gyula and anyone interested
I found out why your Resonance Calculations are not working out with the Primary Inductance I gave.
Your Calculations are Correct
if you
don't have the MOT Secondary under Load. However, as soon as the Secondary is under Load it shifts the Resonating Frequency to a much higher Frequency.
All my prior tests were done with the Secondary under load so this is why we have a difference.
I made a video Demo just for you so you can see what happens. I also attached the Scope shots below.
Link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJcojjksVeU
In all Scope shots Current is Green and Voltage is Yellow
Fist Scope Shot is MOT Primary @46Hz with Secondary Open and No Cap on Primary
Second Scope Shot is MOT Primary @46Hz with Secondary Open and 60uf Cap on Primary
Third Scope Shot is MOT Primary @46Hz with Secondary Shorted and 60uf Cap on Primary
Forth Scope Shot is MOT Primary @195Hz with Secondary Open and No Cap on Primary
Fith Scope Shot is MOT Primary @195Hz with Secondary Open and 60uf Cap on Primary
Sixth Scope Shot is MOT Primary @195Hz with Secondary Shorted and 60uf Cap on Primary
Hope you now understand what is happening. I would also like to know what you think or know is happening. Could this have anything to do with OUG Lenz Delay effect?
Thank you for your time and please feel free to ask me any other experiments you would like me to do.
Also, last nigh I wound a Primary over top of the 7.5H Toroid coil. The New Primary has a 135mH Inductance. I tested it and found nothing unusual form 1Hz to 2MHz. All was Normal Transformer action. So there is something quite different in the MOT that could be caused by the Iron core or the High Impedance Secondary.
Luc
.
Quote from: teslaalset on October 04, 2011, 06:17:35 AM
OUG, Thane,
In none of his measured situations PF < 0 happened, so no COP>1 !!
Nevertheless, great series of demo's.
I DON'T THINK IT WAS OUG's INTENTION TO SHOW OVERNUDITY.
I THINK HIS INTENTION WAS ONLY TO SHOW A REDUCTION IN INPUT ON LOAD.
IF YOU TURNED ON YOUR MICROWAVE OVEN TO COOK YOUR DINNER AND YOUR METER SLOWED DOWN IT WOULD BE A GOOD THING, NO?
AND I DON'T THINK OUG's VIDEOS ARE THAT GREAT ANYWAY >:(
NO DRUGS, NO VIOLENCE, AND NO NUDITY OR S.E.X OF ANY KIND!
MIGHT AS WELL BE THE FREAKIN CHURCH CHANNEL ;).
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 04, 2011, 03:28:02 PM
I DON'T THINK IT WAS OUG's INTENTION TO SHOW OVERNUDITY.
I THINK HIS INTENTION WAS ONLY TO SHOW A REDUCTION IN INPUT ON LOAD.
IF YOU TURNED ON YOUR MICROWAVE OVEN TO COOK YOUR DINNER AND YOUR METER SLOWED DOWN IT WOULD BE A GOOD THING, NO?
Indeed I'm a big fan of slow food.
Let's see what happens when a capacity is added to the primary.
Some say it will make a potential difference ;)
Hi Luc,
So far I forgot to think of the effect of a shorted coil in case of these transformer tests you have been doing. Normally a shorted coil or heavily loaded coil reduces all the other coils self inductances on the transformer because of the counter-flux (Lenz law).
You can test this with your L meter connected to say the primary and short the MOT secondary, you may have to see the primary 76-80mH normal inductance value drops to the 10-12mH range (if you indeed measured 76-80mH when the secondary was an open circuit).
A "problem" still seems manifesting in case of the second scope picture you uploaded whereby the f=46.3Hz, 60uF is in parallel with the primary and the secondary is unsorted. In this case the LC resonance calculation gives 196.9mH primary inductance: why did it "increase" so much wrt the 76-80mH? There was no shorted coil then.
Thanks for your nice video.
Gyula
HHHMMmmmmm
Yah Know I been meanin to go to church a bit More.......
I have such Fond Mamories ....
I see they changed the dress code?
Chet
Quote from: gyulasun on October 04, 2011, 05:08:13 PM
Hi Luc,
So far I forgot to think of the effect of a shorted coil in case of these transformer tests you have been doing. Normally a shorted coil or heavily loaded coil reduces all the other coils self inductances on the transformer because of the counter-flux (Lenz law).
You can test this with your L meter connected to say the primary and short the MOT secondary, you may have to see the primary 76-80mH normal inductance value drops to the 10-12mH range (if you indeed measured 76-80mH when the secondary was an open circuit).
A "problem" still seems manifesting in case of the second scope picture you uploaded whereby the f=46.3Hz, 60uF is in parallel with the primary and the secondary is unsorted. In this case the LC resonance calculation gives 196.9mH primary inductance: why did it "increase" so much wrt the 76-80mH? There was no shorted coil then.
Thanks for your nice video.
Gyula
Thanks for the reply Gyula
I hooked up my variable ;D Inductance meter to the Primary and tonight it reads 70mH.
Then I connect the 60uf Cap and it reads (minus) -26mH.
Then I short the Secondary coil and it reads 17.2mH.
Then I remove the Cap and it reads 11mH
So now it is clear why the Capacitance needed to be so high.
Quote from: gyulasun on October 04, 2011, 05:08:13 PM
Normally a shorted coil or heavily loaded coil reduces all the other coils self inductances on the transformer because of the counter-flux (Lenz law).
Gyula
So if this is Lenz Law happening then where is the Delayed Lenz Effect Overunityguide is talking about?
Also Gyula, would you know why Overunityguide does not see any reason a higher Primary Inductance value would not be any better?... I just can't get my mind around that one.
Thanks for your time
Luc
Quote from: gyulasun on October 04, 2011, 05:08:13 PM
Hi Luc,
So far I forgot to think of the effect of a shorted coil in case of these transformer tests you have been doing. Normally a shorted coil or heavily loaded coil reduces all the other coils self inductances on the transformer because of the counter-flux (Lenz law).
You can test this with your L meter connected to say the primary and short the MOT secondary, you may have to see the primary 76-80mH normal inductance value drops to the 10-12mH range (if you indeed measured 76-80mH when the secondary was an open circuit).
A "problem" still seems manifesting in case of the second scope picture you uploaded whereby the f=46.3Hz, 60uF is in parallel with the primary and the secondary is unsorted. In this case the LC resonance calculation gives 196.9mH primary inductance: why did it "increase" so much wrt the 76-80mH? There was no shorted coil then.
Thanks for your nice video.
Gyula
effect of a short circuit on the secondary:
http://www.cliftonlaboratories.com/ferrite_transformers.htm
Quote from: gotoluc on October 04, 2011, 11:01:03 PM
So if this is Lenz Law happening then where is the Delayed Lenz Effect Overunityguide is talking about?
Also Gyula, would you know why Overunityguide does not see any reason a higher Primary Inductance value would not be any better?... I just can't get my mind around that
@Luc,
Please lets do some calculation on the MOT experiment. In my calculation of the Lenz Delay video, you can see that we can use L/R.
So in the MOT experiment let assume that we are using: 25H as a secondary coil, with an internal reassurance of 300 Ohms. And that we are using 200 Ohms as a load connected to the secondary coil.
This would give us a delay of: L/R = 25/(300+200) = 50 mSec.
To develop a back EMF of around: 63%
If we are using 950Hz in this case, than one period will take you:
1/F = 1/950 = around: 1mSec.
So when you compare the 50 mSec with the 1 mSec, than you can see where the Lenz Delay is coming from...
And further, the secondary MOT transformer coil also has internal capacitance. So this internal capacitance in combination with the secondary induction will create resonance inside the secondary coil.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Quote from: Overunityguide on October 05, 2011, 03:34:25 AM
And further, the secondary MOT transformer coil also has internal capacitance. So this internal capacitance in combination with the secondary induction will create resonance inside the secondary coil.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
DEAR OUG,
I HAVE ANOTHER JOB FOR YOU FOR WHEN YOU GET BACK FROM YOUR BUSINESS TRIP THIS SATURDAY. :-*
MAKE A BI-FILAR SERIES CONNECTED SECONDARY COIL FOR YOUR ORIGINAL LENZ DELAY TRANSFORMER SO YOU CAN SHOW HOW THE BI-FILAR WOUND COIL DIFFERS FROM THE HIGH IMPEDANCE SINGLE WIRE WOUND COIL.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: gotoluc on October 04, 2011, 11:01:03 PM
...
I hooked up my variable ;D Inductance meter to the Primary and tonight it reads 70mH.
Then I connect the 60uf Cap and it reads (minus) -26mH.
Then I short the Secondary coil and it reads 17.2mH.
Then I remove the Cap and it reads 11mH
So now it is clear why the Capacitance needed to be so high.
Hi Luc, thanks for this test, this then explains the difference between my calculations and your measurements.
QuoteSo if this is Lenz Law happening then where is the Delayed Lenz Effect Overunityguide is talking about?
Please ask him to explain it and also that how could it be utilized in practice for instance in case of a microwave oven transformer. I know he showed the LED lamp test in the video but a much higher power load would be much better to test. I think the crucial point is how such a setup is connected to the mains: via what means? so that the power factor should stay near zero to consume reactive power...
Here is an interesting animation to show resistive and reactive power in an AC circuit where you can choose between R, L, C and series RL or series RC components as the loads and see that when (in case of reactive components) they return power towards the mains:
http://www.circuit-magic.com/acpower.htm
Quote from the link:
"... as the current through an inductor increases from its zero value to its maximum value the field around the inductor builds up to a maximum, and when the current decreases from maximum to zero the field collapses and returns the power to the source. You can see therefore that no power is used up in either case, since the power alternately flows to and from the source."
QuoteAlso Gyula, would you know why Overunityguide does not see any reason a higher Primary Inductance value would not be any better?... I just can't get my mind around that one.
Probably he considers using much higher operational frequency for a transformer than 50 or 60 Hz mains frequency and if this is so then a lower inductance primary poses much less drawback in this respect.
Gyula
Geeezz ,
Poor OUG ,He's like Cindefellah!
Work ,work,Work...........
------------
@Boss
I think we can get you in the movies!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OibqdwHyZxk
You could play one of the good guys 8) <- {Good Guy]
Chet
Quote from: wings on October 05, 2011, 02:14:00 AM
effect of a short circuit on the secondary:
http://www.cliftonlaboratories.com/ferrite_transformers.htm
Hi wings,
thanks, very good link.
qoute from the link:
"Considering our simple transformer model, the effect of a short circuit on the secondary is illustrated below. The short circuit effectively removes the distributed capacitance, the core loss and the primary inductance from the model, leaving only the series resistance and the leakage inductance."
Gyula
Quote from: Overunityguide on October 05, 2011, 03:34:25 AM
@Luc,
Please lets do some calculation on the MOT experiment. In my calculation of the Lenz Delay video, you can see that we can use L/R.
So in the MOT experiment let assume that we are using: 25H as a secondary coil, with an internal reassurance of 300 Ohms. And that we are using 200 Ohms as a load connected to the secondary coil.
This would give us a delay of: L/R = 25/(300+200) = 50 mSec.
To develop a back EMF of around: 63%
If we are using 950Hz in this case, than one period will take you:
1/F = 1/950 = around: 1mSec.
So when you compare the 50 mSec with the 1 mSec, than you can see where the Lenz Delay is coming from...
And further, the secondary MOT transformer coil also has internal capacitance. So this internal capacitance in combination with the secondary induction will create resonance inside the secondary coil.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Thanks Overunityguide for this explanation.
Looking at it from just this angle I can now understand why you have no concern for the Primary Inductance.
I will look into it some more
Luc
Correction on my previous post:
In my previous post I wrote: internal assurance of 300 Ohms.
Of course this has to be internal resistance of 300 Ohms.
I am sorry about this, but it has to do something with my stupid auto complete function build into my mobile...
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Oh and Luc, I am glade that now you know what I am talking about...
Hi everyone
i'm just lurking around here and read all previous posts. i know it all depends on the impedance of the secondary and the frequency. so what is the best capacitor value that give the best COP?
i'm building one too.
ffdxshow
Hi everyone,
I can now confirm Overunityguide's Delayed Lenz Effect using my H-Bridge AC Circuit which outputs Square Wave AC from what ever DC Voltage I wish. The best part of using a DC source is I can accurately measure the current consumed using my special meter I built for pulse circuits.
Prior when I was using only the output of the Signal Generator and measuring the Current through a Shunt Resistor connected to my Scope I was not getting real current readings at the right Frequency.
With my new setup I can now see the real current and also now see the Lenz Delay is actually starting around 1,000Hz just like Overunityguide. No capacitors needed.
See the new video demo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNihEux8S1M
Luc
Hi Luc,
Wonderful video.
Would it be too much trouble to ask to see the scope when the load is applied?
Thanks, Garry
Quote from: gotoluc on October 06, 2011, 02:04:45 AM
Hi everyone,
I can now confirm Overunityguide's Delayed Lenz Effect using my H-Bridge AC Circuit which outputs Square Wave AC from what ever DC Voltage I wish. The best part of using a DC source is I can accurately measure the current consumed using my special meter I built for pulse circuits.
Luc
REALLY NICE VIDEO LUC,
YOU CERTAINLY HAVE CONQUERED THAT "ELECTRONICS DEMON" ;)
I NOTICED THAT IN THE VIDEO YOU SAY THAT,
"THE PRIMARY CURRENT DOES NOT CHANGE" WHEN IT LOOKS LIKE IT
ACTUALLY DROPS BY 0.2 mA FROM NO-LOAD TO ON-LOAD? 8)
AM I CORRECT IN WHAT I AM OBSERVING?
I DON'T THINK A CURRENT
DROP SHOULD BE UNDERESTIMATED SINCE IT MEANS THAT:
THE SECONDARY DELAYED BEMF FLUX IS ACTUALLY INCREASING THE PRIMARY IMPEDANCE CAUSING THE CURRENT TO DROP (REDUCING PRIMARY HEAT AND LOSSES WHILE INCREASING EFFICIENCY WHICH WOULD BE A REALLY HUGE BOOST FOR WIND TURBINE COMPANIES - ARE YOU LISTENING VESTAS, PHILLIPS, GE?). PERHAPS IT IS TIME TO PLACE YOUR SETUP ON A 4 CHANNEL SCOPE? JUST LET ME KNOW...?
CONVENTIONAL TRANSFORMER SECONDARY INDUCED BEMF CAUSE THE PRIMARY IMPEDANCE TO DROP WHICH ALLOWS MORE CURRENT TO FLOW INTO THE PRIMARY WHILE ALSO CHANGING THE POWER FACTOR TO MIRROR THE LOAD -
WHAT IS YOUR PF ON-LOAD BTW?IT ALSO MEANS TO ME THAT THE SECONDARY INDUCED BEMF FLUX IS RETURNING TO THE PRIMARY ON THE FALLING EDGE OF THE PRIMARY SINE WAVE RATHER THAN THE LEADING EDGE WHICH OUGHT TO BE EXAMINED MORE CLOSELY.
"WE HAVE COME A LONG WAY BABY" SINCE OUR DAYS AT OTTAWA U (OU) WHEN WE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE HELL WAS GOING ON MOST OF THE TIME. ??? http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins?feature=mhee#p/u/49/WP7zmk1t2gI
CHEERS
T
Subject: Would You Like to Witness and Participate in REAL OPEN WORLDWIDE ENERGY RESEARCH?"We can't set up independent scientific juries every time a company or individual comes forward and makes a extraordinary claim about a technology that can benefit the world." ~ Tyler Hamiltom, MAD LIKE TESLA Author, University of Toronto Ajunct Professor, and former Toronto Star Energy Reporter
Actually we CAN and we ARE and EVERYONE is invited to attend. http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=11350.msg301879#new
If you want to see generators which ACCELERATE ON-LOAD or transformers which supply power to a load with a REDUCTION IN POWER CONSUMPTION it is all here and you can join in (teach and learn) while maintaining your anonymity.
GENERATOR WHICH ACCELERATES ON-LOAD AND USES LESS POWER
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzxc3Ai4T3A
TRANSFORMER WHICH USES LESS POWER ON-LOAD
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kluw71YC5p4
"You think I'm an arrogant [expletive] who thinks he's above the law, and I think you're a slime bucket [journalist] who gets most of his facts wrong." ~ Steve Jobs
Regards
Thane
CC
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: "thaneh@potentialdifference.ca" <thaneh@potentialdifference.ca>
To: Tyler Hamilton <mcmurchie@gmail.com>; tyler@cleanbreak.ca; jackiesyrett@rogers.com
Cc: Bill Moore <editor@evworld.com>; Mike Brace <techeditor@evworld.com>; Jérôme_DANGMANN <jerome.mog@free.fr>; andres francisco moreno yuste <vehiculosverdes@googlemail.com>; Jay Iyengar <jd43@chrysler.com>; marc.boismenu@gm.com; phil.petsinis@gm.com; "Hearsch,Dan" <Dan.Hearsch@ricardo.com>; "Bailo,Carla (NTCNA)" <BailoC@NRD.NISSAN-USA.COM>; 都留 å...¸å <n-tsuru@tbk.t-com.ne.jp>; "LEONDIS,GEORGE" <george_leondis@mail.nissan.co.jp>; Tom Prucha <Tom.Prucha@proteanelectric.com>; Roger Atkins <sidatkins@hotmail.com>; Sasha Serkh <AS7571@gates.com>; Gary Gloceri <ganue@comcast.net>; Jay Giraud <jay@rapidelectricvehicles.com>; Al Cormier <al.cormier@emc-mec.ca>; Mike Elwood <melwood@azuredynamics.com>; shrikar dole <shrikardole@yahoo.com>; Thane Heins <thane_heins@yahoo.ca>; Tyler Hamilton <mcmurchie@gmail.com>; RICHARD SYRETT <jackiesyrett@rogers.com>; james@jperrykelly.com; Bill Moore <editor@evworld.com>; Mike Brace <techeditor@evworld.com>; John Lake <cfo@greentv.com>; mbennett@ultrasystems.com; Mike Collier <lithiumstorage@gmail.com>; Barsilos <barsilos@aol.com>; Babcat Babcat Babcat the Babcat <babcat5@hotmail.com>; Seanna Watson <seanna.watson@gmail.com>; James Kirtley <kirtley@MIT.EDU>; Walter Lewin <lewin@space.mit.edu>; Wolfgang Ketterle <ketterle@MIT.EDU>; Markus Zahn <zahn@mit.edu>; ehsani@ece.tamu.edu; alireza.bakhshai@queensu.ca; Brian.Fleck@ualberta.ca; pfrise@uwindsor.ca; David Mann <david.m5561@gmail.com>; J. Shin <jshin@alcor.concordia.ca>; M. Ehsani <ehsani@mail.ece.tamu.edu>; Theodore Gray <theodore@wolfram.com>; Eric Poisson <epoisson@uoguelph.ca>; James Eberhardt <James.Eberhardt@ee.doe.gov>; Anna Jaffe <ajaffe@mit.edu>; Mitchell Olszewski <olszewskim@ornl.gov>; jackiesyrett@rogers.com; Kyle White <Kyle.White@calgary.ca>; rhabash@site.uottawa.ca; dean@eng.uottawa.ca; Emil M.Petriu <petriu@site.uottawa.ca>; ted.sargent@utoronto.ca; Catherine Shearer-Kudel <cshearerkudel@ocepp.ca>; Josie Rubino <jrubino@ocepp.ca>; Steven Novella <stevennovella@comcast.net>; GiovanniFusina <Giovanni.Fusina@drdc-rddc.gc.ca>; EloisYaxley <elois@newdata.ca>; steven.novella@yale.edu; Robert Clark <ace@vescell.com>; Jérôme_DANGMANN <jerome.mog@free.fr>; Sterling Allan <sterlingda@pureenergysystems.com>; Patrick Timpone <patrick@1radionetwork.com>; JoanneSchnurr <jschnurr@ctv.ca>; pbrent@ctv.ca
Subject: WOLDWIDE COLLABORATIVE ENERGY RESEARCH INVITATION
"We can't set up independent scientific juries every time a company or individual comes forward and makes a extraordinary claim about a technology that can benefit the world." ~ Tyler Hamiltom
Actually we CAN and we ARE and EVERYONE is invited to attend and collaborate. http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=11350.msg301879#new
If you want to see generators which ACCELERATE ON-LOAD or transformers which supply power to a load with a REDUCTION IN POWER CONSUMPTION it is all here and you can join in (teach and learn) while maintaining your anonymity.
GENERATOR WHICH ACCELERATES ON-LOAD AND USES LESS POWER
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzxc3Ai4T3A
TRANSFORMER WHICH USES LESS POWER ON-LOAD
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kluw71YC5p4
"You think I'm an arrogant [expletive] who thinks he's above the law, and I think you're a slime bucket [journalist] who gets most of his facts wrong." ~ Steve Jobs
Kind Regards
Thane
To: Tyler Hamilton <mcmurchie@gmail.com>; tyler@cleanbreak.ca; jackiesyrett@rogers.com
Cc: editor@thevarsity.ca; scott.anderson@utoronto.ca; stacey.gibson@utoronto.ca; city@thestar.ca; tepeditors@thestar.ca; wheels@thestar.ca; haigscience@gmail.com; haigscience@hotmail.com; nwild@umich.edu; contact_us@solarenspace.com; ecelkis@umich.edu; michaelb@umich.edu; paul@saffo.com; ffish@wcupa.edu; robmac@yorku.ca; jackel@yorku.ca; lehn@ecf.utoronto.ca; edbeards@ufto.com; chair@physics.utoronto.ca
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 06, 2011, 07:35:55 AM
I NOTICED THAT IN THE VIDEO YOU SAY THAT, "THE PRIMARY CURRENT DOES NOT CHANGE"
WHEN IT LOOKS LIKE IT ACTUALLY DROPS BY 0.2 mA FROM NO-LOAD TO ON-LOAD? 8)
AM I CORRECT IN WHAT I AM OBSERVING?
I DON'T THINK A CURRENT DROP SHOULD BE UNDERESTIMATED SINCE IT MEANS THAT:
THE SECONDARY DELAYED BEMF FLUX IS ACTUALLY INCREASING THE PRIMARY IMPEDANCE CAUSING THE CURRENT TO DROP (REDUCING PRIMARY HEAT AND LOSSES WHILE INCREASING EFFICIENCY
Hi Thane,
Yes you are correct ... it's dropping!
It can be controlled by the AC Frequency sent to the Primary. A higher Frequency will Increase the Primary Impedance even more but it will also start Lowering the Secondary's Current Output Efficiency. So I tuned to have closest to a zero effect on the Primary so the Secondary can stays efficient.
As you know the Delayed Lenz Effect is best when the Secondary has most load (short circuit). Then the Frequency can be dropped much more and still have no Effect on the Primary.
The other interesting thing is this morning I thought of connecting the MOT in REVERSE.
That is, to use the Secondary as Primary and the Primary as Secondary.
The Lenz Delay works the same in this configuration, except you need to send more Voltage to the High Impedance Coil. However, the Current is now in the Micro Amps so who cares.
So if you don't want to work with High Voltage output, use it in this configuration and the low Impedance Coil is Low Voltage but High Current.
Luc
Quote from: garrypm on October 06, 2011, 03:05:48 AM
Hi Luc,
Wonderful video.
Would it be too much trouble to ask to see the scope when the load is applied?
Thanks, Garry
Hi Garry,
I didn't show the Scope Shot when the Secondary is under load as it would probably confuse people.
This is what confused me in all my Prior tests using my SG output through a Shunt Resistor and looking at the RMS reading across it when the Secondary is under load.
The Shunt's RMS readings on the Scope are higher when under load at the Lower Frequencies. It was only at 4.8kHz that the RMS value on the Shunt dropped. However, I can now see that's not the case. Using my H-Bridge and Special Current Meter has revealed that.
If you still wish to see the Scope Shot I'll post it but I don't want to hear what I just explained.
I trust my Special DC Meter more than any Osillyscope ;D
Let me know
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on October 06, 2011, 11:05:59 AM
Hi Thane,
Yes you are correct ... it's dropping!
As you know the Delayed Lenz Effect is best when the Secondary has most load (short circuit). Then the Frequency can be dropped much more and still have no Effect on the Primary.
The other interesting thing is this morning I thought of connecting the MOT in REVERSE.
That is, to use the Secondary as Primary and the Primary as Secondary.
The Lenz Delay works the same in this configuration, Luc
THIS IS EXACTLY HOW THE BiTT AT OTTAWA UNIVERSITY WAS DESIGNED: http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins?feature=mhee#p/u/35/RbRPCt1-WwQ WITH A 300 OHM PRIMARY.
NEXT STOP...
INFINITELY EFFICIENT BiTTS WHICH CONSUME ONLY REACTIVE POWER AND DELIVER REAL POWER TO THE LOADS. http://www.magmet.com/cutcore.php
CHEERS
T
Oy Vey
The Boss is inviting the whole world to see Overnudity!!
Looks like I'll be cleaning the bathrooms around here A lot more
than usual...........
CinderFellah indeed !!
Chet
Luc,
Forever the gentleman.
Thanks for the offer to show the shots.
Now I understand, there is no need.
Thanks, Garry
At everyone,
here are 2 Scope Shots with a 49vdc input to H-Bridge @54ma set at 1.28kHz.
At this Frequency the MOT has Zero change in current when the Secondary is under Load (7 watts 120v bulb used in last video)
First Scope Shot is with Green Probe across Primary and Yellow Probe across Open Secondary
Second Scope Shot is with Green Probe across Primary and Yellow Probe across Loaded Secondary (bulb)
BTW, for anyone is interested I changed my 4 MOSFET's on the H-Bridge from IRF640N to IRF540N.
At this Frequency the H-Bridge now consumes 60ua (idle) compared to 120ua prior this small change.
Luc
Hi Luc,
Would like to comment a few things.
Quote from: gotoluc on October 06, 2011, 11:05:59 AM
It can be controlled by the AC Frequency sent to the Primary. A higher Frequency will Increase the Primary Impedance even more but it will also start Lowering the Secondary's Current Output Efficiency. So I tuned to have closest to a zero effect on the Primary so the Secondary can stays efficient.
I think this behavior comes from the MOT core laminations poor performance at the increasing frequencies. When you have time you may wish to replace the MOT with the ferrite core having the 7.5H inductance and repeat this test.
On your scope shots above: green trace has 20V/DIV and the square waveform has 3 vertical heights above the zero line and about 2.1 vertical heights downwards, this gives 5.1 x 20V= 102V peak to peak and the scope displays 208V peak to peak, about twice as many?
The same goes for the yellow trace, it is set to 1kV/DIV and the peak to peak is about 3 up and 2 down again, giving 5kV peak to peak, yet it displays 9.97kV, about twice as many again. This is not a problem now of course, just I noticed... lol
However, when you have to measure some kV amplitudes, then the normal scope probes may not have the correct ratings, having only 600-700V specification, so these can easily get damaged from the 4-5kV unloaded tests. There are of course HV probe types manufactured for the some kV range but those are more expensive too.
IT is good you have tested this delayed Lenz effect and hopefully with the better toroidal core quality you can find it again and get higher output power (with the MOT, core loss and secondary coil copper resistance are rather high and limiting factors).
Gyula
Excellent work Gotluc.
Can you publish the schematic of your H-bridge?
I would like to replicate your work. I do have a MOT and I can build the bridge too.
Thanks,
Fausto.
Quote from: gyulasun on October 06, 2011, 04:41:45 PM
When you have time you may wish to replace the MOT with the ferrite core having the 7.5H inductance and repeat this test.
Hi Gyula,
I did make a Primary on the 7.5H Ferrite Toroid and tested it. I posted the results back on page 15 on the bottom of a reply to you: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=11350.msg301782#msg301782
Anyways, it does only normal transformer action. Maybe the effect has somthing to do with the Steel laminations?
Quote from: gyulasun on October 06, 2011, 04:41:45 PM
On your scope shots above: green trace has 20V/DIV and the square waveform has 3 vertical heights above the zero line and about 2.1 vertical heights downwards, this gives 5.1 x 20V= 102V peak to peak and the scope displays 208V peak to peak, about twice as many?
The same goes for the yellow trace, it is set to 1kV/DIV and the peak to peak is about 3 up and 2 down again, giving 5kV peak to peak, yet it displays 9.97kV, about twice as many again. This is not a problem now of course, just I noticed... lol
I noticed that also. I'll see if they maybe have a newer version of the Software
Quote from: gyulasun on October 06, 2011, 04:41:45 PM
However, when you have to measure some kV amplitudes, then the normal scope probes may not have the correct ratings, having only 600-700V specification, so these can easily get damaged from the 4-5kV unloaded tests. There are of course HV probe types manufactured for the some kV range but those are more expensive too.
I do have an expensive High Voltage probe on Channel 2. That's why it's set at x100
Can you have a look at the above Scope Shots as I would like your comments.
Notice on the first Shot how each 50% duty Phases of the H-Bridge to the Primary seem to only effect the Secondary at the beginning of each Phase change. The Secondary seems to have a ringdown like if the rest of the of the on time of the Primary is wasted. Notice on the second Shot (Secondary on load) the voltage on the load drop again like if most of the 50% phase on time is not doing anything to hold the current on the load.
Am I not reading understanding this correctly?
Thanks for your time
Luc
Quote from: plengo on October 06, 2011, 05:18:41 PM
Excellent work Gotluc.
Can you publish the schematic of your H-bridge?
I would like to replicate your work. I do have a MOT and I can build the bridge too.
Thanks,
Fausto.
Hi Fausto,
I'm going to be building a new design of H-Bridge that I can adjust the duty cycle since I'm starting to think there maybe wasted current on the fixed 50% duty cycle.
So you may want to wait a week or two and see how my next build will work out.
I don't have a Schematic for my next build yet, it's just going around in my mind at this time. However, I do have some components on delivery.
But if you want to build the one I have which was designed by Groundloop to use components I had on hand (see below) feel free to do so.
Luc
Here is a link for 5 of the IR2103 for $10 delivered: http://www.ebay.com/itm/5pcs-IR2103-DIP-IC-NEW-/190481621070?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c5996e04e
If one would use you circuit and hook it up to a signal generator (with variable duty cycle) then no change to circuit is necessary to have a variable duty cycle in output AC signal?
Or am I wrong?
Thank you,
Frenky
EDIT:
I see that the first chip is flipflop so I guess it wouldn't work...
Quote from: gotoluc on October 06, 2011, 08:58:06 PM
Hi Gyula,
I did make a Primary on the 7.5H Ferrite Toroid and tested it. I posted the results back on page 15 on the bottom of a reply to you: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=11350.msg301782#msg301782
Anyways, it does only normal transformer action. Maybe the effect has somthing to do with the Steel laminations?
Hi Luc, sorry I must have skipped over it, maybe this effect manifests at an even higher frequency than 2MHz for this kind of transformer. How high frequency can you go up to with the signal generator I wonder.
IT is sure the 7.5H winding on this toroidal core has got a much less self capacitance than in case of the MOT's secondary and I am also sure the laminated core in the MOT fails to maintain its permeability in the kHz range and starts diminishing significantly and nonlinearly.
Re on scope numerical display error of 2: yes it could be due to software and the manufacturer should be aware of that by now.
OK on your HV scope probe!
QuoteNotice on the first Shot how each 50% duty Phases of the H-Bridge to the Primary seem to only effect the Secondary at the beginning of each Phase change. The Secondary seems to have a ringdown like if the rest of the of the on time of the Primary is wasted. Notice on the second Shot (Secondary on load) the voltage on the load drop again like if most of the 50% phase on time is not doing anything to hold the current on the load.
Yes you noticed it correctly. This is the usual behavior when a transformer is driven with square wave: during the on time of the pulse the pulse amplitude does not change hence no current can change in the coil (pulse amplitude is horizontal) so no induction can take place during this time.
Here is a variable duty cycle pulse generator for driving H bridges from Groundloop:
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=819.0 I suggest using also the CMOS type LMC555C or TLC55C timers, they work up to about 3MHz.
This would be good for futuristic too ;)
Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on October 07, 2011, 04:09:50 AM
Hi Luc, sorry I must have skipped over it, maybe this effect manifests at an even higher frequency than 2MHz for this kind of transformer.
QuoteHi Gyula,
Anyways, it does only normal transformer action. Maybe the effect has somthing to do with the Steel laminations?
WE LOOKED AT USING FERRITE LAST YEAR FOR THE BiTT WITH A LICENSEE IN EUROPE BUT THE
POWER FACTOR WAS 1 ON NO-LOAD WHICH WAS NOT USEFUL AT ALL AND I THINK LUC AND I TRIED METGLAS AT OTTAWA U IN 2008 - WHICH WAS GIVEN TO US BY CARL, DO YOU REMEMBER LUC?
ANYWAY PERHAPS LUC CAN VERIFY THIS WITH HIS FERRITE TOROID? CHEERS
T
Quote from: ramset on October 06, 2011, 11:32:49 AM
Oy Vey
The Boss is inviting the whole world to see Overnudity!!
Chet
WELL CHET YOU KNOW WHAT THEY SAY...
"IF THE SHOE FITS"AND WE DO NEED
EXPOSURE 8) BUT MORE THAN THAT PEOPLE NEED TO BE REMINDED OF WHAT REAL HUMAN COOPERATION LOOKS LIKE.
MY POSITION HAS ALWAYS BEEN THAT THE WORLD OUGHT TO HAVE A
"MONTREAL PROTOCOL ON ENERGY ALTERNATIVES WITH GLOBAL COOPERATION SANCTIONED BY THE UN" WITH THE PRIMARY OBJECTIVE TO
SAVE THE PLANET RATHER THAN EXPLOITING THE GLOBAL WARMING ISSUE TO CAPITALIZE FINANCIALLY AS AL GORE AND HIS BUDDIES AT KLEINER PERKINS CAUFIELD & BYERS ARE DOING.
THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL PROVED THAT IT CAN WORK AND WE ARE
ALL PROVING IT HERE AS WELL. :D
CHEERS
T
The Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer (a protocol to the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer) is an international treaty designed to protect the ozone layer by phasing out the production of numerous substances believed to be responsible for ozone depletion. The treaty was opened for signature on September 16, 1987, and entered into force on January 1, 1989, followed by a first meeting in Helsinki, May 1989. Since then, it has undergone seven revisions, in 1990 (London), 1991 (Nairobi), 1992 (Copenhagen), 1993 (Bangkok), 1995 (Vienna), 1997 (Montreal), and 1999 (Beijing). It is believed that if the international agreement is adhered to, the ozone layer is expected to recover by 2050. Due to its widespread adoption and implementation it has been hailed as an example of exceptional international co-operation, with Kofi Annan quoted as saying that
"perhaps the single most successful international agreement to date has been the Montreal Protocol".It has been ratified by 196 states.
HOW DOES ONE START A NEW FORUM TOPIC FOR THE INFO BELOW? ??? Thanks Thane
"We can't set up independent scientific juries every time a company or individual comes forward and makes a extraordinary claim about a technology that can benefit the world." ~ Tyler Hamiltom, Adjunct Professor University of Toronto and Cleantech Blogger at Cleanbreak.
OK THE ABOVE STATEMENT IS BALONEY, SO...
"MONTREAL PROTOCOL" FOR ENERGY ALTERNATIVES AND WORLD BENEFITTING TECHNOLOGIES
POTENTIAL DIFFERENCE INC. IS STARTING A NEW IP COMMERCIALIZATION COMPANY CALLED E-MOTION TECHNOLOGIES INC. WITH THE AIM OF ASSISTING IN THE WORLDWIDE EVALUATION AND COMMERCIALIZATION OF EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES WHICH CAN BENEFIT THE PLANET EARTH AND PROVIDE A FAIR FINANCIAL RETURN FOR ALL PARTIES INVOLVED.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF NON-EXPLOITIVE BUSINESS PRACTICES AND MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL SYNERGIES BETWEEN VARIOUS TECHNOLOGIES WILL ALSO BE ONE OF THE KEY MANDATES AS WELL.
IF YOU HAVE A TECHNOLOGY WHICH IS AT THE PROTOTYPE STAGE WHICH NEEDS TO BE EVALUATED, FURTHER DEVELOPED OR COMMERCIALIZED BUT YOU DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES, ARE UNAWARE OF POSSIBLE SYNERGIES WITH OTHER TECHNOLOGIES OR THE MARKETING ROUTES TO DO SO PLEASE LET ME KNOW.
KIND REGARDS
Thane
Thane C. Heins
President & CEO
Potential +/- Difference Inc. R & D
"The Transition of Power"
thaneh@potentialdifference.ca
Linkedin http://linkd.in/iIZyXF
YouTube http://bit.ly/gCRePU
"How do we make the world work for 100% of humanity in the shortest possible time
-through spontaneous cooperation without ecological damage or disadvantage to anyone"
~ Dr. R. Buckminster Fuller
idea for a test:
maybe to make DC of the output (maybe like diode bridge + capacitor filter) and measure it under different loads
Boss,
Does this work?
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=11455.msg301981#msg301981
Chet
PS
If Not
Click on Forum link
Scroll to news section "click"
Look up top right for "new Topic" "Click"
Wallah..........
PPS
I didn't put the UnderNudity flag in??
And I see our OverNudity Flag is Missing??? [do we have one?]
Quote from: ramset on October 07, 2011, 12:25:13 PM
Boss,
Does this work?
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=11455.msg301981#msg301981
Chet
PS
Wallah..........
PPS
I didn't put the UnderNudity flag in??
And I see our OverNudity Flag is Missing??? [do we have one?]
THANKS RAMSET!
ASK IRON TO SEND YOU A PICTURE OF THE
OVERNUDITY POSEE DON'T POST IT THOUGH AS IT MAY OFFEND SOME HORSE LOVERS.
CHEERS
T
Hi everyone,
I have an update.
I removed the 4013 Flip-Flop from my H-Bridge and connected the two outputs of a SG3525 PWM which does flip flop but with pulse with adjustment.
Works great :D... so I now have an H-Bridge with adjustable Frequency and Pulse Width
See below (basic) schematic I found on the internet and made some small mods like a rotary switch to be able to select different cap values to change Frequency range and also have 2 pots in series (one high resistance and one low) to be able to fine tune Frequency once in range where you want it.
I started testing the MOT by reducing the pulse width and found it was reducing the Secondary Current output in a linear way. So not much was wasted with the prior 50% duty cycle.
However, I found that as I reduced the duty cycle I noticed I could drop the Frequency and still get the same effect (not affecting the Primary Current) with load on the Secondary .
I was able to drop the Frequency down to 60Hz but the duty cycle maybe at 1% more or less. It's just at the minimum pulse width output of the SG3525 but it does work. See scope shots below.
Green Probe across Primary and Yellow Probe across Secondary
First scope shot is Primary @60Hz with 63vdc @740ua with 1% duty cycle and Open Secondary
Second scope shot is Primary @60Hz with 63vdc @740ua with 1% duty cycle and 22 Ohms load on Secondary
My question is, at this Frequency and pulse width does this still work with Overunityguide's Lenz Delay explanation?
Luc
Quote from: gyulasun on October 07, 2011, 04:09:50 AM
maybe this effect manifests at an even higher frequency than 2MHz for this kind of transformer. How high frequency can you go up to with the signal generator I wonder.
IT is sure the 7.5H winding on this toroidal core has got a much less self capacitance than in case of the MOT's secondary and I am also sure the laminated core in the MOT fails to maintain its permeability in the kHz range and starts diminishing significantly and nonlinearly.
Gyula
Hi Gyula,
my Signal Generator is 2MHz Max.
I had already tested the Ferrite Toroid with my H-Bridge without success so I decided to try it with the output of my SG.
At 2Mhz the effect starts, see Scope shots. However I have nothing else to test it with that has a Higher Frequency or output. Also, you can forget about using an H-Bridge at these frequencies.
Green Probe is Current across 1 Ohm and Yellow probe is Voltage
First Scope Shot is Ferrite Toroid Primary @2MHz with Secondary Open
Second Scope Shot is Ferrite Toroid Primary @2MHz with Secondary on 22 Ohm Load
Third Scope Shot is Ferrite Toroid Primary @2MHz with Secondary on 22 Ohm Load with Voltage Probe across Load
That's about all I can do at this time
Luc
Hi Luc,
it seems the input current gets reduced a little when the secondary coil is loaded with the 20 Ohm. So the 'effect' is there and surely at higher than 2 MHz frequency you could find a 90° phase difference between input voltage and current.
At 2MHz a wire wound resistor has got inductive reactance too which adds to the normal DC resistance value, causing the 1 Ohm to be a a little bit higher than 1 Ohm. The same is especially true for a 20 Ohm wire wound resistor because it must have more turns to get the higher resistance. This latter is which may count if someone attempts to calculate output power from the output rms voltage and the 20 Ohm values. Otherwise it does not matter much, only can slightly modify the resultant phase shift as an addition. One more thing: if you happen to have a 10pF or max 22pF capacitor at hand, try to connect in parallel with the secondary, this can bring down the natural resonance of the secondary (7.5H) coil maybe under 2MHz. IF you do not have any cap, you can twist two 15-20 cm long enameled or plactic insulated wire together, connect the two wires of one end to the secondary and leave the other two wire ends of the twist open. This would make a 15-25pF or so capacitor, depending on the tightness of the twist. You can also cut the length to reduce the 'cap' value.
Thanks for your kind efforts.
Gyula
Quote from: gotoluc on October 07, 2011, 04:44:52 PM
Green Probe is Current across 1 Ohm and Yellow probe is Voltage
VOLTAGE =
PRIMARY VOLTAGE?QuoteFirst Scope Shot is Ferrite Toroid Primary @2MHz with Secondary Open
POWER FACTOR IS NOT GOOD, I.E. ALMOST 1
QuoteSecond Scope Shot is Ferrite Toroid Primary @2MHz with Secondary on 22 Ohm Load
CURRENT
DEREASES BY 50mV OR 6.8% WHICH IS
GOOD :)
POWER FACTOR SHIFTS BY ABOUT 10 DEGREES TOWARDS 1 BECOMING
MORE RESISTIVE = NOT SO GOOD :-[
SOME OF THE LOAD PF IS BEING REFLECTED BACK ONTO THE PRIMARY.
QuoteThird Scope Shot is Ferrite Toroid Primary @2MHz with Secondary on 22 Ohm Load with Voltage Probe across Load
PRIMARY VOLTAGE AND LOAD CURRENT PHASE ANGLES MEANS NOTHING HOWEVER IF YOU CAN MOVE THE YELLOW PROBE TO THE SHUNT (PRIMARY CURRENT) THIS WOULD TELL US WHAT EFFECT LOAD PF IS HAVING ON THE PRIMARY... I.E. IS THE SHIFT 10 DEGREES AS ABOVE?
THE ONLY THING THAT IS OF ANY RELEVANCE IS THE PRIMARY CURRENT AND POWER FACTOR.
MOST IMPORTANT IS THE SHUNT PROBE - REMOVING THAT REMOVES OUR REFERENCE POINT FOR OBSERVATION.
GOOD SCIENCE IS GOOD OBSERVATION AND YOU NEED A 4 CHANNEL SCOPE IF YOU ARE GOING TO BE MOVING PROBES AROUND BECAUSE WE NEED TO MAINTAIN OUR REFERENCE POINT. (THAT IS WHY I AM BRINGING YOU MY SCOPE TODAY... IF YOU ARE NOT OUT SAILING?) 8)
CHEERS
T
SAILING??
NOBODY TOLD ME THERE WAS AN OVER NUDITY SAILING TRIP!!
:P
Chet
Quote from: ramset on October 08, 2011, 09:11:31 AM
SAILING??
NOBODY TOLD ME THERE WAS AN OVER NUDITY SAILING TRIP!!
:P
Chet
YOU HAVE SOME BATHROOMS TO CLEAN FIRST MISTER!
WE MAY HAVE GUESTS COMING OVER FOR THANKSGIVING DINNER.
T
GOOD ............
Swab your own decks,See If I care!!
Sigh.....
Overnudity sailing one of my last Vices.............
Chet
Quote from: ramset on October 08, 2011, 10:16:10 AM
GOOD ............
Swab your own decks,See If I care!!
Chet
AFTER YOU ARE DONE WITH THE BATHROOMS YOU HAVE TO CHECK ON OUG TO SEE HOW HE IS DOING WITH HIS CHORES :P NOW THAT HE IS HOME FROM HIS "BUSINESS TRIP".
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 08, 2011, 08:55:28 AM
GOOD SCIENCE IS GOOD OBSERVATION AND YOU NEED A 4 CHANNEL SCOPE IF YOU ARE GOING TO BE MOVING PROBES AROUND BECAUSE WE NEED TO MAINTAIN OUR REFERENCE POINT. (THAT IS WHY I AM BRINGING YOU MY SCOPE TODAY... IF YOU ARE NOT OUT SAILING?) 8)
CHEERS
T
Hi Thane,
it's a nice day today but no wind so no Sailing.
So come on down with your Scope and bring me your Bifilar coil if you can. I have an idea how to test it in a Solid State way (no moving parts).
Thanks for your help
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on October 08, 2011, 10:58:08 AM
Hi Thane,
it's a nice day today but no wind so no Sailing.
So come on down with your Scope and bring me your Bifilar coil if you can. I have an idea how to test it in a Solid State way (no moving parts).
Thanks for your help
Luc
Also, if you have a Signal Generator that can go over 2MHz please bring that over also.
Thanks
Luc
Hello Guys,
As I had promised, today I should supply you with my input / output cop measurements regarding my MOT 950 Hz Experiment... (I will advice you, hold on to your seat...)
Input power going to the primary coil:
Calculated by I2*R (R primary coil) = 0.1A*0.1A*1.8Ohms = 0.018Watts
(This can be calculated this way, because the primary coil is running purely reactive at 950Hz)
Output power secondary coil going to the LED Light Bulb:
First I have to make a correction, in one of my previous posts, I have said that this value was about: 0.94Watts But Unfortunately after doing exact measurements with my scope on the secondary's connected load I had to conclude that it was actually running on: 36V at 0.0091A going to the LED Light Bulb, which gives us: 36V*0.0091A=0.327Watts going to the LED Light Bulb. (with the U and I running in phase)
At the end this will give us a (theoretical) cop of: 0.327/0.018 = 18
But I have to say, for now it only works on small loads... I also have tried connecting a 40Watts/240V rated incandescent light as a load with running the primary on higher (more dangerous voltage levels), and there no Lenz Delay was happening at higher power values... But for now it is a beginning of something new and unexplored...
And further I have to mention, that of course in the MOT experiment my frequency drive controller is consuming a whopping 17.5 Watts only to run Idle. So when you compare this to the 0.327Watts at the output, I must agree that in this way there is no overunity yet... But of course my mostly inefficient frequency drive controller can be replaced with much better and efficient (at lower power ratings) Mosfet H bridge controllers. And further in the video you saw that when comparing the loaded state (18.5 Watts) compared to the primary coil disconnected state (17.5 Watts) Will give you a 1 Watt difference in required input power, which is of course also bigger than the 0.327 Watts output. But this has to do with the primary running purely reactive, for which there is in my MOT experiment no power factor correcting capacitor connected to my primary coil, which can be done in higher efficient replications of my MOT experiment also.
So for now to conclude in short, my MOT experiment is showing that some interesting effects can take place in MOT like transformers running at a higher frequency. But for now I do think that a lot of experimenting (read: try to run on higher power values) needs to be done.
My Related MOT Experiment can be found on:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-j3-x3JJDA4
And at gotoluc I would like to say: Good Work Dude...
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Quote from: Overunityguide on October 08, 2011, 11:13:56 AM
But I have to say, for now it only works on small loads... I also have tried connecting a 40Watts/240V rated incandescent light as a load with running the primary on higher (more dangerous voltage levels), and there no Lenz Delay was happening at higher power values...
WHAT IS THE RESISTANCE OF THAT LARGER INCANDESCENT BULB THAT MAY BE AFFECTING YOUR LENZ DELAY WHICH WOULD REQUIRED A HIGHER FREQUENCY TO COMPENSATE WHICH YOU CAN'T DO WITH YOUR FREQUENCY DRIVE CONTROLLER BUT YOU CAN DO IF YOU USE YOUR GENERATOR AS YOUR INPUT TO YOUR MOT...
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 08, 2011, 12:21:40 PM
WHAT IS THE RESISTANCE OF THAT LARGER INCANDESCENT BULB THAT MAY BE AFFECTING YOUR LENZ DELAY WHICH WOULD REQUIRED A HIGHER FREQUENCY TO COMPENSATE WHICH YOU CAN'T DO WITH YOUR FREQUENCY DRIVE CONTROLLER BUT YOU CAN DO IF YOU USE YOUR GENERATOR AS YOUR INPUT TO YOUR MOT...
CHEERS
T
I have just measured it and (cold) it is about: 96 Ohms. But when we do the math... we get: R=U2/P = (240V*240V)/40Watts = 1440 Ohms (hot)
So indeed this can be way to high for my 950Hz which I am Applying...
But unfortunately, 950 Hz is the upper Limit of my Frequency Drive Controller. So for higher frequencies we do need to get our own H Bridge / microcontroller circuitry. So gotoluc is on the right way by now.
My Related MOT Experiment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-j3-x3JJDA4
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
TO THANE
Hi Thane,
I come across your patent application 2602439 Toroid generator coil and in its last page where the Figures are usually placed it is written:
"Fig 1 and Fig 2: unscannable items received with this application"
Can I see those Figures please?
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on October 08, 2011, 05:58:41 PM
TO THANE
Hi Thane,
I come across your patent application 2602439 Toroid generator coil and in its last page where the Figures are usually placed it is written:
"Fig 1 and Fig 2: unscannable items received with this application"
Can I see those Figures please?
rgds, Gyula
DEAR GYULA,
THAT'S FUNNY THEY DID THE SAME THING WITH MY "INFINITY GENERATOR" PROVISIONAL PATENT.
TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH I FORGOT ABOUT THAT APPLICATION.
LET ME ROOT AROUND IN MY FILES TO SEE IF I CAN FIND THE ACTUAL FILING DIAGRAMS AND I WILL POST IT ASAP.
WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING FOR SPECIFICALLY?
ALSO CAN YOU POST THE LINK?
CHEERS
T
Peter Davey Replication TODAY
Here
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/7096-peter-davey-heater-4.html#post161435
Chet
Quote from: Overunityguide on October 08, 2011, 04:46:19 PM
So indeed this can be way to high for my 950Hz which I am Applying...
But unfortunately, 950 Hz is the upper Limit of my Frequency Drive Controller. So for higher frequencies we do need to get our own H Bridge / microcontroller circuitry. So gotoluc is on the right way by now.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
I WILL REQUEST (AGAIN) THAT YOU USE YOUR GENERATOR OUTPUT AS THE INPUT TO YOUR MOT :P... YOUR INDUCTION MOTOR IS OPERATING AT 950 HZ BUT YOUR GENERATOR MUST BE AT ABOUT 2700 HZ OR SO.
I JUST THINK THIS WOULD A COOL VIDEO 8)...
CHEERS
T
Quote from: Overunityguide on October 08, 2011, 11:13:56 AM
Hello Guys,
As I had promised, today I should supply you with my input / output cop measurements regarding my MOT 950 Hz Experiment... (I will advice you, hold on to your seat...)
At the end this will give us a (theoretical) cop of: 0.327/0.018 = 18
But I have to say, for now it only works on small loads...
And further I have to mention, that of course in the MOT experiment my frequency drive controller is consuming a whopping 17.5 Watts only to run Idle.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
DEAR OUG,
THE EFFICIENCY OF A TRANSFORMER IS CALCULATED BY THE OUTPUT POWER TO A LOAD DIVIDED BY THE INPUT TO THE TRANSFORMER PRIMARY.THAT IS IT...! :D
THE FREQUENCY OF A CONVENTIONAL ELECTRIC VEHICLE GENERATOR CAN EASILY BE 950 HZ OR EVEN HIGHER SO YOUR SIMPLE PROCESS MAY WORK VERY WELL AND ONCE CONVERTED TO DC THE FREQUENCY IS A NON ISSUE.
CHEERS
T
Hi everyone,
I built a transformer with a Bifilar Coil as Secondary.
Thane has suggested he uses Bifilar Coils in his Generator so I was thinking good chances are that same effect could work in a Transformer.
I have tested it and it works the same ;D
The big advantage is, now we can save Tons of Wire and have Low Coil Resistance which translates to more Current to the Load.
So put away your MOT's and make yourself a Transformer with a Bifilar Coil ;)
See video Demo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUmVSf878aY
@Overunityguide, can you or someone do the math on the efficiency. Thank you
Luc
Data of Coils and Electrical:
Primary DC Resistance 79 Ohms
Primary Inductance 665mH
Secondary DC Resistance 8 Ohms
Secondary Inductance 418mH
Idle H-Bridge (not connected to primary)
Input Voltage 62.7vdc
H-Bridge Current wasted 30ua
H-Bridge Connected to Primary
Input Voltage 62.4vdc
Current to H-Bridge input 8.3ma (no load or with load)
Load on Secondary is 150 Ohms @ 4.10 Volts RMS
Scope Sots below are Orange is Current Probe across 1 Ohm Shunt, Light Blue is Voltage Probe across the Coil and Purple is Probe across the 150 Ohm Load on Secondary
First Scope Shot is No Load on Secondary
Second Scope Shot is 150 Ohm Load on Secondary
Quote from: gotoluc on October 09, 2011, 01:45:16 AM
Hi everyone,
[...]
or someone do the math on the efficiency. Thank you
Luc
[...]
hi Luc
assuming that the scope is presenting True (calculated) RMS values (which appears to be the case, looking at the 'square wave' values):
i/p power to primary would appear to be approx 2W
o/p power in 150 ohm load would appear to be approx 100mW
efficiency approx 5% - is this the calc you wanted?
HTH
Quote from: nul-points on October 09, 2011, 02:21:54 AM
hi Luc
assuming that the scope is presenting True (calculated) RMS values (which appears to be the case, looking at the 'square wave' values):
i/p power to primary would appear to be approx 2W
o/p power in 150 ohm load would appear to be approx 100mW
efficiency approx 5% - is this the calc you wanted?
HTH
Hi NP
No I don't think so
For Total Input I calculate 62.4vdc @ 8.3ma = 0.51792 Watts
This is the Total Input Power to the Transformer. However the 79 Ohm Primary is eating most of that in its Resistance. So to be fare we need to factor that out to find the true power transfer available to the Secondary. However, this is where I need help.
The output is 4.10 Volts RMS on a 150 Ohm load = 0.1121 Watts
Thanks anyways
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on October 09, 2011, 02:38:48 AM
Hi NP
No I don't think so
For Total Input I calculate 62.4vdc @ 8.3ma = 0.51792 Watts
This is the Total Input Power to the Transformer. However the 79 Ohm Primary is eating most of that in its Resistance. So to be fare we need to factor that out to find the true power transfer available to the Secondary. However, this is where I need help.
The output is 4.10 Volts RMS on a 150 Ohm load = 0.1121 Watts
Thanks anyways
Luc
hi again Luc
you want the efficiency of the transformer, is that correct?
if so, you don't need to include the power used by your H-bridge
your scope shows 32mV RMS across a 1 ohm shunt - this equates to a current of 32mA RMS
you don't state shunt location explicitly but it appears to be on the primary side of the transformer
(because the waveform is not in phase with the voltage across the 150 ohm output load resistor)
so my calc for i/p power = 61.5 * 0.032 = 1.97W (approx 2W)
my calc for your o/p power is 4.1 * 0.027 = 0.1107W (approx 100mW)
hence my calc of your transformer efficiency** is approx (0.1 / 2) * 100 = 5%
HTH
[EDIT: ** for this frequency and load]
Quote from: nul-points on October 09, 2011, 03:08:06 AM
so my calc for i/p power = 61.5 * 0.032 = 1.97W (approx 2W)
@nul-points, sorry but I have to give you 'zero points' for your input calculation. (please don't take it personal)
I say this because you are forgetting one very important parameter which also should be added in your input power calculation. This one important parameter is the phase angle (power factor) between current and voltage at the primary side of the transformer... So when comparing the loaded state with the unloaded state of gotoluc's bifilar secondary's transformer. You can see that in the loaded state this phase angle is becoming higher.
(So read: more to 90 degrees). Further you can see that the amperage to the primary went up when connecting the load, but that in relation with this the phase angle (power factor) also becomes bigger.
Those two related parameters (primary amperage and phase angle) are why you don't see any change in the total input power in gotoluc's very need input power measurement setup.
Quote from: nul-points on October 09, 2011, 03:08:06 AM
my calc for your o/p power is 4.1 * 0.027 = 0.1107W (approx 100mW)
@nul-points, this is where I totally agree with you, so it looks like that there is for now 0.1107W coming out of the transformer for no noticeable input power change at all!
@Thane & Gotoluc... Great work and great cooperation guys. And if I may give one suggestion, maybe it is better to replace the input coil in the setup with a low Ohms / high current one, so that more usable power can be transferred to the secondary. And maybe try to run it at some higher frequency settings (1000Hz/1500Hz). But I am sure that you already thought about this...
So than again: Great work.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 08, 2011, 07:07:15 PM
DEAR GYULA,
THAT'S FUNNY THEY DID THE SAME THING WITH MY "INFINITY GENERATOR" PROVISIONAL PATENT.
TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH I FORGOT ABOUT THAT APPLICATION.
LET ME ROOT AROUND IN MY FILES TO SEE IF I CAN FIND THE ACTUAL FILING DIAGRAMS AND I WILL POST IT ASAP.
WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING FOR SPECIFICALLY?
ALSO CAN YOU POST THE LINK?
CHEERS
T
Hi Thane,
Here is a link to your application (Toroid Generator Coil) to the Canadian Patent Office:
http://brevets-patents.ic.gc.ca/opic-cipo/cpd/eng/patent/2602439/summary.html?type=number_search
I simply wished to see the Figures to better understand your setup described in the application.
Thanks, Gyula
Hi Folks,
Regarding the efficiency calculations I think the main power source for this setup is the battery bank, it supplies 62.4V DC voltage and the current taken is about 8.3mA (83mV/10 Ohm) so this gives a total input power of 0.517W.
If we can agree on this half a watt input power than the the efficiency of the H-bridge is what comes into the picture next and I suppose here it has a 90% efficiency, this reduces the possible input power to the transformer to 0.517*0.9=0.465W.
Now the transformer efficiency is (0.1107/0.465)*100=23.8% (Note: This depends on the efficiency number we consider for the H-bridge.)
When a load connected to the mains consumes only reactive current, the reactive current has to come from somewhere and it is also the mains, though most watthours meters do not measure it... hence when you wish to create the reactive current you have to furnish real power first.
Gyula
Quote from: Overunityguide on October 09, 2011, 05:48:50 AM
@nul-points, sorry but I have to give you 'zero points' for your input calculation. (please don't take it personal)
I say this because you are forgetting one very important parameter which also should be added in your input power calculation.
[...]
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
i agree - my bad - i regarded the i/p as from a single-ended driver, but of course, although Luc has a unipolar DC i/p supply, he is using an H-bridge!
with 32mA RMS i/p current (measured on the 1 ohm shunt) and a bipolar 61.5 RMS i/p voltage (measured across the primary coil) the average power i/p is approx 0.55W
so the transformer efficiency = 0.1107 / 0.55 = approx 20%
DEAR LUC,
YOUR H BRIDGE IS A THING OF BEAUTY 8) BUT
HERE IS MY SUGGESTION...
REPLACE THE PRIMARY IN THE BiTT WITH THE BI-FILAR BECAUSE IT "APPEARS" TO BE GIVING SOME GOOD LENZ DELAY.
THEN RUN THE BiTT WITH 60 HZ SINE WAVE AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS THEN TWEAK THE FREQUENCY TO SEE WHERE YOU GET THE BEST PERFORMANCE.
THEN ONCE YOU HAVE ESTABLISHED SOME GOOD RESULTS GO BACK TO DC STUFF WITH THE AC STUFF AS YOUR POINT OF REFERENCE. :P
BUT BEFORE YOU DO THAT I WOULD (INDEPENDENTLY) TEST THE BiTT AS IS JUST TO SEE WHERE IT IS AT AS WELL SO YOU WILL KNOW IF THE BI-FILAR PRIMARY PROVIDES BETTER PERFORMANCE.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 09, 2011, 08:02:52 AM
DEAR LUC,
YOUR H BRIDGE IS A THING OF BEAUTY 8) BUT
HERE IS MY SUGGESTION...
REPLACE THE PRIMARY IN THE BiTT WITH THE BI-FILAR BECAUSE IT "APPEARS" TO BE GIVING SOME GOOD LENZ DELAY.
THEN RUN THE BiTT WITH 60 HZ SINE WAVE AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS THEN TWEAK THE FREQUENCY TO SEE WHERE YOU GET THE BEST PERFORMANCE.
THEN ONCE YOU HAVE ESTABLISHED SOME GOOD RESULTS GO BACK TO DC STUFF WITH THE AC STUFF AS YOUR POINT OF REFERENCE. :P
BUT BEFORE YOU DO THAT I WOULD (INDEPENDENTLY) TEST THE BiTT AS IS JUST TO SEE WHERE IT IS AT AS WELL SO YOU WILL KNOW IF THE BI-FILAR PRIMARY PROVIDES BETTER PERFORMANCE.
CHEERS
T
Hi Thane,
I agree!
This will be my next step and in the exact way you suggest.
I just couldn't resist :D to test the Bifilar Coil to see if it worked also in a transformer application.
I'll be out all day today so it will go to Monday or later for results
Thanks for all your help Thane
Luc
@gotoluc
What's do'in.
Since Thane loaned you his BiTT transformer coil that has the three coils. S1-Primary-S2. Consider this.
Take one secondary and call it a primary. The other secondary is your 1st secondary. The center primary is your 2nd secondary or your main output. Now if the two original secondaries are wound identical, maybe consider removing 1/2 % (or less) of the winding from the new primary. Or just try this as is for now.
So you now have Primary-Main Output-Secondary.
Now pulse the primary to attain the secondary resonance and check that output and see what the output is on the Main Output. The idea here is that if the primary is pulsed to the secondary resonance, it will be consuming very little energy making it easier for the secondary to return its output back to the primary. Now if at the same time the Main Output can produce juice, well, well, you may have a winner.
Actually this general idea came to me while working on the SM TPUs as I think this is the base idea of how it works, except in the SM TPU I am trying with a core of insulated baling wire and is also the output. So in my present tests the core is used to transfer coupling energy from primary to secondary plus also giving output itself. lol
I had prepared the image below a few days ago but waited to post it because I thought it was not the right moment. I am very curious to know what the resonant frequencies are on the BiTT as we know Thane only runs the thing at 60hz.
Maybe one other note on MOTs.
The second image I had done in 2008 to show how to grind one of the top laminated welds that permits you to just pry off the top laminated section with a good side hit using a hammer. Now if you had two identical MOTS, you take one of them and remove the top laminate. This proves that the top laminate block is only held there with the welds and that the metal lamination plates are not inter twinned with the other vertical laminate sides. So if you take this cut MOT and now secure the cut end against the top block of the second complete MOT, this will give you a MOT with two primaries and two secondaries. Of course this is not a BiTT replication but it does give you so many other ways to drive it like putting both primaries in series, etc, etc. Actually the cut MOT could also be used as a pick-up coil when using rotating wheel magnets.
Besides that, hope everything is well in Camelot.
wattsup
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 08, 2011, 07:15:01 PM
I WILL REQUEST (AGAIN) THAT YOU USE YOUR GENERATOR OUTPUT AS THE INPUT TO YOUR MOT :P... YOUR INDUCTION MOTOR IS OPERATING AT 950 HZ BUT YOUR GENERATOR MUST BE AT ABOUT 2700 HZ OR SO.
I JUST THINK THIS WOULD A COOL VIDEO 8)...
CHEERS
T
Dear Thane,
Today I have tried to speed up my motor generator a bit more... But unfortunately I come across some practical problems when doing this...
My biggest problem when trying to run this setup on higher frequencies is that above 150 Hz going to my normal induction motor the rotor slip becomes too big. So above 150 Hz my rotor goes out sink and after a while results in a total dead stop of my rotor...
Although this phenomenon could be expected, because each induction motor has its own U/f characteristics. Which means that at higher frequencies the frequency drive controller must supply a higher voltage.
(this to compensate for the stator coils impedances)
But in my case the highest possible voltage to drive my motor with is 240V and this upper limited value is reached at 50 Hz. Which means that at 150 Hz, my controller still is supplying 240 Volts. Where in this case it has to be 720V to stay on the same torque figures...
So to conclude, the highest possible value to run my motor generator with is 150Hz, which will result in 450Hz coming from my generator coil. So you see the 950Hz (direct from my frequency drive controller) is still the highest frequency for which I can test things on...
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Quote from: Overunityguide on October 09, 2011, 04:54:29 PM
Dear Thane,
Today I have tried to speed up my motor generator a bit more... But unfortunately I come across some practical problems when doing this...
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
DEAR O.U.G.
WHEN EDISON WAS WORKING ON THE LIGHT BULB HE WAS ASKED BY SOMEONE (PROBABLY A REPORTER) IF HE WAS JUST WASTING EVERYONE'S TIME AFTER 10,000 TRIES. HE SAID, "NOT AT ALL WE HAVE SIMPLY IDENTIFIED 10,000 THINGS THAT DON'T WORK."
SO UNLESS WE ARE WILLING TO TRY (AND FAIL) WE CAN'T REALLY KNOW FOR SURE WHICH IS JUST A DIFFERENT FORM OF SUCCESS.
NICE TRY ANYWAY AND FOR TEACHING US ALL SOMETHING NEW. ;)
CHEERS
T
BTW - WHAT IS YOUR NEXT PROJECT/VIDEO THAT YOU ARE GOING TO DAZZLE US WITH? 8)
Quote from: wattsup on October 09, 2011, 11:05:05 AM
@gotoluc
Consider this.
Take one secondary and call it a primary. The other secondary is your 1st secondary. The center primary is your 2nd secondary or your main output. Now if the two original secondaries are wound identical, maybe consider removing 1/2 % (or less) of the winding from the new primary. Or just try this as is for now.
So you now have Primary-Main Output-Secondary.
Now pulse the primary to attain the secondary resonance and check that output and see what the output is on the Main Output. The idea here is that if the primary is pulsed to the secondary resonance, it will be consuming very little energy making it easier for the secondary to return its output back to the primary. Now if at the same time the Main Output can produce juice, well, well, you may have a winner.
wattsup
HELLO WATTSUP,
CAN YOU USE THE FOLLOWING DRAWING SUPPLIED BY TESLASET TO SHOW THE PROPOSED FLUX PATH ROUTES... THAT YOU ARE PROPOSING IN YOUR PROPOSAL TO LUC?
IE TIME = 1 PRIMARY FLUX
TIME = 2 SECONDARY FLUX ROUTES
CHEERS
T
@CRANKYpants
Wow, you are asking something pretty tricky since this had not been done yet. Your tests were done with AC but this proposal is to try DC pulses, hence the same direction and also not only at 60hz but at much higher frequencies to attain resonance levels that your AC tests would never have seen.
But I gave it an educated shot to show flux path leaves the top of the primary and goes two ways, one up and one towards the center core where you have the Main Output Coil (MOC). The flux to goes down into the secondary coil and exit that coil one towards the primary and two towards the center core again.
What I am thinking is when you start the pulsing, it will take some time for the core to ramp up so you should see a gradual increase of output on both the Secondary and also on the MOC.
The secondary should show a DC output waveform. This is all theoretical but the MOC should show a totally different waveform closer to a very dense AC or double DC or + and - DC waveform. I had hoped someone would try your BiTT coil with DC for a long time now and hopefully @gotoluc will have a chance to do some experiments. There is no rush.
Also, @gotolucs 2Mhz limit should me high enough to reach some resonance levels since the now Primary has many winds.
One thing though about DC pulsing in wound coils. The tests can be done with the coil as is but you can also try pulsing the primary with any other type of coil in series to the primary coil and see what the differences are. If my hunch is correct, you should see more output from the secondary and the MOC when another coil is in series with the primary. In this case the primary should be on the pulsed side. The reason for that is complicated but it would be a good test just to show the differences. We can always get into the whys afterwards. The series coil should have at least 50% or more of the primary inductance.
Ahhhhhhh. What a great weekend and Monday off. More time to work on the bench. lol
wattsup
HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO ALL MY FELLOW CANADIAN TURKEY GOBBLERS OUT THERE! :)
CHEERS
T
Hi everyone,
I have an update on the Transformer Delayed Lenz Effect.
See Video for explanation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZtIhOV00uU
The below Scope Shots are:
Ch 1 Yellow Probe is 10 Ohm Shunt Resistor, Ch 2 Lt. Blue is Coil Voltage, Ch 3 Purple is Secondary Coil 10 Ohm Load and Ch 4 is Resonator Coil 10 Ohm Load
First is Transformer @ 60Hz no Load
Second is Transformer @ 60Hz with Secondary on 10 Ohm Load
Third is Transformer @ 60Hz with Secondary on 10 Ohm Load and 29uf on Resonating Coil
Please post your comments and Power Calculations. Keep in mind the Shunt Resistor is 10 Ohms and not 1 Ohm.
Luc
Hi Luc,
When the secondary coils are unloaded the input power is approximately: Pin=V*I*cos82° (I estimated from the scope shots the input voltage leads current by about 82°. How I got this 82°: the time difference between input voltage and current is about 3.8msec, this gives roughly 82°.)
So Pin=5.96*0.0508*cos82°=0.0421W
Loaded case, no capacitor, I noticed no change in the 82° phase shift :
input power Pin=5.57*0.0548*cos82°=0.04248W
output power Pout=0.5772/10=0.03329W
Loaded case with capacitor, I noticed the phase shift decreased to about 34.5° from 82°, this means it is decisive to watch on the scope only the voltage drop decrease across the shunt resistor, you have to consider any change in the phase shift too.
input power Pin=5.2*0.0457*cos34.5°=0.1958W
output power Pout=0.6742/10=0.04542W
circulating power in the LC (140mH 39uF) tank circuit, assuming resonance PLC=0.4842/10=0.02342W
Efficiency in the loaded case, no cap:
Pout/Pin=(0.03329W/0.04248W)*100=78.3%
Efficiency in the loaded case with cap:
(Pout + PLC)/Pin=(0.04542W + 0.02342W)/0.1958W=0.3515*100=35.15%
So it seems this setup now behaves as a conventional transformer when there is no 39uF tuning cap connected. When the 39uF is connected to the till then 140mH idle coil, efficiency suffers, probably due to the change in the phase shift in the input voltage-current.
(I recall the 140mH coils have got a DC resistance between 120 to 180 Ohms?)
Gyula
Hi Gyula,
thank you for doing the power calculations.
As you can see I have no idea how to do AC Power Calculations yet but there is hope as I now understand that a higher voltage across the Shunt Resistor does not necessarily matter if the Phase (cos angle) stays the same. Do I have that correct?
I decided to look at Phase much closer on the Scope and found it did shift @60Hz.
In the First scope Shot below I expended to Scopes Voltage divisions so we could clearly see where they fall at the Zero point.
For loads I decided to separate the 2 Secondaries and used a 10 Ohm Load on each.
I found that it's only @248Hz that there is Zero Phase Shift when under Load. See Second Shot below. Frequencies above 248Hz the Phase slowly goes up and below 248Hz Phase slowly drops.
The First Shot below is the no load centered Reference. We have exactly 4 squares between each side of the rising and dropping voltage phase. Each square should be 22.5 degrees, so then one of the 5 divisions in each square should be 4.5 degrees. The Current is 3 divisions behind the Voltage (3 x 4.5 = 13.5) so 90 - 13.5 = 76.5 degrees.
So would you agree this is an accurate way to get Phase degree?
Third Shot is Complete view.
Can you re-calculate the power in vs power out with this more accurate data.
I still don't understand how you came up with the numbers above so I better let you do it. Hopefully in time I will be able to learn the equations ;D
Thanks for your time Guyla... I'll get there one step at the time thanks to people like you who are willing to help.
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on October 16, 2011, 12:53:17 PM
The Current is 3 divisions behind the Voltage (3 x 4.5 = 13.5) so 90 - 13.5 = 76.5 degrees.
Luc
ACTUALLY LUC THE CURRENT LAGS THE VOLTAGE BY 17 DIVISIONS AND 17 x 4.5 = 76.5 DEGREES
I know it's anal but... ;)
SO YOUR POWER IN = Vprimary x Iprimary x COS 76.5 (COS 76.5 = 0.233)
SO YOUR POWER IN = Vprimary x Iprimary x 0.233Pout = Vload^2 / RloadCHEERS
T
Hi Luc,
Quote
.... I now understand that a higher voltage across the Shunt Resistor does not necessarily matter if the Phase (cos angle) stays the same. Do I have that correct?
I did not mean it that way, though what you say I think it also matters because an increasing shunt voltage means an increasing input current hence an increasing input power draw while the phase angle may remain the same. I meant when your LC tank circuit was activated by connecting the 39uF cap, the input current got reduced (voltage drop across the shunt decreased) but the phase angle between the input voltage and input power has changed from the 82° to 34.5°, this caused a significant increase in input power.
Quote
....
The First Shot below is the no load centered Reference. We have exactly 4 squares between our rising and dropping voltage phase. Each square should be 22.5 degrees, so then one of the 5 divisions in each square should be 4.5 degrees. The Current is 3 divisions behind the Voltage (3 x 4.5 = 13.5) so 90 - 13.5 = 76.5 degrees.
So would you agree this is an accurate way to get Phase degree?
Yes it is more accurate now than I managed to estimate it but then the 76.5° is even further away from the 90° goal. Maybe you wanted to write 8 squares above instead of 4?
Quote
I still don't understand how you came up with the numbers above so I better let you do it. Hopefully in time I will be able to learn the equations ;D
I used conventional AC power calculations whereby the phase angle between the AC current and voltage is considered and you multiply the rms values of current and voltage with the cosine value of the phase angle.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/powerac.html
I will revise the calculations though I just noticed Thane already gave a hint.
Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on October 16, 2011, 02:05:03 PM
Hi Luc,
I did not mean it that way, though what you say I think it also matters because an increasing shunt voltage means an increasing input current hence an increasing input power draw while the phase angle may remain the same. I meant when your LC tank circuit was activated by connecting the 39uF cap, the input current got reduced (voltage drop across the shunt decreased) but the phase angle between the input voltage and input power has changed from the 82° to 34.5°, this caused a significant increase in input power.
Okay I think I get it.
Quote from: gyulasun on October 16, 2011, 02:05:03 PM
Yes it is more accurate now than I managed to estimate it but then the 76.5° is even further away from the 90° goal. Maybe you wanted to write 8 squares above instead of 4?
I edited it to say:
We have exactly 4 squares between each 90 degrees side of the rising and dropping voltage phase.
Quote from: gyulasun on October 16, 2011, 02:05:03 PM
I will revise the calculations though I just noticed Thane already gave a hint.
Gyula
Please do the complete calculations. I will go over it on the phone with Thane to get a verbal explanation of how to do the calculations.
Thanks
Luc
Hi Luc,
Focusing on your third scope shot now, I assume there is no 39uF connected and CH3 and 4 show the output voltage across the 10 Ohm resistors, respectively.
CH1 is the voltage across the input current shunt and CH2 is the input voltage as before, right?
Now the phase angle between input current and voltage seems to be near 90° for me? One full wave is 4 msec rounded down (248 Hz is 4.03 msec) and there is 1 msec for the 90° section. The 1 msec section is divided to 5 smaller divisions, this means 18° for any two neighbouring small divisions and I can see 4.5 small such divisions between current and voltage curves, giving a phase angle of 4.5 x 18°=81°
The input power now is Pin=7.16V*0.0177A*cos81°=0.0198W
Output power on one of the 10 Ohm load is Pout1=(0.208*0.208)/10= 0.00432W
Output power on the other 10 Ohm load is Pout2=(0.171*0.171)/10=0,00292W
Summing the two outputs gives 0.00725W
efficiency is (0.00725W/0.0198W)*100=36.6%
Now if you could expand the third scope shot to see more precisely the phase angle (I used an estimated 81°) and what is more you could attain a phase shift much nearer to 90° degree between input current and voltage, then the real input power would be much less hence efficiency should improve. The exact 90° phase shift would mean a fully reactive input power and no real input power (cos90°=0) this is what Thane aims at.
Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on October 16, 2011, 03:53:51 PM
Hi Luc,
Focusing on your third scope shot now, I assume there is no 39uF connected and CH3 and 4 show the output voltage across the 10 Ohm resistors, respectively.
CH1 is the voltage across the input current shunt and CH2 is the input voltage as before, right?
Now the phase angle between input current and voltage seems to be near 90° for me? One full wave is 4 msec rounded down (248 Hz is 4.03 msec) and there is 1 msec for the 90° section. The 1 msec section is divided to 5 smaller divisions, this means 18° for any two neighbouring small divisions and I can see 4.5 small such divisions between current and voltage curves, giving a phase angle of 4.5 x 18°=81°
The input power now is Pin=7.16V*0.0177A*cos81°=0.0198W
Output power on one of the 10 Ohm load is Pout1=(0.208*0.208)/10= 0.00432W
Output power on the other 10 Ohm load is Pout2=(0.171*0.171)/10=0,00292W
Summing the two outputs gives 0.00725W
efficiency is (0.00725W/0.0198W)*100=36.6%
Now if you could expand the third scope shot to see more precisely the phase angle (I used an estimated 81°) and what is more you could attain a phase shift much nearer to 90° degree between input current and voltage, then the real input power would be much less hence efficiency should improve. The exact 90° phase shift would mean a fully reactive input power and no real input power (cos90°=0) this is what Thane aims at.
Gyula
HI Gyula,
yes, that is correct!... and no Capacitor used.
Third Scope shot is the same as the Second Scope Shot. Nothing has changed other then the Scopes Voltage and Time Divisions so you can see the complete picture.
So your 81 degrees estimate is not correct.
I have checked all the Transformers I have, even a high end Audio Power Amp Toroid. None of them are 90 degrees out of phase idle (no load). The Toroid is at 40.5 degrees with no load.
So I don't know why we have to be at 90 degrees to get a winner. If we start with 40.5 and we connect a load and it stays at 40.5 then is the Power on the load not coming from Reactive power?
Luc
Luc, sorry for the misunderstanding....
Pin=7.16*0,0177*cos76.5=0.02958W
efficiency (0.00725W/0.02958W)*100=24.5%
You wrote: I found that it's only @248Hz that there is Zero Phase Shift when under Load. See Second Shot below. Frequencies above 248Hz the Phase slowly goes up and below 248Hz Phase slowly drops.
My question is where do you mean exactly the zero phase shift happens at the 248Hz frequency?
According to Thane, a 90° phase shift is the goal between the input current and voltage. This is a situation when input power is fully reactive and in case this happens at the 60 Hz mains frequency than utility WattHour meters in most homes would not measure the load's consumption. Of course reactive current would still load the mains and this reactive current should still be supplied by the utility providers.
Considering your question on the 40.5° phase angle: it does not represent a fully reactive power like it would when the phase angle were at or very near to 90° angle.
Phase angle, Phi = arctan(XL/R) so if you have R=120 Ohm and a coil's inductive reactance XL=150 Ohm at a given AC frequency, than the phase angle between their current and voltage is arctan(150/120)=51.34° arctan function is available in Windows built-in scientific calculator and click on Inv icon inside it when wish to take arctan. (the 120 Ohm is the coil's DC resistance) So in this example we have both a reactive and a real (heat) dissipation for this coil. If you had a coil which would have say XL=800 Ohm at an AC frequency and it would have only 1 Ohm DC copper resistance, its phase angle would be arctan(800/1)=89.92° so pretty close to 90° an almost ideal coil.
This means that to get a phase angle very near to 90° the L/R for a coil has to be a high value, meaning a low resistive part. By manipulating the frequency to find this situation may help but I guess it brings in capacitive part of the coil windings (like for a MOT secondary) and an unpredictable nonlinear core behaviour at the higher than manufactured frequencies, so all in all here is where you have to ask Thane on any further such questions. I really mean this, without any bias.
Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on October 16, 2011, 05:40:53 PM
You wrote: I found that it's only @248Hz that there is Zero Phase Shift when under Load. See Second Shot below. Frequencies above 248Hz the Phase slowly goes up and below 248Hz Phase slowly drops.
My question is where do you mean exactly the zero phase shift happens at the 248Hz frequency?
Humm :-\... lets try it this way. If I connect the Primary of the Transformer I made to the output of my Signal Generator to find the Frequencies that when I connect the load to the Secondary it does not consume any extra current.
This happens at 248Hz. At lower Frequencies it slowly starts to consume current and at higher Frequencies it slowly starts to reduce current consumption.
Now when doing the same as above but using the Scope to only look at Phase ( scope adjusted like fist and second shot) I can see at 248Hz there is Zero Phase change when adding the load or removing it.
Now, if I start to lower the Frequency it slowly starts to shift in a negative way (reducing phase degree)and if I increase the Frequencies it slowly start to shifts in a positive way (adding phase degree)
This is what I mean with a Zero Phase Shift Frequency.
I hope you understand as I don't know how to explain it any better. I would have to do a video ;D if you don't get it.
Quote from: gyulasun on October 16, 2011, 05:40:53 PM
According to Thane, a 90° phase shift is the goal between the input current and voltage. This is a situation when input power is fully reactive and in case this happens at the 60 Hz mains frequency than utility WattHour meters in most homes would not measure the load's consumption. Of course reactive current would still load the mains and this reactive current should still be supplied by the utility providers.
I agree to the above but I don't think it's possible for a transformer Primary to not consume any current, so I don't think you can start at 90 degrees Phase Shift. That is what I've been trying to say. However, from my tests I do see that it's possible to build a Transformer in a way that when the Secondary is on load it will not shift the Primary Phase to a lower degree. This I have proven with my tests with special core. Please correct me if I'm wrong but as far as I am concerned there are no low Impedance Transformers that you can take off the shelf and have these results.
Quote from: gyulasun on October 16, 2011, 05:40:53 PM
Considering your question on the 40.5° phase angle: it does not represent a fully reactive power like it would when the phase angle were at or very near to 90° angle.
I agree but like I said above, I don't think a full 90 degree shift could be achieved. I hope I'm wrong but I have not seen it yet.
Quote from: gyulasun on October 16, 2011, 05:40:53 PM
Phase angle, Phi = arctan(XL/R) so if you have R=120 Ohm and a coil's inductive reactance XL=150 Ohm at a given AC frequency, than the phase angle between their current and voltage is arctan(150/120)=51.34° arctan function is available in Windows built-in scientific calculator and click on Inv icon inside it when wish to take arctan. (the 120 Ohm is the coil's DC resistance) So in this example we have both a reactive and a real (heat) dissipation for this coil. If you had a coil which would have say XL=800 Ohm at an AC frequency and it would have only 1 Ohm DC copper resistance, its phase angle would be arctan(800/1)=89.92° so pretty close to 90° an almost ideal coil.
This arctan calculation sounds very interesting. At what Frequency do you think you would get 800 Ohms Reactance?
Could you calculate heat dissipation (losses) in my Primary @248Hz Sine Wave with DC R of 17.2 Ohms and L of 220mH
Thanks for your time.
Luc
Hi Luc,
Ok, now it is clear how you meant the zero phase shift occuring i.e. not occuring... :)
QuoteI agree to the above but I don't think it's possible for a transformer Primary to not consume any current, so I don't think you can start at 90 degrees Phase Shift. That is what I've been trying to say. However, from my tests I do see that it's possible to build a Transformer in a way that when the Secondary is on load it will not shift the Primary Phase to a lower degree. This I have proven with my tests with special core. Please correct me if I'm wrong but as far as I am concerned there are no low Impedance Transformers that you can take off the shelf and have these results.
Yes, a transformer will always consume at least reactive current and the less copper and core loss a transformer has got, the closer the phase shift would be to the ideal 90° phase shift. When you start loading it, surely you can find a frequency where this phase shift would not change due to the load but the same reactive current is still consumed by the primary coil. I do not know if such a low impedance transformer exists off the shelf, the frequency you test it is always a question and what purpose a specific transformer was manufactured for.
QuoteThis arctan calculation sounds very interesting. At what Frequency do you think you would get 800 Ohms Reactance?
Could you calculate heat dissipation (losses) in my Primary @248Hz Sine Wave with DC R of 17.2 Ohms and L of 220mH
Well, the formula to calculate the frequency where a coil can have 800 Ohm inductive reactance is f=X
L/(2pi*L) i.e. f=800/(6.28*L)
For your 220mH coil the frequency where you would have 800 Ohm inductive reactance would be f=800/(6.28*0.22)=579 Hz However, the 17.2 Ohm resistance would "ruin" the phase angle a little: arctan800/17.2=88.76°phase angle would be involved so an even higher frequency should be found... At 9 kHz the 220mH coil has an X
L of 124344 Ohm reactance this gives a phase angle of 89.99° with its own 17.2 Ohm wire resistance...
From your third scope shot the current via your 220mH primary is 0.0177A this is what is established by the series 10 Ohm shunt and the inductive impedance of this coil at 248 Hz. This current dissipates P
L=0.0177*0.0177*17.2=0.00538W power i.e 5.38 mW loss in the coil.
Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on October 17, 2011, 05:52:16 AM
Yes, a transformer will always consume at least reactive current and the less copper and core loss a transformer has got, the closer the phase shift would be to the ideal 90° phase shift. When you start loading it, surely you can find a frequency where this phase shift would not change due to the load but the same reactive current is still consumed by the primary coil. I do not know if such a low impedance transformer exists off the shelf, the frequency you test it is always a question and what purpose a specific transformer was manufactured for.
@Gyula
The Primary coil resistance is 1.8 Ohms in my MOT transformer experiment...
This is exactly why I am using a MOT transformer to do this kind of experiments.
My MOT High Freq. (Delayed Lenz) Experiment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-j3-x3JJDA4
And Yes Reactive Power will be consumed, but in my opinion this is a nonissue, because we always can power factor correct this.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Quote from: Overunityguide on October 17, 2011, 07:46:52 AM
...
The Primary coil resistance is 1.8 Ohms in my MOT transformer experiment...
This is exactly why I am using a MOT transformer to do this kind of experiments.
Yes, high power mains transformers in the half to the 1-2 kWatt range have primary coils made from thick wire, so copper resistance is not the main problem. However their core laminations can have upper frequency limits that may prevent them to get meaningful power output because losses above some hundred Hertz or in the very low kHz range become prohibitive. Perhaps the so called Hypersil cores do not suffer from as much frequency limitation as the laminations with normal 4% Si content.
And I assume your MOT's primary may serve as a "coupling coil" to the very high impedance secondary coil.
QuoteAnd Yes Reactive Power will be consumed, but in my opinion this is a nonissue, because we always can power factor correct this.
Yes this is what would be the most welcome tests and looking forward to seeing such tests where really useful output power can be received at the output and the big question is: at what input power price?
Thanks, Gyula
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 11, 2011, 10:28:10 PM
Hello Everyone,
The coils employed in this prototype are 4.5 ohms, 16 gauge bi-filar wound series connected with M1 core laminations and create acceleration at 1800 RPM with a 10 ohm light bulb. Each coil can produce 50 Watts or more and the magnets are 90 lb pulling weight. They create so much torque and acceleration that two set screws on each rotor were not enough to keep them secured to the drive shaft and they had to be returned to the machinist to have key-ways installed. Even now the air gap on each side is about 1/2 an inch. When properly balanced with three rotors and offset cores the cogging torque is virtually zero and the core "cost" was very low - which is reduced as speed increases anyway and is NOT an issue.
http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins?feature=mhee#p/u/4/u3gVfltiO-E
I will post the test data when I find it to end this discussion (which is a waste of time BTW) because all generators have coils and cores with some hysterisis losses inherent in them but not all generators accelerate when a load is applied which is the REAL issue.
Cheers
Thane
WOW Thane,
i'm just catching up on bits of this thread.
4.5 ohms @ 16-gauge is 9.5 pounds of wire, crikey !!!
No wonder you're getting 50 watts :)
I've got hold of a MOT so i may join you chaps on that journey soon.
In the meantime i've been watching ALL of Thane's youtube videos (all 62 of them !) :
http://www.youtube.com/user/thanecheins
It's a very sound and logical journey, it's very interesting seeing the concept go through it's stages of development and i recommend that everyone views the lot of them.
If you use FireFox and want to download them all in one go then i'd recommend this plugin :
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/bytubed-bulk-youtube-video-dow/
Best to all,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on October 17, 2011, 11:22:36 AM
WOW Thane,
In the meantime i've been watching ALL of Thane's youtube videos (all 62 of them !) :
http://www.youtube.com/user/thanecheins
It's a very sound and logical journey, it's very interesting seeing the concept go through it's stages of development and i recommend that everyone views the lot of them.
Best to all,
DC.
HEY DC,
THANKS FOR NOTICING! 8) YOU ARE ONE OF THE FIRST TO FULLY UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS.
WHEN PDI SET UP SHOP AT OTTAWA UNIVERSITY BACK IN 2008, DR. HABASH GAVE US AN OTTAWA U (OU) WEBPAGE TO CHRONICLE THE EVOLUTION OF THE ReGenX TECHNOLOGY IN AN OPEN PUBLIC FORUM WITH AN OPEN DOOR POLICY FOR ANYONE TO COME AND SEE THE TECHNOLOGY IDEALLY BEFORE THEY CRITICIZED IT. :-\
ALMOST EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT HIT THE FAN WHEN THE TORONTO STAR PUBLISHED THEIR
"IS IT PERPETUAL MOTION?" READER MANIPULATION STORY. >:(
WHAT PEOPLE DON'T KNOW IS THAT DR. ZAHN REFUSED TO SPEAK TO US AFTER THAT, AND DR. HABASH REMOVED THE CONTENT FROM THE WEB PAGE AND LIED WHEN HE TOLD ME SOMEONE HACKED INTO THE UNIVERSITY SERVER AND TOOK IT DOWN... THEN THE LIES CONTINUED RIGHT UP UNTIL PDI WAS EVENTUALLY EXPELLED FROM OTTAWA U IN 2010 BECAUSE THE DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING DIDN'T LIKE "PERPETUAL MOTION RESEARCH" (EVEN THOUGH IT ISN'T AND EVEN THOUGH I BEGGED HIM MANY TIMES TO COME AND SEE THE TECHNOLOGY). :P
THANKS TO THIS FORUM THE TRUTH AND THE TECHNOLOGY'S JOURNEY CAN BE SHARED AND KEPT ALIVE IN THE EVENT THAT THE ABOVE NEGATIVE EVENTS ARE REPLAYED IN THE FUTURE... :'(
CHEERS ;)
T
CC
tyler@cleanbreak.ca,
"Markus Zahn" <zahn@mit.edu>,
rhabash@site.uottawa.ca,
dean@eng.uottawa.ca,
"Emil M.Petriu" <petriu@site.uottawa.ca>
<jackiesyrett@rogers.com>
Quote from: gyulasun on October 17, 2011, 05:52:16 AM
Hi Luc,
Ok, now it is clear how you meant the zero phase shift occuring i.e. not occuring... :)
Yes, a transformer will always consume at least reactive current and the less copper and core loss a transformer has got, the closer the phase shift would be to the ideal 90° phase shift. When you start loading it, surely you can find a frequency where this phase shift would not change due to the load but the same reactive current is still consumed by the primary coil. I do not know if such a low impedance transformer exists off the shelf, the frequency you test it is always a question and what purpose a specific transformer was manufactured for.
Well, the formula to calculate the frequency where a coil can have 800 Ohm inductive reactance is f=XL/(2pi*L) i.e. f=800/(6.28*L)
For your 220mH coil the frequency where you would have 800 Ohm inductive reactance would be f=800/(6.28*0.22)=579 Hz However, the 17.2 Ohm resistance would "ruin" the phase angle a little: arctan800/17.2=88.76°phase angle would be involved so an even higher frequency should be found... At 9 kHz the 220mH coil has an XL of 124344 Ohm reactance this gives a phase angle of 89.99° with its own 17.2 Ohm wire resistance...
From your third scope shot the current via your 220mH primary is 0.0177A this is what is established by the series 10 Ohm shunt and the inductive impedance of this coil at 248 Hz. This current dissipates PL=0.0177*0.0177*17.2=0.00538W power i.e 5.38 mW loss in the coil.
Gyula
Thanks Gyula for all the calculations and suggestions.
Always lots to learn :P
Luc
AS SENT TO ALL THE BIG WIGS LISTED BELOW...
HOW TO AVOID OIL WAR # 3 with IRANDear All,
As the USA prepares to embark on yet another "oil war" with Iran I would like to propose a way to avoid it.
Below is a video proof which demonstrates that energy can indeed be created buy using the Work Energy Principle and by doing work without energy. This video demonstration can be repeated at any time for anyone as can all the other demonstrations on our YouTube Channel http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins?feature=mhee.
THIS NEW ENERGY INFORMATION WILL MAKE THE OIL WAR JUSTIFICATION MOOT AND WILL DIVERT MEDIA ATTENTION AWAY FROM SOMETHING TERRIBLE AND WASTEFUL TOWARDS SOMETHING USEFUL AND GOOD - BUT YOUR PARTICIPATION IS REQUIRED.
Kind regards
Thane
ENERGY CAN BE CREATED VIDEO
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_wleUlcMK0
ReGenX Technology has been independently replicated over half a dozen times with a Dutch replication below.
http://www.youtube.com/user/overunityguide#p/a/u/0/kzxc3Ai4T3A
CC
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: HOW TO AVOID OIL WAR # 3 with IRANFrom: <thaneh@potentialdifference.ca>
Date: Sat, October 15, 2011 9:10 am
To: thaneh@potentialdifference.ca
Cc: "Bill Moore" <editor@evworld.com>, "Mike Brace"<techeditor@evworld.com>, "Jérôme_DANGMANN" <jerome.mog@free.fr>,
"andres francisco moreno yuste" <vehiculosverdes@googlemail.com>, "JayIyengar" <jd43@chrysler.com>, marc.boismenu@gm.com,
phil.petsinis@gm.com, "Hearsch,Dan" <Dan.Hearsch@ricardo.com>,"Bailo,Carla (NTCNA)" <BailoC@NRD.NISSAN-USA.COM>, "都留 å...¸å"
<n-tsuru@tbk.t-com.ne.jp>, "LEONDIS,GEORGE"<George_leondis@mail.nissan.co.jp>, "Tom Prucha"<Tom.Prucha@proteanelectric.com>, "Roger Atkins"
<sidatkins@hotmail.com>, "Sasha Serkh" <AS7571@gates.com>, "GaryGloceri" <ganue@comcast.net>, "Jay Giraud"
<jay@rapidelectricvehicles.com>, "Al Cormier" <al.cormier@emc-mec.ca>,"Mike Elwood" <melwood@azuredynamics.com>, "shrikar dole"
<shrikardole@yahoo.com>, "Thane Heins" <thane_heins@yahoo.ca>, "Tyler Hamilton" <mcmurchie@gmail.com>, "RICHARD SYRETT"
<jackiesyrett@rogers.com>, james@jperrykelly.com, "John Lake"<cfo@greentv.com>, "Owen Charles" <owen@gotpower.com>, "Rob"
<aka.teslaalset@gmail.com>, mbennett@ultrasystems.com, "Mike Collier"<lithiumstorage@gmail.com>, "Barsilos" <barsilos@aol.com>, "Babcat
Babcat Babcat the Babcat" <babcat5@hotmail.com>, "Seanna Watson"<seanna.watson@gmail.com>, "James Kirtley" <kirtley@MIT.EDU>, "Walter
Lewin" <lewin@space.mit.edu>, "Wolfgang Ketterle" <ketterle@MIT.EDU>,"Markus Zahn" <zahn@mit.edu>, ehsani@ece.tamu.edu,
alireza.bakhshai@queensu.ca, Brian.Fleck@ualberta.ca,pfrise@uwindsor.ca, "David Mann" <david.m5561@gmail.com>, "J. Shin"<jshin@alcor.concordia.ca>, "M. Ehsani" <ehsani@mail.ece.tamu.edu>,"Theodore Gray" <theodore@wolfram.com>, "Eric Poisson"<epoisson@uoguelph.ca>, "James Eberhardt" <James.Eberhardt@ee.doe.gov>,
"Anna Jaffe" <ajaffe@mit.edu>, "Mitchell Olszewski"<olszewskim@ornl.gov>, jackiesyrett@rogers.com, "Kyle White"<Kyle.White@calgary.ca>, rhabash@site.uottawa.ca, dean@eng.uottawa.ca,"Emil M.Petriu" <petriu@site.uottawa.ca>, ted.sargent@utoronto.ca,"Catherine Shearer-Kudel" <cshearerkudel@ocepp.ca>, "Josie Rubino"<jrubino@ocepp.ca>, "Steven Novella" <stevennovella@comcast.net>,GiovanniFusina" <Giovanni.Fusina@drdc-rddc.gc.ca>, "EloisYaxley"
<elois@newdata.ca>, steven.novella@yale.edu, "Sterling Allan" <sterlingda@pureenergysystems.com>,"Patrick Timpone" <patrick@1radionetwork.com>, "JoanneSchnurr"
<jschnurr@ctv.ca>, pbrent@ctv.ca, tyler@cleanbreak.ca, robmac@yorku.ca, jackel@yorku.ca, lehn@ecf.utoronto.ca, chair@physics.utoronto.ca, editor@thevarsity.ca, scott.anderson@utoronto.ca, stacey.gibson@utoronto.ca, city@thestar.ca, tepeditors@thestar.ca, wheels@thestar.ca, haigscience@gmail.com, haigscience@hotmail.com, "Patrick Timpone" <patrick@1radionetwork.com>, jayweidner@sacredmysteries.com, sharronrose@sacredmysteries.com,
HERE IS A GOOD READ...
FUNNY THING, MAINSTREAM SCIENCE PEOPLE DON'T USE TERMS LIKE OVERUNITY OR VIOLATING THE LAW OF CONSERVATION OF ENERGY THEY USE TERMS LIKE...
NET GAIN ;)
DO YOU THINK WE CAN CONVINCE STEFAN TO CHANGE THE OU FORUM'S NAME TO THE NET GAIN FORUM?
CHEERS
T
ps - is it just me or does that wall plug look like this :D ?
Dear Thane,
Any news on my asking?
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=11350.msg302139#msg302139
Thanks, Gyula
Hi everyone,
since now I learned how to correctly calculate Pin and Pout thanks to Thane and Gyula I decided to test the BiTT.
From all the paying around with the BiTT I can tell you it's a very different Transformer then the one I built.
One of the main difference is there is no ideal Frequency it works better at. The 50Hz to 200Hz range is all the same and Frequencies above that the output starts to go down in a linear way.
The other difference is Load, the more the load the more the Phase shift. Mine, the more the load (short is best) the more I can drop the Frequency and still have a Frequency that I get Zero Phase shift loaded or not.
Here are my Power Calculations from the Scope data. Shunt is 10 Ohms and S1 & S2 loads are 150 Ohms each. Test is done at 60Hz.
First scope shot is no load
Second scope shot is with loads and Interestingly enough it has the same 76.5 Phase angle then my Transformer.
Third scope shot we can see all the data and I calculate 0.0246713136 Watts in
Power out is 0.001944 Watts on S2 and 0.0015876 Watts on S1 for a Total of 0.0035316 Watts out
Looks to be a little under the 14.5% efficiency range
If Thane or anyone else see a problem in my calculations please point them out
Luc
Okay my friends... here it is :D
The GTL 90 Transformer.
Operating a load with perfect 90 Degrees Phase Shift at 60Hz :o from my Signal Generator Output ... Reactive Power man 8)
Shunt Resistor is 10 Ohms and Load is also 10 Ohms
First Scope Shot is no Load close up Phase check
Second Shot is with 10 Ohm Load close up Phase check
Third Scope Shot is with 10 Ohm Load full view and Data
Let me know what you think
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc link=topic=11350.msg302770#msg302770
Here are my Power Calculations from the Scope data. Shunt is 10 Ohms and S1 & S2 loads are 150 Ohms each. Test is done at 60Hz.
@Luc, have you tried two different loads at the same time on the BIT? So lets say S1: 30 Ohms and for instance S2: 150 Ohms? My guess is that this will amplify the counter Lenz effects between the two secondaries, playing inside the special BIT transformer... Of course all this without reflecting to the primary coil.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Quote from: Overunityguide on October 17, 2011, 05:02:02 PM
@Luc, have you tried two different loads at the same time on the BIT? So lets say S1: 30 Ohms and for instance S2: 150 Ohms? My guess is that this will amplify the counter Lenz effects between the two secondaries, playing inside the special BIT transformer... Of course all this without reflecting to the primary coil.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Dear Overunityguide
please look at my new post above yours.
Luc
Hi Luc,
Can you show a photo of these setups BIT/GTL90? Just curious...
Your calculations are correct for the BIT.
On your GTL90 I wonder if a power factor correction could be done like Overunityguide mentioned this afternoon?
To do it, you need to know the input coil self inductance and choose a capacitor with the same reactance at 60 Hz the input coil has at 60 Hz. Then connect this cap in parallel with the input coil, this way the input impedance will be real with no phase shift between input current and voltage instead of the present 90° shift.
Gyula
Edited
Still a better improvement so I re-posted the Scope Shots.
Now 182mv of Reactive Power on the 10 Ohm load
0.00324 Watts of Free Power ;D
Now it's time to plug it in the wall :o
Wish me luck
Luc
Quote from: gyulasun on October 17, 2011, 05:11:51 PM
Hi Luc,
Can you show a photo of these setups BIT/GTL90? Just curious...
Your calculations are correct for the BIT.
On your GTL90 I wonder if a power factor correction could be done like Overunityguide mentioned this afternoon?
To do it, you need to know the input coil self inductance and choose a capacitor with the same reactance at 60 Hz the input coil has at 60 Hz. Then connect this cap in parallel with the input coil, this way the input impedance will be real with no phase shift between input current and voltage instead of the present 90° shift.
Gyula
Humm :-\... I thought that 90 degrees Phase shift was the best scenario. I achieve it and now you say something else is better.
Inductance of my Primary is 220mH
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on October 17, 2011, 05:38:45 PM
Humm :-\... I thought that 90 degrees Phase shift was the best scenario. I achieve it and now you say something else is better.
Inductance of my Primary is 220mH
Luc
Luc, I do not know if it is better or not... just repeated a suggestion that a reactive input can be power factor corrected.
Primary coil inductive reactance is 82.896 Ohm, this needs a 32 uF parallel cap to get resonance at 60 Hz.
Quote from: gotoluc on October 17, 2011, 05:38:45 PM
Humm :-\... I thought that 90 degrees Phase shift was the best scenario. I achieve it and now you say something else is better.
Luc
HEY LUC,
DON'T LISTEN TO THESE GUYS THEY ARE ALL ON CRACK! ;)
POWER FACTOR CORRECTION IS GENERALLY DONE ON A BUILDING AS A WHOLE ANYWAY...
SOON THERE WON'T BE A GRID SO THE POINT IS MOOT ANYWAY.
NOW IF YOU STICK YOUR BiTT (WITH ZERO POWER FACTOR) IN BETWEEN AN ELECTRIC CAR'S GENERATOR AND THE BATTERY (PF = 1) AND YOU WILL HAVE REACTIONLESS (LENZ FREE) TRANSFER OF POWER WHICH IS WHAT THIS THREAD IS ALL ABOUT. :D
ACTUALLY YOU CAN USE THE BiTT BETWEEN THE BATTERY AND MOTOR AS WELL.
CHEERS
T
PS 1
GOTOLUC 90 TRANSFORMER PHOTOS PLEASE?
PS 2
NOW THAT YOU HAVE A PF = 0 PRIMARY POWER CONSUMPTION = Ip(squared) x Rdcprimary
PS 3
NICE SCOPE WORK BTW (EVEN IF I DO SAY SO MYSELF :-X)
MY ELECTRONICS PROFESSOR PETER CARILLO IS SMILING DOWN FROM HEAVEN RIGHT NOW SEEING THAT I ACTUALLY LEARNED SOMETHING IN HIS CLASS AFTERALL).
Quote from: gotoluc on October 17, 2011, 05:25:56 PM
0.00324 Watts of Free Power ;D
Luc
0.00324 WATTS - PRIMARY CURRENT (SQUARED) x PRIMARY DC RESISTANCE.
CHEERS
T
Here are the new Scope Shots with the GTL 90 Transformer connected to 120vac 60Hz Grid Power
Power in Reactive = 0 Watts
Power out = 0.74 Watts
Please note that I changed the Shunt Resistor to 1 Ohm since Input Voltage is much higher then the Singal Generator Output was.
First Shot is GTL 90 Transformer with 120vac 60Hz Grid Power no Load (phase check)
Second Shot is GTL 90 Transformer with 120vac 60Hz Grid Power & 10 Ohms Load (phase check)
Third Shot is GTL 90 Transformer with 120vac 60Hz Grid Power & 10 Ohms Load (complete view & data)
One interesting thing about this Transformer is when I connect the 10 Ohm load to the Secondary there is Zero effect to the Primary Phase degree. You can see that between the first scope shot (no load) and the second scope shot (10 ohm load).
Please post your comments
Luc
At anyone interested,
I made a video of my last day of sailing for this Season.
Location: Ottawa River, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Sailboat: 1978 Pearson 23 feet long, with 8 foot beam (wide), 2.5 foot draft (deep) with swing fin up (shoal draft keel)
I bought this Sailboat for $350 in the Spring of 2010. The stern Starboard corner was ripped open in a storm so it was written off. I restore the boat in the Spring and Summer of 2010 to close to new condition.
Link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELrXokXjWpY
Luc
I'm posting these scope shots just for the fun of it.
I can adjust the Voltage to Lead the Current by 97 degrees which give a Negative cos of -0.1219
However the output starts to drop
I calculate -0.7878 Watts returned to Grid and 0.2133 Watts on the 10 Ohm Load
Let me know if I calculated it right
Luc
Especially for GotoLuc:
(good work on the GTL 90 Transformer BTW)
Amsterdam Canal Boat Trip Part1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31i8kvkJoWY
Amsterdam Canal Boat Trip Part2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CePs4Dde7ck&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
And Luc I want you to know that I am also feeling myself "MAD LIKE TESLA" !
BTW what is in the book?
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Quote from: Overunityguide on October 18, 2011, 03:27:55 AM
Especially for GotoLuc:
(good work on the GTL 90 Transformer BTW)
Amsterdam Canal Boat Trip Part1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31i8kvkJoWY
Amsterdam Canal Boat Trip Part2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CePs4Dde7ck&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
And Luc I want you to know that I am also feeling myself "MAD LIKE TESLA" !
BTW what is in the book?
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
http://madliketesla.com/about-the-book/
Quote from: gotoluc on October 17, 2011, 11:26:15 PM
However the output starts to drop
Luc
HEY LUC,
THIS IS WHAT YOU WOULD EXPECT... SINCE THE SECONDARY INDUCED BEMF FLUX IS
INCREASING THE PRIMARY IMPEDANCE INSTEAD OF DECREASING IT AS PER A CONVENTIONAL TRANSFORMER.
YOU CAN SEE THAT YOUR PRIMARY CURRENT HAS DECREASED ALSO.
PRIMARY CURRENT MAGNITUDE DETERMINES SECONDARY VOLTAGE SO IF IT DROPS LOAD POWER DROPS AS WELL.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: gotoluc on October 17, 2011, 07:37:30 PM
Here are the new Scope Shots with the GTL 90 Transformer connected to 120vac 60Hz Grid Power
Power in Reactive = 0 Watts
Power out = 0.74 Watts
Please note that I changed the Shunt Resistor to 1 Ohm since Input Voltage is much higher then the Singal Generator Output was.
First Shot is GTL 90 Transformer with 120vac 60Hz Grid Power no Load (phase check)
Second Shot is GTL 90 Transformer with 120vac 60Hz Grid Power & 10 Ohms Load (phase check)
Third Shot is GTL 90 Transformer with 120vac 60Hz Grid Power & 10 Ohms Load (complete view & data)
One interesting thing about this Transformer is when I connect the 10 Ohm load to the Secondary there is Zero effect to the Primary Phase degree. You can see that between the first scope shot (no load) and the second scope shot (10 ohm load).
Please post your comments
Luc
Hi Folks,
From Luc's scope shots it is seen the voltage drop across his 1 Ohm shunt resistor is 110mV. It is ok that this 110 milliAmper is a reactive current because the input voltage leads 90° wrt the input current but it SHOULD be supplied from the mains to maintain the induction in his GTL90 transformer.
So what is the advantage with this or similar setups I wonder.
Thanks, Gyula
PS Luc, would like to invite you (and anyone else) for this sightseeing here
www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OkPLfOjCW0
(music by Johann Strauss: Blue Danube Waltz)
Quote from: gyulasun on October 18, 2011, 07:08:36 AM
So what is the advantage with this or similar setups I wonder.
Thanks, Gyula
IF LUC'S DATA IS CORRECT IT MEANS THAT HE CAN CHARGE HIS CELLPHONE OR EV USING ONLY REACTIVE (BORROWED) POWER, REACTIVE CURRENT USED ON ONE HALF OF THE SINEWAVE AND RETURNED ON THE OTHER... NET CONSUMPTION = 0.0 WATTS (EXCEPT FOR SOME SMALL DC HEAT DISSIPATION see http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/tracir.html#c4 in this case 50 Watts instead of 2600 Watts).
REACTIVE CURRENT PROVES THAT GOD EXISTS BECAUSE WHO ELSE BUT A BEING OF INFINITE LOVE WOULD CREATE SOMETHING THAT EVERYONE CAN USE (ANY AMOUNT OF) AND NEVER PUT A DENT IN THE ORIGINAL SUPPLY? WOW NOW THAT'S A MIRACLE BABY! :D
AND EVERYONE ON THE GRID CAN DO THE SAME SHARING AND WE CAN ALL GET DOWN TO THE BUSINESS OF ENDING THESE BOAT RIDES.
Quote from: Overunityguide on October 18, 2011, 03:27:55 AM
Especially for GotoLuc:
(good work on the GTL 90 Transformer BTW)
Amsterdam Canal Boat Trip Part1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31i8kvkJoWY
Amsterdam Canal Boat Trip Part2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CePs4Dde7ck&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
And Luc I want you to know that I am also feeling myself "MAD LIKE TESLA" !
BTW what is in the book?
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Thanks Overunityguide for the videos. Did you shoot them yourself?
So I guess you live in Amsterdam?... I have been there to visit for a day when my sister was living in Belgium. Very nice and diversified city. So much to see. We did not get the chance to do a canal boat tour. I like all the floating homes. Great stuff
Thanks for sharing
Luc
@Wings, thanks for the link on the book.
Quote from: gyulasun on October 18, 2011, 07:08:36 AM
Hi Folks,
From Luc's scope shots it is seen the voltage drop across his 1 Ohm shunt resistor is 110mV. It is ok that this 110 milliAmper is a reactive current because the input voltage leads 90° wrt the input current but it SHOULD be supplied from the mains to maintain the induction in his GTL90 transformer.
So what is the advantage with this or similar setups I wonder.
Thanks, Gyula
PS Luc, would like to invite you (and anyone else) for this sightseeing here
www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OkPLfOjCW0
(music by Johann Strauss: Blue Danube Waltz)
Hi Gyula
I don't fully understand the advantage of a Transformer having these characteristics!... this is all new to me. I just learned yesterday how to correctly calculate AC Power ;D
So, that will be my next investigation project. How to use this in a practical application.
I will post what I find as usual.
So you live in Budapest , Hungary?... looks very beautiful at night from the water. I wonder if they could use some Reactive Transformers to Power all those lights. ;D
A few years back I went to Tychy, Poland to do some volunteer construction work of a new youth center. I wish I would of known you then and how close I was to see Budapest.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
PS did you shoot the video yourself?... if you did! great job ;)
Hi Luc,
My "problem" with such transformers is that you have to give input power continuously and although it sounds good the transformer gives it back (albeit with some loss) in the other half sine wave as Thane wrote but the bottom line is that input power should be created first and if millions of people would start using many kilo or Megawatts of reactive power from the mains, the utility providers surely would find out how to handle the situation and continue charging for electricity accordingly. It is hard to believe they would cooperate with the consumers...
Nevertheless, it is always good to learn from hands on tests.
Gyula
PS No I did not shoot the video.
Quote from: gyulasun on October 18, 2011, 12:33:37 PM
Hi Luc,
My "problem" with such transformers is that you have to give input power continuously and although it sounds good the transformer gives it back (albeit with some loss) in the other half sine wave as Thane wrote but the bottom line is that input power should be created first and if millions of people would start using many kilo or Megawatts of reactive power from the mains, the utility providers surely would find out how to handle the situation and continue charging for electricity accordingly. It is hard to believe they would cooperate with the consumers...
Nevertheless, it is always good to learn from hands on tests.
Gyula
PS No I did not shoot the video.
this can be a solution?
Use of electrical power multiplication for power smoothing in power distribution James F. Corum
http://www.google.com/patents?id=kqiYAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://www.energeticforum.com/attachments/renewable-energy/8622d1311265352-resonance-properties-rotating-ring-circuits-ring-circuits.pdf
Tesla everywhere
http://books.google.ch/books?id=ZNqo1zaZRTYC&lpg=PA215&ots=ZJXOJknmUP&dq=%22Resonance%20Properties%20of%20Ring%20Circuits%22&hl=it&pg=PA202#v=onepage&q=%22Resonance%20Properties%20of%20Ring%20Circuits%22&f=false
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 05, 2011, 06:52:19 AM
DEAR OUG,
I HAVE ANOTHER JOB FOR YOU FOR WHEN YOU GET BACK FROM YOUR BUSINESS TRIP THIS SATURDAY. :-*
MAKE A BI-FILAR SERIES CONNECTED SECONDARY COIL FOR YOUR ORIGINAL LENZ DELAY TRANSFORMER SO YOU CAN SHOW HOW THE BI-FILAR WOUND COIL DIFFERS FROM THE HIGH IMPEDANCE SINGLE WIRE WOUND COIL.
CHEERS
T
Dear Thane,
This is exactly what I have done last week, and I have played several days with it by now. My bifilar series connected coil has two windings both of about 3 Ohms each. And I have used this coil as a secondary transformer coil just like in my first transformer video about the Delayed Lenz Effect inside a transformer.
For now my conclusions are: That when I run the setup on 950 Hz that for the bifilar series connected secondary transformer coil I am getting the same effect with my LED light bulb load, just as in my high impedance secondary coil transformer experiment. 0.2 Watts input power drop going to the primary coil.
But for now, because my bifilar series connected secondary coil has got two windings of low DC resistance, I had decided to load them with a 5 Watts 12V incandescent car light bulb. (also on 950Hz) So after doing this I came to the conclusion that my input voltage going to the primary had to be higher, so this is what I did. And after increasing the input voltage going to the primary coil I saw the following effect taking place:
After connecting the load to the bifilar series connected secondary coil, the input power going to my primary coil went up by 4 Watts, and there was going about 3.2 Watts to the 12v car light bulb in this scenario. So 80% efficient by now, was the best I could squeeze out of it.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 29, 2011, 04:38:43 PM
HEY LUC,
YOU HAVE A RESONANT CIRCUIT THERE... ;)
I STILL WONDER IF THIS (AND OVERUNITYGUIDE'S) TRANSFORMER DELAYED LENZ IS ACTUALLY A CORE HYSTERISIS DELAYED EFFECT OR A BIT OF BOTH?
CHEERS
T
To continue with the above, I now am thinking also that the Lenz Delay has to do something with the "CORE HYSTERISIS DELAYED EFFECT" which you are describing above, rather then that it has to do something with input or output coils of the transformer... So for now I do think that building a proper core which can be saturated above a certain level can be the key to further enhance the Delayed Lenz Effect.
Thane I think that you are aware of the Gabriel Device? Which can be viewed in the following thread:
Gabriel Device, possible COP=8: (Operation: Thane Heins effect based device)
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10518.0
Furthermore, I do think that the following Tesla patent can be very helpful when trying to do further experimentation in this Delayed Lenz Effect field:
http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-433,702-electrical-transformer
Ok, I think that was all for today,
Wishing you all the Best and With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Hello,
Lenz-Delay ?
Here we go: http://www.intalek.com/Papers/zaev1.pdf (http://www.intalek.com/Papers/zaev1.pdf)
Regards
Katgor01
Just a small update.
Yesterday i tested a bifilar-wound, serially connected coil, the same 0.25mm coil i previously had as straight-wound, the performance increases in terms of a rise in frequency and a drop in current draw are on the order of four times better than a straight-wound coil.
Here's a short clip of the new coil in action. I plan to get a cheap HD camera soon, apologies for fuzziness and mesy desk ;+}
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8DEYX-e6_Q
Best to all,
DC.
Quote from: Overunityguide on October 19, 2011, 06:45:02 AM
To continue with the above, I now am thinking also that the Lenz Delay has to do something with the "CORE HYSTERISIS DELAYED EFFECT" which you are describing above, rather then that it has to do something with input or output coils of the transformer... So for now I do think that building a proper core which can be saturated above a certain level can be the key to further enhance the Delayed Lenz Effect.
Hi Overunityguide,
I also believe the Delayed Lenz effect has to do with the core.
Thanks for sharing your new tests results
Quote from: Overunityguide on October 19, 2011, 06:45:02 AM
Furthermore, I do think that the following Tesla patent can be very helpful when trying to do further experimentation in this Delayed Lenz Effect field:
http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-433,702-electrical-transformer
You may also want to look at this Tesla Patent which is 4 years later then the one above.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=uwhBAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=1#v=onepage&q&f=false
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Agreed with Luc on core material.
I am running my device at ~400 Hz.
I have tried ferrite, with poor, if any, acceleration under load or even short-circuit.
Bright, mild steel was OK, the effect was there.
My best results so far are from the loose bolts contained in masonry anchor shields, i'm unsure of their material composition but i cut into one and it looks like steel but could be an alloy.
The seller of the bolts doesn't have a clue what they are made from and seems to think i'm rather odd in asking ;+}
I just tried a bifilar/series coil with two conductors of different size, hoping that the difference in potential between them may enhance the effect, but it degrades it, the effect is still there but suffers by 30% in rotor frequency and 12% in currrent draw.
Best to all,
DC.
My laminations arrived today.
The performance was not as good as my loose anchor bolts !
Results in spreadsheet here :
http://www.mediafire.com/?zh6s7dwt21wx53h
If you don't have excel installed then get the viewer here :
http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?id=10
Best to all,
DC.
Quote from: gotoluc on October 19, 2011, 10:08:25 AM
Hi Overunityguide,
I also believe the Delayed Lenz effect has to do with the core.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
YOU ARE ALL ON CRACK...!
IT'S NOT DELAYED LENZ AT ALL IT'S
DIVERTED LENZ 8) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lu0MDMDChSg 8)
JUST KIDDING A BIT OF BOTH IS REQUIRED ;)
CHEERS
T
Deep cut
RE: anchor bolts and support sleeves.
Grade 5 material unless its Xtra high strength application [85 ->100,000. psi material]
There should be an AISI spec or an ASTM spec on the product for reference.
Chet
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 19, 2011, 07:25:53 PM
YOU ARE ALL ON CRACK...!
IT'S NOT DELAYED LENZ AT ALL IT'S DIVERTED LENZ 8) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lu0MDMDChSg 8)
JUST KIDDING A BIT OF BOTH IS REQUIRED ;)
CHEERS
T
Hey Cranky ;]
Was wondering what you think about these 2 pdfs.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on October 19, 2011, 09:49:54 PM
Hey Cranky ;]
Was wondering what you think about these 2 pdfs.
Mags
DEAR MAGS, IT'S THE SAME FOR
EVERY IDEA :-\ CHEERS T
Hmm, well I was just wondering what you thought, as in whether you agree with what the pdfs say.
Thanks
Mags
Quote from: wings on October 18, 2011, 03:05:27 PM
this can be a solution?
Use of electrical power multiplication for power smoothing in power distribution James F. Corum
http://www.google.com/patents?id=kqiYAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://www.energeticforum.com/attachments/renewable-energy/8622d1311265352-resonance-properties-rotating-ring-circuits-ring-circuits.pdf
Tesla everywhere
http://books.google.ch/books?id=ZNqo1zaZRTYC&lpg=PA215&ots=ZJXOJknmUP&dq=%22Resonance%20Properties%20of%20Ring%20Circuits%22&hl=it&pg=PA202#v=onepage&q=%22Resonance%20Properties%20of%20Ring%20Circuits%22&f=false
Hi Wings,
Thanks for the links. The Corum brothers have studied Tesla's work thoroughly and I assume their applications / patents were born from practical tests too. I mean several patent applications because the one from James Corum you refer to (US 20060190513) was preceeded by two on the same subject and the application numbers were US 20060190511 and US 20060190512.
So these applications need studying and testing, together with the Parametric power multiplication application US 2007132489 ( http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?FT=D&date=20070614&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP&CC=US&NR=2007132489A1&KC=A1 )
Thanks, Gyula
Quote from: Magluvin on October 20, 2011, 12:28:29 AM
Hmm, well I was just wondering what you thought, as in whether you agree with what the pdfs say.
Thanks
Mags
DEAR MAGS,
I AGREE THAT ALOT OF WORK HAS GONE INTO THE PDFS BUT I AM SORRY I DON'T HAVE ANY SPECULATIVE OPINION ON WHAT WILL HAPPEN IN REAL LIFE... MAGNETISM HAS ITS OWN RULES AND MANY HAVE NOT EVEN BEEN ENCOUNTERED YET BY EXPLORERS. THE ONLY WAY TO FIND OUT IS TO BUILD IT AND GET SOME DATA. UNFORTUNATELY IF IT DOES ACTUALLY WORK THEY "WON'T COME" BUT WILL TRY TO IGNORE IT FOR AS LONG AS POSSIBLE. :-X
CHEERS
T
JUST AN FYI FOR ALL YOU PERPETUAL LEARNERS OUT THERE... ;)
PHASE SHIFTING TRANSFORMERS
http://www.esat.kuleuven.be/electa/publications/fulltexts/pub_1502.pdf
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 20, 2011, 09:07:00 AM
JUST AN FYI FOR ALL YOU PERPETUAL LEARNERS OUT THERE... ;)
PHASE SHIFTING TRANSFORMERS
http://www.esat.kuleuven.be/electa/publications/fulltexts/pub_1502.pdf
CHEERS
T
.....
Magtech has developed a controllable inductance. It is controlled by a magnetic flux in a copper and iron coil. A small DC current changes the relative permeability in the iron, and makes the inductance continuously variable.
http://www.energyvcfair.com/download_05/FORUM_B/4_Magtech_Vol1.pdf
site:
http://www.magtech.no/
patents
7256678
7061356
7180206
7259544
6965291
Application number: 11/033,483
Application number: 10/700,349
Quote from: wings on October 20, 2011, 11:13:35 AM
.....
Magtech has developed a controllable inductance. It is controlled by a magnetic flux in a copper and iron coil. A small DC current changes the relative permeability in the iron, and makes the inductance continuously variable.
http://www.energyvcfair.com/download_05/FORUM_B/4_Magtech_Vol1.pdf
NICE!
I BET GOTOLUC WILL BE INTERESTED IN THIS:
Dynamics of Orthogonal Coil Conditioning http://www.intalek.com/Index/Projects/Research/VTA_Conditioning.pdf
CHEERS
T
Test results, 500g of 0.25mm, bifilar-wound, series-connected, laminated-core coil.
This coil/core combination overspeeds the rotor when shorted.
Rotor with no coil/core present.
Hz : 450
mA : 443
Rotor with coil/core present, open-circuit.
Hz : 450
mA : 438
Rotor with coil/core persent, short-circuit.
Hz : 455
mA 433
Video here :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onvYaT-k7yk
Thanks for reading,
DC.
Hi All
After my experiment with the transformer (MOT) and other test as per Overunityguide and Luc , i decided to try a replication of the Overunityguide experiment in his video.
Until now i did not get any acceleration under load with all my different experiments. (Muller, Romero etc.. )
And thank's to Deepcut info i decided to test one of my old Bificoil ( not so much DC resistance ) and made a slight modif on a Monopole drum by adding a counter pole magnet between each older one.
So the result is very interesting and is confirming the Thane's experiment another time.
Youp :o i will have hard sleeping these next days
Thank's to all for contribution, and do not hesitate to try .
Laurent
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrbEtXCsXiw
Hello wings,
what magtech presents here is very old stuff, goes way back to somewhere between 1898 to 1930 and is called "magnetic amplifier"
They ceased teaching this in germany at the technical universities in 1960. I was lucky to find a book in an east-germany university-library : Transductor-controlling technology, which is a very good and stable method to control hydroxy-cells.
I doubt it will be possible to patent this old technique.
Regards
Kator01
Quote from: woopy on October 20, 2011, 05:12:38 PM
Hi All
So the result is very interesting and is confirming the Thane's experiment another time.
Laurent
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrbEtXCsXiw
NICE WORK LAURENT,
I SUGGEST YOU TRY ANOTHER TEST AT 600 RPM AND I BET YOU WILL SEE DECELERATION EVEN WITH A SHORT.
OR CHANGE YOUR SERIES CONNECTED BI-FILAR TO PARALLEL CONNECTED BI-FILAR AND SEE MASSIVE BRAKING EFFECTS.
KIND REGARDS
Thane
generator [ˈdÊ'É›nəˌreɪtÉ™]n
1. (Physics / General Physics) Physics
a. any device for converting mechanical energy into electrical energy by electromagnetic induction,
I HAVE SAID IT BEFORE AND I WILL SAY IT AGAIN...THE INPUT TO AN ELECTRIC GENERATOR IS:
THE MECHANICAL POWER IN THE DRIVE SHAFT WHICH = THE DRIVE SHAFT TORQUE x DRIVE SHAFT SPEED.
INPUT POWER = TORQUE x SPEED
THE INPUT POWER IS THEREFORE THE DRIVE SHAFT POWER PRIOR TO LOADING DIVIDED BY THE OUTPUT (WHICH IS THE ELECTRICAL LOADED POWER OUTPUT).
EFFICIENCY = ELECTRICAL OUTPUT/MECHANICAL INPUT x 100
IN A CONVENTIONAL SYSTEM THE MECHANICAL INPUT ALWAYS HAS TO BE INCREASED TO MAINTAIN THE LOAD (MORE TORQUE ADDED) AND THIS ADDED TORQUE x THE SPEED IS THE INPUT ENERGY VALUE.
IN THE ReGenX SCENARIO THE MECHANICAL OUTPUT IS GREATER AFTER LOADING THAN BEFORE LOADING SO THAT ALONE MAKES THE SYSTEM OVER 100% EFFICIENT (MECHANICAL OUTPUT IS GREATER THAN MECHANICAL INPUT BECAUSE TORQUE AND SPEED ARE BOTH HIGHER AFTER LOADING)
EFFICIENCY = MECHANICAL OUTPUT (GENERATOR LOADED) / MECHANICAL INPUT (GENERATOR UNLOADED) x 100
IF OUTPUT ELECTRICITY IS ALSO PRODUCED THE EFFICIENCY IS THEN:
EFFICIENCY = MECHANICAL OUTPUT (GENERATOR LOADED) + ELECTRICAL OUTPUT / MECHANICAL INPUT (GENERATOR UNLOADED) x 100
SO EVERYONE WHO HAS EVER BEEN ABLE TO PRODUCE ACCELERATION WHILE LOADING THEIR GENERATOR HAS SUCCEEDED IN PRODUCING AN OVERUNITY DEVICE!
CONGRATULATIONS! :D I JUST WANT TO PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR EFFORTS BECAUSE FEW PEOPLE WILL. :P AND FEWER STILL WILL UNDERSTAND. :'(
KIND REGARDS
Thane
Thane C. Heins
President
Potential +/- Difference Inc. R & D
"The Transition of Power"
thaneh@potentialdifference.ca
Linkedin http://linkd.in/iIZyXF (http://linkd.in/iIZyXF)
Hi, all.
The subject of the "magnetic amplifier" raised here by woopy and Kator01, is described in page 97 (110 of 187) of the book "Practical-Transformer-Handbook" by Irving Gottlieb (187 pages in .pdf) and the link to it you can find here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6763.msg302197#msg302197
there is also another publication on the Internet "magnetic amplifiers" by George Trinkaus:
http://www.themeasuringsystemofthegods.com/magnetic%20amplifiers.pdf
as well as "Magnetic Amplifier Control for Simple, Low-Cost, Secondary Regulation" by Bob Mammano:
http://www.ti.com/lit/ml/slup129/slup129.pdf
seems like the non-mechanical the coils only effect is generally understood,but
is there any beneficial overunity in coil only? (mechanical over unity i understand)
Quote from: shimondoodkin on October 20, 2011, 09:42:46 PM
is there any beneficial overunity in coil only?
DEAR SHIMONDOODKIN,
THAT IS A VERY GOOD QUESTION! ;)
A GENERATOR COIL EMPLOYS ELECTROMAGNETIC INDUCTION TO CONVERT MAGNETIC FIELD ENERGY TO ELECTRICAL ENERGY. THE MAGNITUDE OF FLUX OFFERED BY THE MAGNETIC FIELD COULD BE CONSIDERED AS THE
INPUT TO THE COIL AND THE EMF AS THE
OUTPUT. THE ONLY WAY TO INCREASE THE OUTPUT IN A CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR WHILE IT IS RUNNING IS TO INCREASE THE TIME INTERVAL OR RATE OF FLUX CHANGE SPEED UP THE ROTOR OR TO INCREASE THE MAGNETIC FIELD MAGNITUDE IF ELECTROMAGNETS ARE EMPLOYED IN THE ROTOR.
WE ALREADY KNOW THAT THE ReGenX GENERATOR
CREATES ITS OWN FLUX RATE OF CHANGE INCREASE BY CAUSING ROTOR ACCELERATION BUT IT ALSO
INCREASES ITS OWN MAGNETIC FIELD ENERGY ABOVE THAT SUPPLIED SUPPLIED BY THE MAGNETS ON THE ROTOR.
IF YOU OBSERVE AT 959 IN THIS VIDEO YOU WILL NOTICE COIL #1's EMF INCREASES WHEN COIL #2 IS ENGAGED
BECAUSE COIL #2's DISCHARGING FLUX IS ADDING TO THE FLUX AVAILABLE IN COIL #1 AND VICE VERSA. http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins?feature=mhee#p/u/13/W_wleUlcMK0
THIS IS ALSO OBSERVABLE IN THIS VIDEO WHEN THE ReGenX COILS ARE ENGAGED: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYi2OyS5cK4
SO THE FLUX MAGNITUDE INSIDE THE CORE IS GREATER ON-LOAD (OUTPUT) THAN NO-LOAD (INPUT).From Faraday's law of induction: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_induction
Michael Faraday stated that electromotive force (EMF) produced around a closed path is proportional to the rate of change of the magnetic flux through any surface bounded by that path. In practice, this means that an electric current will be induced in any closed circuit when the magnetic flux through a surface bounded by the conductor changes. This applies whether the field itself changes in strength or the conductor is moved through it.
In mathematical form, Faraday's law states that:
For the case of a coil of wire, composed of N loops with the same area, the equation becomes
EMF = - N (flux change) / rate of time
where
EMF is the electromotive force
ΦB is the magnetic flux.
THANKS FOR THE GOOD QUESTION! 8)
CHEERS
T
Quote from: gotoluc on October 19, 2011, 10:08:25 AM
Hi Overunityguide,
I also believe the Delayed Lenz effect has to do with the core.
Thanks for sharing your new tests results
You may also want to look at this Tesla Patent which is 4 years later then the one above.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=uwhBAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=1#v=onepage&q&f=false
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 19, 2011, 07:25:53 PM
YOU ARE ALL ON CRACK...!
IT'S NOT DELAYED LENZ AT ALL IT'S DIVERTED LENZ 8) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lu0MDMDChSg 8)
JUST KIDDING A BIT OF BOTH IS REQUIRED ;)
CHEERS
T
Dear Thane, I have to admit that I was to fast by pulling conclusions about that the Delayed Lenz Effect only has to do something with the core material... In fact I think that you are right (again and again, quite annoying!) That it has to be a combination of both... So a properly designed core can help delaying and the Bifilar wound series connected coil can help delaying the counter EMF effect even more. I came to this conclusion yesterday evening when trying only a really thick wire wound coil, which doesn't give me any good delayed effect at all. So based on this experience I had to conclude that the Lenz Delay has to be a combination of both.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Quote from: DeepCut on October 20, 2011, 03:03:31 PM
Test results, 500g of 0.25mm, bifilar-wound, series-connected, laminated-core coil.
This coil/core combination overspeeds the rotor when shorted.
Rotor with no coil/core present.
Hz : 450
mA : 443
Rotor with coil/core present, open-circuit.
Hz : 450
mA : 438
Rotor with coil/core persent, short-circuit.
Hz : 455
mA 433
Video here :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onvYaT-k7yk
Thanks for reading,
DC.
Hello DeepCut,
Conratulations on your results, do you actually realize what you have accomplished with this experiment?!
(I think you do) But to clarify it a bit more for all other readers of this thread:
What DeepCut has accomplished by now is outstanding. He is showing: 443 mA going to the setup on no load, no coil, no nothing.
And he is showing: 433 mA going to the setup WITH THE BIFILAR COIL in SHORTING mode. And getting extra additional acceleration also!
Until so far I even haven't been able to get this type of results yet. I really hope that your measurements are correct, because if they are and you encounter for all losses, then your setup has the potential to be a self runner! Just like the suggest bike project of Thane himself!
And Furthermore Congrats on Woopy's replication also.
Thanks for sharing your results, and With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Hi Thane
Yes you are right, i slowed down the rotor and the threshold for the pure shortcut of my bificoil serial connected, is arround 570 rpm.
I mean under this speed the shortcuting produce a braking effect (standard generator behaviour) and the rotor slows down
and above this speed at around 600 rpm the shortcuting produces the acceleration of the rotor.
Between 570 and 600 rpm almost nothing happens. it seems that the rotor is slightly wobling but perhaps it is some balance effect ??
Totally amazing. Thank's so much for your tenacity on this fantastic work. And especially for sharing it.
So i do suppose that if we can arrange a setup with perhaps an odd and even repartition of coils and magnets (for example 16 magnets on the drum and lets say 7 coils )
in order to reduce the cogging at minima, we could get something usable...........really interesting. Hmmm!!
Yep a lot of thinking this next days. :P
@ Deepcut
Bravo also for your test. Yes it is really fantastic and somehow disturbing :o to feel the effect in our's hands.
I can only encourage everybody to try the replication.
Good luck at all
Laurent
Thanks OUG, yes i know what it means :)
Nice one Laurent :)
I am testing again today because, as we all know, results can vary from day-to-day.
Results.
Ten minute device warm-up.
Start, 11:15.
Hz : 445
mA : 451
End, 11:25.
Hz : 460
mA : 415
Test, No coil/core present.
Hz : 460
mA : 415
Test, coil/core present, open-circuit.
Hz : 434
mA : 420
Test, coil/core present, short-circuit.
Hz : 464
mA : 409
Coil details.
Gauge : 33 SWG (0.250mm)
Weight : 500g
Length : 1,145 metres (approx)
L : 1.4 Henries without core, 16.5 Henries with core.
R : 405 OHms
Winding : Bifilar, serial-connected.
Core details.
Type : Lamination
Grade : E160/M6/35/Grain oriented, 'I'.
Depth : 0.35mm
Length : 40mm
Width : 10mm
Number of pieces used : 20
Best to all,
Gary.
My replication should be ready within a day or so, for now: a little teaser of my new setup.
24 magnet poles, 20 generator coils, almost no cogging.
WOW !!! Keyho, it's a thing of beauty :)
Love the over-arching motor mounts, looks like a UFO ;+}
Thanks, laser cutting is quite expensive but it is worth every penny ;)
I've spotted something of concern in my build :(
The weight of the coil asembly, once it is placed on the lower perspex sheet, it depresses it very slightly and causes the RPM of the rotor to change because of the change in stress on the bearing.
I am now rebuilding the device so that this can't happen.
I'll post results.
Quote from: Overunityguide on October 21, 2011, 02:46:32 AM
Dear Thane, I have to admit that I was to fast by pulling conclusions about that the Delayed Lenz Effect only has to do something with the core material... In fact I think that you are right (again and again, quite annoying!) That it has to be a combination of both... So a properly designed core can help delaying and the Bifilar wound series connected coil can help delaying the counter EMF effect even more. I came to this conclusion yesterday evening when trying only a really thick wire wound coil, which doesn't give me any good delayed effect at all. So based on this experience I had to conclude that the Lenz Delay has to be a combination of both.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
DEAR OVERUNITYGUIDE,
I HATE TO TELL YOU THIS BUT YOU MAY HAVE TO INCLUDE
"SKIN EFFECT" IN YOUR ANALYSIS :P SINCE IT HAS AN EFFECT ON WIRE AND CORE RESISTANCE AS FREQUENCY INCREASES.
CHEERS
T
Skin effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skin_effect
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Skin effect is the tendency of an alternating electric current (AC) to distribute itself within a conductor with the current density being largest near the surface of the conductor, decreasing at greater depths. In other words, the electric current flows mainly at the "skin" of the conductor, at an average depth called the skin depth. The skin effect causes the effective resistance of the conductor to increase at higher frequencies where the skin depth is smaller, thus reducing the effective cross-section of the conductor. The skin effect is due to opposing eddy currents induced by the changing magnetic field resulting from the alternating current
Skin effect reduction of the self inductance of a conductor. Since the skin effect causes a current at high frequencies to flow mainly at the surface of a conductor, it can be seen that this will reduce the magnetic field inside the wire, that is, beneath the depth at which the bulk of the current flows. It can be shown that this will have a minor effect on the self inductance of the wire itself; see Skilling[8] or Hayt[9] for a mathematical treatment of this phenomenon.
Note that the inductance considered in this context refers to a bare conductor, not the inductance of a coil used as a circuit element. The inductance of a coil is dominated by the mutual inductance between the turns of the coil which increases its inductance according to the square of the number of turns
Quote from: kEhYo77 on October 21, 2011, 07:15:47 AM
My replication should be ready within a day or so, for now: a little teaser of my new setup.
24 magnet poles, 20 generator coils, almost no cogging.
DEAR kEhYo77,
R. BUCKMINSTER FULLER ONCE SAID,
"EVERYONE IS BORN A GENIUS, BUT THE PROCESS OF LIVING DE-GENIUSES THEM."NICE TO SEE YOUR DESIGN GENIUS HERE 8) ALONG WITH ALL THE OTHERS!
CHEERS
T
Quote from: kEhYo77 on October 21, 2011, 07:15:47 AM
24 magnet poles, 20 generator coils, almost no cogging.
DEAR kEhYo77,
WHAT IS YOUR CORE MATERIAL?
(I HOPE IT IS NOT METGLAS OR FERRITE?)
IF YOUR MAGNETS ARE ALTERNATING N-S-N-S ON THE ROTOR
YOU WILL ONLY GET POSITIVE RESULTS (ie increased on-load EMF as mentioned in post # 360) FROM YOUR
COILS THAT ARE PLACED ON THE SAME POLE POLARITY IE ALL NORTH POLE MAGNET POSITIONS OR ALL SOUTH POLE.
KEEP ALL THE CORES THERE THOUGH SINCE THEY BALANCE AND REDUCE START-UP COGGING -
HOWEVER COGGING DIMINISHES WITH RPM :) ... SO YOU CAN PULL THE NON USED CORES OUT (IF POSSIBLE) TO REDUCE HYSTERISIS LOSSES IN THOSE UNUSED CORES ONCE YOUR SYSTEM IS UP TO SPEED. :P GOOD LUCK!
CHEERS
T
@CRANKYpants
I already achieved acceleration with those ferrite cores and the 4 coils in the picture are all on the same phase (the same pole is facing them simultaniousely in NSNS config) and there are 5 phases like that. The plan is to change the core material later on to see the difference.
Thanks for kind words, Thane.
kEhYo
Quote from: woopy on October 21, 2011, 06:21:02 AM
Hi Thane
So i do suppose that if we can arrange a setup with perhaps an odd and even repartition of coils and magnets (for example 16 magnets on the drum and lets say 7 coils ) in order to reduce the cogging at minima, we could get something usable...........really interesting. Hmmm!!
Good luck at all
Laurent
DEAR LAURENT,
MY SUGGESTION IS THAT PEOPLE
ELIMINATE THE EXTERNAL PRIME MOVER AND USE THE GENERATOR COILS AS MOTOR COILS TO GET THE SYSTEM UP TO SPEED AND THEN CONVERT THE MOTOR COILS OVER GENERATOR COILS INDIVIDUALLY ONE BY ONE.
THIS IS A GOOD PLACE FOR MOTOR MAKERS TO START: http://www.simplemotor.com/hemotor.htm
THIS WAY THERE IS NO COGGING TORQUE WHICH NEEDS TO BE BALANCED.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: kEhYo77 on October 21, 2011, 08:29:35 AM
@CRANKYpants
I already achieved acceleration with those ferrite cores and the 4 coils in the picture are all on the same phase (the same pole is facing them simultaniousely in NSNS config) and there are 5 phases like that. The plan is to change the core material later on to see the difference.
Thanks for kind words, Thane.
kEhYo
DEAR kEhYo,
NO DOUBT ABOUT IT - YOUR MACHINE IS A THING OF BEAUTY!
HERE'S TO HOPING IT IS MORE THAN JUST A PRETTY FACE... ;)
I HOPE YOU KEPT YOUR CUTTING TEMPLATES, PEOPLE MAY WANT TO BUY SOME "KITS" FROM YOU LATER ON.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: woopy on October 21, 2011, 06:21:02 AM
Bravo also for your test. Yes it is really fantastic and somehow disturbing :o to feel the effect in our's hands.
YOU ARE ALL JUST A BUNCH OF FREAKIN' INTERNATIONAL LAW BREAKERS 8)
T
OK i stabilised the test-bed.
I put two wooden blocks (yes it's all very high-tech !) under the base-plate to stop it flexing when the coil is placed there.
I also cut a new shaft (carbon rod) that is longer, so there is more room between base-plate and top-plate and the coil isn't squeezing up the top-plate.
I seem to have lost a few tens of Hz though, top speed has dropped to 412 Hz. Maybe that happens with a longer shaft, i don't know anything of mechanical engineering.
It's interesting that you get the best speed from the magnet when it's center is above the drive coil center. Is the magnetic field strong at the 'curve-out' than it is at TDC of a coil ?
So the results aren't as dramatic, but the effect is still there, the coil still 'over-speeds' the rotor.
All previous tests have shown that the higher the impedance, the stronger the effect so i will buy a kilo of wire for the next test.
I stuck a voltmeter on the gen-coil and it read 272 VAC, i haven't bothered measuring current since this gauge of wire won't be used for getting power out, but it's probably micro-amps rather than milli.
I'm going to test the addition of a capacitor now.
** EDIT ADD **
Oops, forgot results !
First stable test-bed test, 21/10/2011.
No coil/core present.
Hz : 412
mA : 411
Coil/core present, open-circuit.
Hz : 400
mA : 415
Coil/core present, short-circuit.
Hz : 414
mA : 409
10 Ohm load resistor.
Hz : 422
mA : 404
30 Ohm load resistor.
Hz : 420
mA : 405
100 Ohms load resistor.
Hz : 420
mA : 405
Onward And Upward :)
DC.
DELETED double post
Tested the effect through a stepdown AC-AC transformer then rectifier, got speedup but no overspeed.
One thing i don't understand is, i am measuring no current at all.
I have one meter setup to read voltage, with a 10 ohm resistor between it and the gen coil.
Another meter for reading current, is clipped to either leg of the resistor.
Am i doing something wrong with the power measuring ?
Cheers,
DC.
I just did 2 test runs. At first I couldn't replicate the speed up from my previous setup at 950Hz. I started thinking what changes did I make. And it became clear. The core length in front of the coil has shortened! I readjusted my coils a little to the back and Bingo! The effect came back, starting from around 800 Hz. So the Lenz delay has got much to do with that sticking out piece of the core for the most part, I think. At least in my case.
Look at WoopyJump's latest vid how far to the back his coil is...
Nice one keyho. The position of the core will change the inductance of the coil to a certain extent.
Good book on transformer engineering, lots of explanations, doesn't just rely on maths alone and includes phase-shifting transformers :
http://www.mediafire.com/?6ikmb55t92wixr8
Best to all,
DC.
"Until one is committed, there is hesitancy,the chance to draw back, always ineffectiveness. Concerning all acts of initiative and creation, there is one elementary truth, the ignorance of which kills countless ideas and splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then providence moves too. All sorts of things occur to help one that would never have otherwise occurred. A whole... stream of events issues from the decision, raising in one's favor all manner of unforeseen incidents and meetings and material assistance which no man can have dreamed would have come his way. Whatever you can do or dream you can begin it. Boldness has genius, power, and magic in it. Begin it now." ~ Goethe
Boss
Truer words have rarely been put to print !!
Thank you for sharing this inspiration!!
Chet
PS
I'll be posting this in the mens room over the Urinal!!
"Until one is committed, there is hesitancy,the chance to draw back, always ineffectiveness. Concerning all acts of initiative and creation, there is one elementary truth, the ignorance of which kills countless ideas and splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then providence moves too. All sorts of things occur to help one that would never have otherwise occurred. A whole... stream of events issues from the decision, raising in one's favor all manner of unforeseen incidents and meetings and material assistance which no man can have dreamed would have come his way. Whatever you can do or dream you can begin it. Boldness has genius, power, and magic in it. Begin it now." ~ Goethe
Hi all
@Kehio very nice job bravo. Hope to get more results soon.
OK today i decided to make a second serie of test.
First i doublestacked the magnets on the rotor to get more flux
Second i changed the prime mover motor for a stronger one
third i made the measurement through a FWBR and a 1 ohm resistor ( see the pix and the shematic at the bottom of the result pix.)
So in this new setup the threshold seems to be at around 865 rpm.
Under this speed the rotor begin slowly to slow down and goes down to very low rpm (about 230 ) and during the deceleration the current increase from 470 ma up to 570 ma.
But above the threshold the rotor accelerates.
So i made the test at 6 than 7 up to 11 volts dc on the prime mover.
And as you can see on the result sheet , the acceleration is much stronger at 10 volts than at 6 volts.
It is a pitty because at 2600 rpm i heard the bad "CLAACKK" followed by a special woble , which indicate me to immediately stop the test before beeing tranperced by some furious ejected magnets Youp!! :-[
But i wonder what would happen if i could go much faster. I mean when we go higher above the threshold , the acceleration is even stronger.
(at 6 volt, i can only accelerate from 950 rpm up to 1087 rpm that is an increase of 137 rpm, but at 10 volts i go from 1197 up to 2438 rpm that is an increase of 441 rpm
What would the rpm increase be at 20 volt ?? ::)
Of course in this test i did not take account of the increasing output of electrical energy from the coil. But i can spin the same DC motor as the prime mover (slowly ) with a propeller.
I will re-re-watch the Thane's video to try to pick up some more explanation of this phenomen. And improve my test bench.
ok for today
good luck at all
Laurent
Great work. ;)
I think it would much safer if you would move the magnets to the inside of the plastic ring.
Quote from: futuristic on October 23, 2011, 12:57:02 PM
Great work. ;)
I think it would much safer if you would move the magnets to the inside of the plastic ring.
MY THOUGHTS EXACTLY ;) AND DRILL A HOLE IN YOUR DISK (THE SAME SIZE AS YOUR CORE) SO YOU CAN MOUNT YOUR COIL IN THE SAME PLACE AT THE
EXTERIOR.
YOU ALSO HAVE ENOUGH SPACE (I THINK)
TO DOUBLE YOUR FREQUENCY (AND INDUCED COIL VOLTAGE) BY DOUBLING THE NUMBER OF POLES (INSIDE YOUR DRUM).
IF YOU ARE REALLY CRAFTY AND ENERGETIC - YOU CAN EVEN MAKE A
CORE SPOKE PATTERN AND PLACE IT INSIDE THE DRUM WITH CORES ON EACH SPOKE.
YOU WILL HAVE TO MATCH UP A NORTH POLE SPOKE WITH A SOUTH POLE SPOKE ON THE OTHER SIDE BUT YOUR FLUX TRANSFER THROUGH YOUR CORE WILL BE HIGHER SO YOUR INDUCED EMF WILL ALSO BE HIGHER... WHICH WILL IMPROVE OVERALL PERFORMANCE SIGNIFICANTLY . 8)
IF YOU ARE EVEN MORE CRAFTY YOU CAN START THE ROTOR WITH THE STATOR REMOVED AND GRADUALLY INSERT IT INTO THE ROTOR THUS MECHANICALLY VARYING THE LOADED GENERATOR SPEED. :P
CHEERS
T
i am not sure if this correct,
but something i have noticed.
kapanadze device may have something shared with this device.
in both videos they call it cold electricity they tune the current to be cut off at top of sine wave. because they say because of phase shift of the current starts to flow only after voltage begins to be high enough.
so they don't let the voltage flow.
but the not flowing voltage can charge a capacitor.
as i grasped from http://jnaudin.free.fr/kapagen/index.htm (there is overmore explanation in mit lectures near bottom about this cold electricity)
in this device you also tune the frequency so the phase shift will be most effective.
so that's the idea of similarity i have noticed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9UKBEEKx4w
@23min-25min
and
kapanadze explanation 1(russian)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uj5KX7_JHXo
@20min-~22min
Hi everyone,
just a quick update of how one could use an off the self Transformer with a small Capacitance in Series to create a Delayed Lenz Effect or Phase Shift.
Link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RtZh5bStD8
The Troid used in the video demo has a 0.3 Ohm DC Resistance on each coil and they are 35mH each
The Series Capacitance is 24uf
Shunt Resistor is 1 Ohm and load is 10 Ohms
Power out is 10.8 Watts
Power in is Reactive 0 Watts
Luc
Fantastic. ;)
Some wiki:
QuoteThe portion of power due to stored energy, which returns to the source in each cycle, is known as reactive power.
If the loads are purely reactive, then the voltage and current are 90 degrees out of phase. For half of each cycle, the product of voltage and current is positive, but on the other half of the cycle, the product is negative, indicating that on average, exactly as much energy flows toward the load as flows back. There is no net energy flow over one cycle. In this case, only reactive energy flowsâ€"there is no net transfer of energy to the load.
In your case there is obvious transfer of energy to the load so congratulations. ;)
But I think you should not stop here. Because if everyone would use reactive power then el. energy companies would start sending bills for reactive power.
If when using reactive power the energy flows toward the load and back, then there must be a way to make self or almost self sustaining circuit which will still deliver (create?) energy for load. Perhaps some sort of LC tank in resonance?
Keep up the good work. ;)
Quote from: gotoluc on October 24, 2011, 11:55:34 AM
Hi everyone,
just a quick update of how one could use an off the self Transformer with a small Capacitance in Series to create a Delayed Lenz Effect or Phase Shift.
Power out is 10.8 Watts
Power in is Reactive 0 Watts
Luc
OUTPUT POWER = 10.8 WATTS
INPUT TRUE POWER = 1.97 WATTS
EFFICIENCY = 10.8/1.97 x 100 = 548.2 %REACTIVE POWER = 147.4 VAR
CAN ANYONE FIND AN ERROR IN MY MATH? ;)
BTW ITS NOT DELAYED LENZ BUT "SHIFTED LENZ" AND WHY TESLA INVENTED BI-FILAR WINDINGS TO GET RID OF THE EXTERNAL CAPACITORS.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: futuristic on October 24, 2011, 01:40:40 PM
Fantastic. ;)
But I think you should not stop here. Because if everyone would use reactive power then el. energy companies would start sending bills for reactive power.
Keep up the good work. ;)
Electronic meters display the energy used on an LCD or LED display, and can also transmit readings to remote places. In addition to measuring energy used,
electronic meters can also record other parameters of the load and supply such as maximum demand, power factor
and reactive power used etc. They can also support time-of-day billing, for example, recording the amount of energy used during on-peak and off-peak hours.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 24, 2011, 02:10:44 PM
OUTPUT POWER = 10.8 WATTS
INPUT TRUE POWER = 1.97 WATTS
EFFICIENCY = 10.8/1.97 x 100 = 548.2 %
REACTIVE POWER = 147.4 VAR
CAN ANYONE FIND AN ERROR IN MY MATH? ;)
BTW ITS NOT DELAYED LENZ BUT "SHIFTED LENZ" AND WHY TESLA INVENTED BI-FILAR WINDINGS TO GET RID OF THE EXTERNAL CAPACITORS.
CHEERS
T
In Europe we pay an extra cost if the reactive power is below phase 0.9
Quote from: wings on October 24, 2011, 02:49:46 PM
In Europe we pay an extra cost if the reactive power is below phase 0.9
NOW ALL LUC HAS TO DO IS:
1) TAKE A BATTERY INVERT THE OUTPUT TO AC
2) RUN IT THROUGH HIS "SIDEWAYS" TRANSFORMER
3) BUMP IT UP BY 500%
4) RECTIFY IT
5) FEED THE OUTPUT INTO ANOTHER BATTERY AT 5 TIMES THE 1ST BATTERY INPUT
6) RUN LIKE HELL... 8)
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 24, 2011, 03:08:48 PM
NOW ALL LUC HAS TO DO IS:
1) TAKE A BATTERY INVERT THE OUTPUT TO AC
2) RUN IT THROUGH HIS "SIDEWAYS" TRANSFORMER
3) BUMP IT UP BY 500%
4) RECTIFY IT
5) FEED THE OUTPUT INTO ANOTHER BATTERY AT 5 TIMES THE 1ST BATTERY INPUT
6) RUN LIKE HELL... 8)
T
;D ;D ;D
great
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 24, 2011, 02:30:48 PM
Electronic meters display the energy used on an LCD or LED display, and can also transmit readings to remote places. In addition to measuring energy used, electronic meters can also record other parameters of the load and supply such as maximum demand, power factor and reactive power used etc. They can also support time-of-day billing, for example, recording the amount of energy used during on-peak and off-peak hours.
Hi Thane,
thanks for doing all the full power calculations.
In the case the Utility Company would start charging for Reactive Power. Would that be for the 1.97 Watts used?
Just wondering :-\
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on October 24, 2011, 03:18:51 PM
Hi Thane,
thanks for doing all the full power calculations.
In the case the Utility Company would start charging for Reactive Power, would that be for the 1.97 Watts used?
Just wondering :-\
Luc
PROBABLY MORE LIKE (147.4 x 0.9) - 133.1 = 14.3 WATTS :'( GIVE OR TAKE.
BUT IF YOU FOLLOW MY INSTRUCTIONS ABOVE YOU'LL BE ABLE TO POWER YOUR ELECTRIC SAIL BOAT ALL THE WAY TO AFRICA AND BACK WITH ONLY TWO BATTARIES.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 24, 2011, 03:26:31 PM
PROBABLY MORE LIKE 147.4 x 0.9 = 132 WATTS :'( GIVE OR TAKE.
BUT IF YOU FOLLOW MY INSTRUCTIONS ABOVE YOU'LL BE ABLE TO POWER YOUR ELECTRIC SAIL BOAT ALL THE WAY TO AFRICA AND BACK WITH ONLY TWO BATTARIES.
CHEERS
T
Wow :o... that's a rip off.
I'll get the H-Bridge out and make my own Power.
Will update in a couple of days
Luc
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 24, 2011, 03:08:48 PM
NOW ALL LUC HAS TO DO IS:
1) TAKE A BATTERY INVERT THE OUTPUT TO AC
2) RUN IT THROUGH HIS "SIDEWAYS" TRANSFORMER
3) BUMP IT UP BY 500%
4) RECTIFY IT
5) FEED THE OUTPUT INTO ANOTHER BATTERY AT 5 TIMES THE 1ST BATTERY INPUT
6) RUN LIKE HELL... 8)
T
driving form zero to 16 KHz (with Arduino)
http://interface.khm.de/index.php/lab/experiments/arduino-dds-sinewave-generator/
this circuit in pure sinusoidal way
http://www.kerrywong.com/2010/03/12/a-power-inverter-with-arduino-pulse-source/
or use PWM ?
or other resonant circuit?
I bought this for arduino to make DIY signal generator:
http://iteadstudio.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=18&products_id=414
But I don't know how to amplify the signal to get something in the range 20V 3A AC. Probably something like powerful audio amplifier?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 24, 2011, 02:10:44 PM
...
BTW ITS NOT DELAYED LENZ BUT "SHIFTED LENZ" AND WHY TESLA INVENTED BI-FILAR WINDINGS TO GET RID OF THE EXTERNAL CAPACITORS.
Hi Thane,
My understanding on Tesla patent on Coil for electromagnets
http://www.tfcbooks.com/patents/coil.htm is that he neutralized the coil's inductance with the capacitance attained between the bifilar wires so that the input current found resistance only that of the coil's DC resistance. Does not this mean resonance and if it does then it could not give 90° phase shift but zero degree only?
Quote: "I have found that in every coil there exists a certain relation between its self-induction and capacity that permits, a current of given frequency and potential to pass through it with no other opposition than that of ohmic resistance, or, in other words, as though it possessed no self-induction". Unquote
So he did get rid of the external capacitors with using the 'distributed capacitance of parallel wires but then he must have got a phase shift of near or at zero degree.
rgds, Gyula
Great news gotoluc! In the back of my mind I knew it was possible.
For those of you interested in building a cheap, pure sine wave inverter, here is a nice pdf:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=P4PEGQ6Q (http://www.megaupload.com/?d=P4PEGQ6Q)
At everyone,
I connected the circuit to my H-Bridge but used 12vdc first so not to blow things up. The results are not the same then with the grid 120vac 60Hz sine wave.
There could be a mistake somewhere :-\ so lets look at this over carefully. Maybe the power meter I'm using is being fooled in this kind of configuration?
A youtube user posted this: "Sorry Luc, but I have to correct you on the voltage leading the current. In a capacitive circuit the current leads the voltage. This is what your scope is showing. Scope traces go from left to right with time."
I thought it was the other way around?... but I may not have it correct. Can you look over the scope shot below and comment.
I think a pure sine wave output inverter would help confirm but I don't have one. Only modified sine wave I have. I'll give that a try and let you know.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on October 25, 2011, 02:59:04 AM
At everyone,
I connected the circuit to my H-Bridge but used 12vdc first so not to blow things up. The results are not the same then with the grid 120vac 60Hz sine wave.
There could be a mistake somewhere :-\ so lets look at this over carefully. Maybe the power meter I'm using is being fooled in this kind of configuration?
A youtube user posted this: "Sorry Luc, but I have to correct you on the voltage leading the current. In a capacitive circuit the current leads the voltage. This is what your scope is showing. Scope traces go from left to right with time."
I thought it was the other way around?... but I may not have it correct. Can you look over the scope shot below and comment.
I think a pure sine wave output inverter would help confirm but I don't have one. Only modified sine wave I have. I'll give that a try and let you know.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Hi Luc,
Great Video...
Wattmeters base their reading on: E * I * cos(phi) or (power factor).
I am curious if your power meter is capable of showing the power factor. My power meter can show this value, and it shows me also if the load is running inductive or if it is running capacitive. I think that displaying that (those three individual values: E * I * cos(phi)) will help you a-lot.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Quote from: futuristic on October 24, 2011, 04:57:04 PM
I bought this for arduino to make DIY signal generator:
http://iteadstudio.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=18&products_id=414
But I don't know how to amplify the signal to get something in the range 20V 3A AC. Probably something like powerful audio amplifier?
Look around in some recycle electronics shops or even pawn shops for a pre 1980,s analogue amplifier. Old record players are a good source for dual channel analogue amps.
Digital amps for this type of experimenting are not really a good choice as many of them employ a direct coupled output, with a DC offset bias, which will affect your primary winding current consumption in a negative way. This is rare with analogue amps.
Besides that, old analogue amps are usually dirt cheap.
Cheers.
Hello Gotoluc I have DSO 2090, just a tips to measure the power, use the maths function (CannelA*ChannelB) to display power, if you see a curve that have equal pulse above and bottom the zero line you have reactive power, maybe it will be much easier to read.
Channel -> Maths -> Activate -> SourceA(Channel1) -> SourceB(Channel2) ->
Operation -> A*B...
Quote from: gotoluc on October 25, 2011, 02:59:04 AM
At everyone,
There could be a mistake somewhere :-\ so lets look at this over carefully. Maybe the power meter I'm using is being fooled in this kind of configuration?
A youtube user posted this: "Sorry Luc, but I have to correct you on the voltage leading the current. In a capacitive circuit the current leads the voltage. This is what your scope is showing. Scope traces go from left to right with time."
I thought it was the other way around?... but I may not have it correct. Can you look over the scope shot below and comment.
I think a pure sine wave output inverter would help confirm but I don't have one. Only modified sine wave I have. I'll give that a try and let you know.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
LUC,
THE DIAGRAM BELOW SHOWS A SERIES RLC CIRCUIT.
RESONANCE OCCURS WHEN XL AND XC ARE EQUAL AND IS MINIMUM IMPEDANCE AND ZERO PHASE SHIFT.
WHEN XL AND XC ARE MADE UNEQUAL AS IN YOUR CASE...
TOTAL IMPEDANCE INCREASES, CURRENT DROPS, AND MOVES OUT OF PHASE WITH THE VOLTAGE. THE PROBLEM IS THIS DIAGRAM IS FOR AN INDUCTOR BUT YOU HAVE A TRANSFORMER THERE WHICH IS ACTUALLY TWO INDUCTORS IN PARALLEL
AND YOUR INDUCTANCES ARE EQUAL AND THE MAGNETIC COUPLING BETWEEN THEM IS PERFECT (M = 1). SO...
THE EQUIVALENT INDUCTANCE WILL BE ZERO AS THE TWO EQUAL INDUCTORS CANCEL EACH OTHER OUT. BECAUSE THE COUNTER FLUX FROM L2 WILL CREATE A NET 0 FLUX IN L1. IN THE DIAGRAM BELOW B WILL = 0 BECAUSE BL1 AND BL2 WILL BE EQUAL AND OPPOSITE.
SO WHAT YOUR METER AND SCOPE ARE READING IS THE POWER DISSIPATED ACROSS A 1 OHM RESISTOR AND A SMALL CAP.
I SUGGEST THAT YOU 1) REMOVE THE SECONDARY LOAD AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS AND 2) REMOVE THE TRANSFORMER AS WELL...?
CHEERS
T
Mutually Coupled Inductors in ParallelWhen inductors are connected together in parallel so that the magnetic field of one links with the other, the effect of mutual inductance either increases or decreases the total inductance depending upon the amount of magnetic coupling that exists between the coils. The effect of this mutual inductance depends upon the distance apart of the coils and their orientation to each other. Mutually connected inductors in parallel can be classed as either "aiding" or "opposing" the total inductance with parallel aiding connected coils increasing the total equivalent inductance and parallel opposing coils decreasing the total equivalent inductance compared to coils that have zero mutual inductance. http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/inductor/parallel-inductors.html
Is it possible to select C for parallel resonance so that it blocks 50/60 Hz signal ? If so, what if you then put transformer that has one way induction (e.g. gabriel device), you could then take power from it but there would be no current flowing in the source because of parallel resonance.
Normal transformer would not work because of mutual inductance that would drive the parallel circuit out of resonance. Or there would need to be tunable capacitor and adjust it differently for every different kind of load.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 25, 2011, 08:39:54 AM
[...]
WHEN XL AND XC ARE MADE UNEQUAL AS IN YOUR CASE... TOTAL IMPEDANCE INCREASES, CURRENT DROPS, AND MOVES OUT OF PHASE WITH THE VOLTAGE.
THE PROBLEM IS THIS DIAGRAM IS FOR AN INDUCTOR BUT YOU HAVE A TRANSFORMER THERE WHICH IS ACTUALLY TWO INDUCTORS IN PARALLEL AND YOUR INDUCTANCES ARE EQUAL AND THE MAGNETIC COUPLING BETWEEN THEM IS PERFECT (M = 1).
SO... THE EQUIVALENT INDUCTANCE WILL BE ZERO AS THE TWO EQUAL INDUCTORS CANCEL EACH OTHER OUT. BECAUSE THE COUNTER FLUX FROM L2 WILL CREATE A NET 0 FLUX IN L1. IN THE DIAGRAM BELOW B WILL = 0. BECAUSE BL1 AND BL2 WILL BE EQUAL AND OPPOSITE.
[...]
Dear Thane,
This is exactly what I was thinking, it runs almost totally capacitive. (sure no resonance)
So power factor is indeed almost: 0 (or almost 90 degrees capacitive). And indeed a heavily loaded transformer will respond more like a much smaller (lower ohmic) normal resistive load. So in Luc's video it could be that he is indeed showing his first steps to overunity.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
LUC,
I HAVE A 12V DC - 120 VAC INVERTER IF YOU WANT TO BORROW IT.
LET ME KNOW AS I'LL BE IN OTTAWA TODAY.
CHEERS
T
To all concerned
Hi everyone,
I'm sorry to say but there is an error in my circuit :( ... my voltage probe was on the grid side of the series capacitor and Thane says it should be on the coil side.
Attached is the new scope shot with the probe on the coil side of the cap. As we can see there is no current and voltage phase shift.
My guess is that the power meter was fooled when I reached a certain capacitance value.
I will remove the video as the information is not correct.
Sorry for the confusion
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on October 25, 2011, 10:41:22 AM
Hi everyone,
I'm sorry to say but there is an error in my circuit :( ... my voltage probe was on the grid side of the series capacitor and Thane says it should be on the coil side.
Attached is the new scope shot with the probe on the coil side of the cap. As we can see there is no current and voltage phase shift.
My guess is that the power meter was fooled when I reached a certain capacitance value.
I will remove the video as the information is not correct.
Sorry for the confusion
Luc
Hi Luc,
Don't be to fast on your conclusions... Your video is showing an almost 90 degrees phase shift between grid voltage and between total setup current, so I do think that you didn't fooled your wattmeter!
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
@gotoluc Why does your new scope shot not show grid voltage vs 1 Ohm resistor voltage but instead some other voltage (output 10 Ohm I guess) is shown? I think that this is misleading...
Quote from: Overunityguide on October 25, 2011, 11:13:12 AM
Hi Luc,
Don't be to fast on your conclusions... Your video is showing a 90 degrees phase shift between grid voltage and between total setup current, so I do think that you didn't fooled your wattmeter!
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Hi Overunityguide,
I don't know what to think now ???... can you answer this question. In a Series LC circuit (like below) where would the Voltage probe be connected?... where I have it or on the other side of the Capacitor?
Thanks for your time
Quote from: kEhYo77 on October 25, 2011, 11:30:46 AM
@gotoluc Why does your new scope shot not show grid voltage vs 1 Ohm resistor voltage but instead some other voltage (output 10 Ohm I guess) is shown? I think that this is misleading...
That's because in the shot above the voltage probe is connected on the other side (coil side) of the series capacitor and you now see the capacitors activity.
I'm now unsure of its correct connection position. If someone can confirm this it would be helpful.
Thanks
Luc
EDITEDI added the Schematic of how I had the probes (green and yellow) connected in the video demo. The difference in where I think there could be an error is the yellow probe could be connected on the other side of the capacitor.
@all
A little simulation of gotoluc's test circuit without the shunt resistor.
Apparently the phase angle between the input voltage and current stays the same no matter what I do in here hmm...
The bigger the capacitance the higher the output but the input is all reactive.
gotoluc's circuit simulation (http://www.falstad.com/circuit/#%24+1+5.0E-6+7.943983955226134+39+5.0+50%0Av+192+288+192+160+0+1+60.0+120.0+0.0+0.0+0.5%0Aw+368+240+368+288+0%0AT+288+208+368+208+0+0.035+1.0+0.831172355486657+-0.14139974739146235+0.999%0Aw+288+208+288+160+0%0Aw+368+288+464+288+0%0Ar+464+160+464+288+0+10.0%0Aw+368+208+368+160+0%0Ac+192+288+288+288+0+2.4E-5+-85.4301698218665%0Aw+288+240+288+288+0%0Ar+368+160+464+160+0+0.3%0Ar+192+160+288+160+0+0.3%0Ao+0+64+0+35+149.65776766268445+2.993155353253689+0+-1%0Ao+5+64+1+35+8.749002899132048+9.765625E-105+0+-1%0A)
Quote from: gotoluc on October 25, 2011, 12:09:04 PM
Hi Overunityguide,
I don't know what to think now ???... can you answer this question. In a Series LC circuit (like below) where would the Voltage probe be connected?... where I have it or on the other side of the Capacitor?
Thanks
Luc
EDITED
I added the Schematic of how I had the probes (green and yellow) connected in the video demo. The difference in where I think there could be an error is the yellow probe could be connected on the other side of the capacitor.
Hi Luc,
Your schematic with the yellow probe and with your green one is the correct setup to measure. This is exactly the same setup as what your wattmeter uses internally. And that when you replace the yellow probe to the other side of the capacitor, you see the voltage and current in phase, is also logic. This can be expected due to the fact that you are loading your transformer with the 10 Ohm load. (this results on a higher power factor on your primary input coil)
So then again I think that your first setup is the correct one...
I also have an other question about the accuracy of your wattmeter, do you know what the accuracy is on lower loads? Lets say lower then 4 watts? I say this because I can remember that when I was buying my wattmeter, that the accuracy for the more cheaper ones was no so good at all, especially in the lower range < 4 watts.
I hope that I have explained the probes issue in an understandable way. And if you have any further questions regarding your setup, then don't hesitate to ask them.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Quote from: Overunityguide on October 25, 2011, 02:21:52 PM
Hi Luc,
Your schematic with the yellow probe and with your green one is the correct setup to measure. This is exactly the same setup as what your wattmeter uses internally. And that when you replace the yellow probe to the other side of the capacitor, you see the voltage and current in phase, is also logic. This can be expected due to the fact that you are loading your transformer with the 10 Ohm load. (this results on a higher power factor on your primary input coil)
So then again I think that your first setup is the correct one...
I also have an other question about the accuracy of your wattmeter, do you know what the accuracy is on lower loads? Lets say lower then 4 watts? I say this because I can remember that when I was buying my wattmeter, that the accuracy for the more cheaper ones was no so good at all, especially in the lower range < 4 watts.
I hope that I have explained the probes issue in an understandable way. And if you have any further questions regarding your setup, than don't hesitate to ask then them.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
I agree. I am NoMorePetro from YouTube. I would also add here as I stated on YouTube that the voltage is lagging the current slightly less than 90 degrees.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqDdr4UERx0&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Rick
Quote from: kEhYo77 on October 25, 2011, 02:02:38 PM
@all
A little simulation of gotoluc's test circuit without the shunt resistor.
Apparently the phase angle between the input voltage and current stays the same no matter what I do in here hmm...
The bigger the capacitance the higher the output but the input is all reactive.
Thanks kEhYo77 for doing this circuit simulation. It helps and is a very interesting result.
In my test there is an ideal Capacitance value for the meter to reach Zero Watts. Once reached by just adding 0.5uf the meter would start to show 1 Watt and the more you add the more it goes up. The same happens if you reduce the Capacitance from the ideal value.
Thanks for your time
Luc
Quote from: Overunityguide on October 25, 2011, 02:21:52 PM
Hi Luc,
Your schematic with the yellow probe and with your green one is the correct setup to measure. This is exactly the same setup as what your wattmeter uses internally. And that when you replace the yellow probe to the other side of the capacitor, you see the voltage and current in phase, is also logic. This can be expected due to the fact that you are loading your transformer with the 10 Ohm load. (this results on a higher power factor on your primary input coil)
So then again I think that your first setup is the correct one...
I also have an other question about the accuracy of your wattmeter, do you know what the accuracy is on lower loads? Lets say lower then 4 watts? I say this because I can remember that when I was buying my wattmeter, that the accuracy for the more cheaper ones was no so good at all, especially in the lower range < 4 watts.
I hope that I have explained the probes issue in an understandable way. And if you have any further questions regarding your setup, then don't hesitate to ask them.
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Thanks Overunityguide for confirming if my first probe setup was correct or not.
The Watts meter I used is not a high quality item. It's made by Blue Planet and model: EM100. Maybe someone can find something online about its accuracy at low wattage.
Hopefully Thane can bring over his High Quality Power Meter so we can re-confirm.
Luc
ADDEDQuote from: RAD-HHO on October 25, 2011, 02:39:17 PM
I agree. I am NoMorePetro from YouTube. I would also add here as I stated on YouTube that the voltage is lagging the current slightly less than 90 degrees.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqDdr4UERx0&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Rick
Thanks Rick for doing this Spice Simulation of the circuit. Great job and idea of making a video of it.
I re-uploaded my video since I now feel confident with everyone's support that this was not an error in my part.
I added a link to NoMorePetro (Rick) Simulation in the YouTube video description.
Thanks again for everyone's support.
Link to re-uploaded video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuBAN9uf7Uo
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on October 25, 2011, 12:09:04 PM
I added the Schematic of how I had the probes (green and yellow) connected in the video demo. The difference in where I think there could be an error is the yellow probe could be connected on the other side of the capacitor.
LUC,
IT IS MY OPINION THAT ONE PROBE OUGHT TO BE ACROSS THE 1 OHM SHUNT (CURRENT) AND THE OTHER ACROSS THE PRIMARY OF THE TRANSFORMER (VOLTAGE).
NOT THE TRANSFORMER PRIMARY AND CAP COMBINATION. :P
CHEERS
T
Quote from: gotoluc on October 25, 2011, 03:25:58 PM
Thanks Rick for doing this Spice Simulation of the circuit. Great job and idea of making a video of it.
I re-uploaded my video since I now feel confident with everyone's support that this was not an error in my part.
I added a link to NoMorePetro (Rick) Simulation in the YouTube video description.
Thanks again for everyone's support.
Link to re-uploaded video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuBAN9uf7Uo
Luc
Luc, Your quite welcome, Thank you for all your work!
Overunityguide, I have attached the Spice shots you requested on youtube. I added a voltage divider to the input to bring down the input voltage so it would show the output voltage better on the Spice scope shot. The input voltage is now divided by ten. The circuit resistance did not change though.
Rick
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on October 25, 2011, 05:25:17 AM
Hello Gotoluc I have DSO 2090, just a tips to measure the power, use the maths function (CannelA*ChannelB) to display power, if you see a curve that have equal pulse above and bottom the zero line you have reactive power, maybe it will be much easier to read.
Channel -> Maths -> Activate -> SourceA(Channel1) -> SourceB(Channel2) ->
Operation -> A*B...
Hi SchubertReijiMaigo,
sorry I forgot to reply to your post.
I've noticed the Math function before and did play around with it but don't quite understand it yet.
Thanks for your post
Luc
Thanks you, I have read this thread by hazard, it seems your delayed Lenz law device device, look like Transverter device (Rotoverter sold state version) . If you read Combine.pdf you find a lot of information: especially they said in semi resonance state (like your case) L become R R become C and C become L resulting a PF of 0 in series or PF = 1 in parallel with minimum watts consumption (the real watts at secondary is not reflected to the source)... Another thing is they said for every real watts you need to circulate 10 VAR and PF 0 in order to achieve OU state, the energy is in Radio Frequency state Voltage at node/ Current at anti node... It's very look a like for me.
The PF 89 ° that Thane has calculated is due maybe to the 1 ohm load which reflect to the line as PF=1 try to measure voltage across the coil and capacitor excluding the shunt to see what happen, if you find PF=0 Bingo !!!
Your experiment start to interest me a lot, look like that someone have put in real in real world the Transverter device with of the off the shelf device !!!
Good Job and Good luck.
Quote from: RAD-HHO on October 25, 2011, 10:05:13 PM
Luc, Your quite welcome, Thank you for all your work!
Rick
NICE WORK RICK,
NOW PLEASE PUT THE SCOPE ACROSS THE TRANSFORMER PRIMARY AND REDO THE SIMULATION.
THANKS
T
I have made LT Spice simulation, with same value and parameter, the power of the secondary load is reflected to the source exactly, look like simulation is not best way to test this configuration. Simulation usually comply with law of conservation energy and are not always in accordance with reality...
What happen if you load more the trafo, maybe must be retuning the cap value to keep PF=0 with different load...
Your trafo is 12 volts with 10 Ohms load which dissipate 14 watts of real power, right ?
According to the classical law of conservation your meter should display 14 watts also... But instead display 0 watts... So I don't think your meter is fooled because your are in the 15 watts range...
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 26, 2011, 06:51:48 AM
NICE WORK RICK,
NOW PLEASE PUT THE SCOPE ACROSS THE TRANSFORMER PRIMARY AND REDO THE SIMULATION.
THANKS
T
As you wish....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VYhO4mJH4c&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Sorry about the quality. If you can't see everything I will repost later when I have wifi available.
Does anyone know why I can't attach photos here with my iPhone? Is there an app for this forum that allows attachments? If not, we need one.
Hi everyone,
last night I picked up a Pure Sine Wave output Inverter and tested it on the circuit.
Unfortunately I don't think the Inverters circuit knows what to do with Reactive Power as there was no decrease in current draw on the 12vdc side. Watts out was Watts in.
Something else I noticed is the 24uf Capacitance used to make my Watts meter display Zero when plugged into the Grid would display 3 to 4 Watts when plugged in to the Inverter. By reducing the Capacitance to 15uf it came back to Zero. So maybe the Capacitance is doing some kind of Impedance matching and fools the meter?
I think a special circuit would be needed to recirculate this Reactive Power.
Would a Isolation transformer between a power Source and a Reactive power device be able to show a benefit? or using an alternator as power source. Could this be simulated in Spice?
I would be interested to also see if a smaller load like 1 Ohm (instead of 10) would do to the Phase. Can one of you check that in Spice.
Thanks
Luc
Quote from: RAD-HHO on October 26, 2011, 11:03:41 AM
As you wish....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VYhO4mJH4c&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Sorry about the quality. If you can't see everything I will repost later when I have wifi available.
THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT IS REQUIRED THANKS RAD-HHO.
UNFORTUNATLEY THE VOLTAGE AND CURRENT ARE ALMOST IN PHASE WHICH IS WHAT I EXPECTED. :-\
CHEERS
T
QuoteUnfortunately I don't think the Inverters circuit knows what to do with Reactive Power as there was no decrease in current draw on the 12vdc side. Watts out was Watts in.
Yes, some Inverter can't deal with reactive power (especially capacitive one) they burn energy like active load (at the 12 Volts side) and burn up because transistor cannot support capacitive power...
QuoteSomething else I noticed is the 24uf Capacitance used to make my Watts meter display Zero when plugged into the Grid would display 3 to 4 Watts when plugged in to the Inverter. By reducing the Capacitance to 15uf it came back to Zero. So maybe the Capacitance is doing some kind of Impedance matching and fools the meter?
Hmm, maybe some losses in the inverter or the voltage sightly different than the grid... Then you must "re-tune" the cap value to obtain PF=0...
QuoteI would be interested to also see if a smaller load like 1 Ohm (instead of 10) would do to the Phase. Can one of you check that in Spice.
Thanks
Luc
I have tested this also, same result as before full reflection to the source, simulation comply with conservation energy, I am skeptic to use simulation to test FE circuit... In simulation any component that have PF=1 is reflected into the source no matter what kind of circuit you use.
SRM.
Quote from: RAD-HHO on October 26, 2011, 11:20:17 AM
Does anyone know why I can't attach photos here with my iPhone? Is there an app for this forum that allows attachments? If not, we need one.
Attachments are done below the post text box.
There are some restrictions like, maximum individual size 500KB
and allowed file types: txt, tif, xls, doc, odt, pdf, jpg, gif, mp3, mpg, flv, mp4, mpeg, png, rm, ra, rmv, avi, zip, wmv, wma, rar, qt, mov, swf, asf, wm2d, 3gp, 3g2
Hope this helps
Luc
Thanks SRM for your tests and reply
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on October 26, 2011, 03:36:32 PM
Attachments are done below the post text box.
There are some restrictions like, maximum individual size 500KB
and allowed file types: txt, tif, xls, doc, odt, pdf, jpg, gif, mp3, mpg, flv, mp4, mpeg, png, rm, ra, rmv, avi, zip, wmv, wma, rar, qt, mov, swf, asf, wm2d, 3gp, 3g2
Hope this helps
Luc
Yeah, I have posted attachments here before with my pc. I just tried doing it on my iPhone, and it would not let me. I got this... See attachment...... notice the "Choose File" is grayed out.
Quote from: RAD-HHO on October 26, 2011, 11:03:41 AM
As you wish....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VYhO4mJH4c&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Sorry about the quality. If you can't see everything I will repost later when I have wifi available.
Here are some clearer shots of this video.
InputVoltage is divided by ten to make everything presentable on the scope shot.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 25, 2011, 08:39:54 AM
Mutually Coupled Inductors in Parallel
When inductors are connected together in parallel so that the magnetic field of one links with the other, the effect of mutual inductance either increases or decreases the total inductance depending upon the amount of magnetic coupling that exists between the coils. The effect of this mutual inductance depends upon the distance apart of the coils and their orientation to each other. Mutually connected inductors in parallel can be classed as either "aiding" or "opposing" the total inductance with parallel aiding connected coils increasing the total equivalent inductance and parallel opposing coils decreasing the total equivalent inductance compared to coils that have zero mutual inductance. http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/inductor/parallel-inductors.html
some calculation with mutual inductance effect give less efficiency 444% instead of 489% (please check my calculation)
Hi, today i have been doing multiple-coil tests with the device i'm using to investigate acceleration-under-load.
The point of today's tests was to investigate the acceleration effect with a group of coils, connected in series.
The results have revealed a major drawback in my rotor geometry.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1235.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fff437%2Fdeepcut71%2Fth_DSC01471.jpg&hash=a58cb91b4787e1c8c1c135bde1ce9a7ed6cb2b4b) (http://s1235.photobucket.com/albums/ff437/deepcut71/?action=view¤t=DSC01471.jpg)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1235.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fff437%2Fdeepcut71%2Fth_DSC01470.jpg&hash=82eec03b115d751ff0a20d6068d0c5aea858ca63) (http://s1235.photobucket.com/albums/ff437/deepcut71/?action=view¤t=DSC01470.jpg)
Because i am using a single, diametrically magnetised magnet, there is no point at which a coil is not within a rotating magnetic field.
This results in some undesirable behaviour.
With three coils in series, arranged around the rotor in a circular fashion, 90 degrees apart (there is a fourth, small drive coil), one of the coils will always have part of it in the North magnetic field and part of it in the South magnetic field, during this phase in rotation, the other two coils will have either North only or South only passing through them.
With regards to power generation, am i right in thinking this means that the half North/half South coil has current trying to flow in both directions ?
If so then i have to use two larger coils or go for a multi-magnet rotor setup.
It's very annoying because my device take 6 or 7 Watts to run and two coils gets me 5.7 Watts ...
Any help with the AC aspect of this greatly appreciated, i think i've diagnosed the problem correctly :o
Cheers,
DC.
Hey Deep
Try a cap in series with your load after the gen coil.
Try 1uf to 10uf not polarized(electrolytic) and of a voltage above the coils output.
It just might take ya over the edge. ;]
Mags
Not yet mate, i want to solve this, someone here must know enough about AC to confirm my theory ?
Quote from: DeepCut on October 27, 2011, 01:01:29 PM
Not yet mate, i want to solve this, someone here must know enough about AC to confirm my theory ?
ARE YOU STILL DRUNK OR JUST HUNGOVER AT THIS POINT DUDE? ;)
CAN YOU DESCRIBE YOUR UNDESIRABLE EFFECTS IN GREATER DETAIL PLEASE?
CHEERS
T
Quote from: DeepCut on October 27, 2011, 12:48:22 PM
Hi, today i have been doing multiple-coil tests with the device i'm using to investigate acceleration-under-load.
With regards to power generation, am i right in thinking this means that the half North/half South coil has current trying to flow in both directions ?
NO IT MEANS THAT THE SINE WAVE IS PASSING THROUGH THE ZERO POINT ON THE Y AXIS.
QuoteIf so then i have to use two larger coils or go for a multi-magnet rotor setup.
Cheers,DC.
WHAT TYPE OF COILS ARE YOU USING?
CHEERS
T
Hi Thane,
HV coils, each is a half-pound of 0.25mm.
L = 20+ Henries (my LCR meter only goes to 20 for inductance).
R = ~400 ohms
They are bifilar-wound, series-connected, wired in series together.
So if a coil has a South pole and a North pole cutting it at the same time then that's not a bad thing ?
Cheers,
Gary.
Hello everyone,
I tried to replicate Luc`s setup however I measured the real-power with this famous german Hartmann & Braun Instrument ( 1980)
http://www.radiomuseum.org/r/hartmann_wattavi.html
It is a pure Power-Meter which cannot be fooled because the current to be measured is used to magnetize a closed iron-core in the center of which a electrodynamic meter-coil ( galvanometer-coil) is turning the needle. A small current resulting from the voltage is fed into this sensitive coil.
Now current and voltage determine the real power monitored in this Instrument in a direct way - no interpretation , no calculation by pic-programms.
In all configurations I tested ( I have a torióid-transformer with two identical secondaries specified for 50 V each )
there was always real-power flowing from the grid into the system. Average efficiency was about 75 to 80 %.
Wattage was in the range from 5 to 10 Watt into a 1 Ohm-Power-Resistor. Average efficiency was about 75 to 80 %. Phaseshift was monitored across a 0,27 Ohm Power-resistor and strange enough my scope definitely showed a 90 degree phase-shift in an configurations. This result was veryfied at the same time with a standard mechanical power-meter - Ferraris-meter - we use here in germany as the main grid-meter
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/wiki/Stromzähler (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/wiki/Stromz%C3%83%C2%A4hler)
The minute phaseshift-difference ( maybe 2 to 5 degrees) simply escapes these digital meters and I have to confess that I first was confused by my scope-readings until I realized that these Digi-meters can not be used in these measurements and visually I was not able to detect the small difference on my scope.
The wattavi K however can not be fooled.
Sorry folks this setup does not work.
Regards
Kator01
Hi
here on this webside ( old measurement-techique ) in figure 2 (Abb.2 ) you can see how this closed iron-meter-ring of the watavi k was construced by the
hartmann & braun engineers way back in 1980
http://www.alte-messtechnik.de/technik/elektrodynamisch.php (http://www.alte-messtechnik.de/technik/elektrodynamisch.php)
on the right side you can see the feed-in-terminals for the current.
@cranky : I placed the probe directly to the primary coil and the phasesshift of 90 degrees was gone. Voltage and current was fully in-phase.
The different cap-values I used ( 15 to 70 mykoFarad) simply changed the input voltage-level- and by this of course the current.
Regards
Kator01
Quote from: DeepCut on October 27, 2011, 03:10:29 PM
Hi Thane,
They are bifilar-wound, series-connected, wired in series together.
Cheers,
Gary.
DEAR GARY,
WHY DID YOU CONNECT THEM TOGETHER IN SERIES? ???
TRY SHORTING EACH OF THEM INDIVIDUALLY AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: Kator01 on October 27, 2011, 06:23:35 PM
Hello everyone,
I tried to replicate Luc`s setup however I measured the real-power with this famous german Hartmann & Braun Instrument ( 1980)
http://www.radiomuseum.org/r/hartmann_wattavi.html
It is a pure Power-Meter which cannot be fooled because the current to be measured is used to magnetize a closed iron-core in the center of which a electrodynamic meter-coil ( galvanometer-coil) is turning the needle. A small current resulting from the voltage is fed into this sensitive coil.
Now current and voltage determine the real power monitored in this Instrument in a direct way - no interpretation , no calculation by pic-programms.
In all configurations I tested ( I have a torióid-transformer with two identical secondaries specified for 50 V each )
there was always real-power flowing from the grid into the system. Average efficiency was about 75 to 80 %.
Wattage was in the range from 5 to 10 Watt into a 1 Ohm-Power-Resistor. Average efficiency was about 75 to 80 %. Phaseshift was monitored across a 0,27 Ohm Power-resistor and strange enough my scope definitely showed a 90 degree phase-shift in an configurations. This result was veryfied at the same time with a standard mechanical power-meter - Ferraris-meter - we use here in germany as the main grid-meter
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/wiki/Stromzähler (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/wiki/Stromz%C3%83%C2%A4hler)
The minute phaseshift-difference ( maybe 2 to 5 degrees) simply escapes these digital meters and I have to confess that I first was confused by my scope-readings until I realized that these Digi-meters can not be used in these measurements and visually I was not able to detect the small difference on my scope.
The wattavi K however can not be fooled.
Sorry folks this setup does not work.
Regards
Kator01
Thanks Kator01 for taking the time to do this test and confirm what I thought.
I wrote in a prior post that I don't think a reactive circuit would have any benefit operating on its own. It would probably need a finely tuned receiving/re-injecting timing circuit to deal with the returned reactive current which is not built in the quality meter you used. So the results don't surprise me at all.
However, I do believe this circuit is sending some current back and that's what's affecting my cheap Watts meter. Probably the meters internal measuring capacitor is being re-charged when the circuits capacitance is tuned or balanced to the Meter.
Thanks again for your tests
Luc
At everyone,
I forgot to mention yesterday that my test using the pure sine wave inverter the Shunt resistor displayed larger peak (larger than grid tests) on the tops of the current peaks. So I reconnected everything to capture the scope shots. Please look them over and post what you think is the cause of this.
I also activated the Math function as user SchubertReijiMaigo had suggested in his post below.
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on October 25, 2011, 05:25:17 AM
Hello Gotoluc I have DSO 2090, just a tips to measure the power, use the maths function (CannelA*ChannelB) to display power, if you see a curve that have equal pulse above and bottom the zero line you have reactive power, maybe it will be much easier to read.
If this information is correct the math function seem to confirm it is reactive power.
First scope shot is of the current shunt only
Second is with the inverters sine wave input to the circuit
Third is with Math Function added
and Forth is with the probes separated on their own and Math Function
Please let me know what you think
Luc
Quote from: wings on October 26, 2011, 06:32:41 PM
some calculation with mutual inductance effect give less efficiency 444% instead of 489% (please check my calculation)
next
what is the best way to generate variable reactive power from DC reducing energy loss?
@ Gotoluc, Thank you for posting that, but can you display MATHVVmean function, because it's hard to see (the curve contain a lot of harmonics (I wonder where it comes ?)
I have noticed if MATHVmean tend to go higher it' mean that the power is active, but if it stay around zero it's reactive (no matter the MATHVrms value)... Sorry for this late information (I'm still in the learning curve in AC oscilloscope measurement), Yesterday just finished to burn up my amplifier with tuned Resonant circuit... :'( :'(
Hello Luc, thanks for you're interesting experiments! Any chance you could measure the power feeding the inverter before and after applying the load of the transformer? This will give a good indication of power use after the inverter.
Quote from: gotoluc on October 28, 2011, 01:11:29 AM
...
I forgot to mention yesterday that my test using the pure sine wave inverter the Shunt resistor displayed larger peak (larger than grid tests) on the tops of the current peaks.
....
Hi Luc,
I think the larger peaks on top of the current peaks come from a starting core saturation, either in your test transformer core or the inverter inside output core or just both. If you wish to test this, you can insert a series resistor higher than the 1 Ohm shunt to decrease the current, even though it is reactive. As Thane calculated it the reactive power in your previous setup from the mains was about 147 VAR (with 1.23A current) and if you allow only 1A or slightly less current to flow instead, the spikes should get reduced or should disappear from the current peaks.
QuoteSomething else I noticed is the 24uf Capacitance used to make my Watts meter display Zero when plugged into the Grid would display 3 to 4 Watts when plugged in to the Inverter. By reducing the Capacitance to 15uf it came back to Zero. So maybe the Capacitance is doing some kind of Impedance matching and fools the meter?
I think the inverter inside transformer's output coil adds its own inductance to the series LC you terminate it with and this is why you needed to reduce the capacitor to 15uF. The transformer in the inverter simply detuned your original LC resonance. This shows nicely that an inverter cannot really substitute the mains very low impedance, unless the inverter is designed for many kW of output power, for this would involve much lower output impedance by default.
Gyula
THIS POST WAS EDITED
Here is a replacement scope shot with Vmean on the Math.
Math is set at 50 Volts division.
Amp meter on the 12.2VDC side of the inverter shows the inverter consumes 400ma idle (nothing connected on output)
Under load it goes up to 1,130ma
The Series Capacitor used in this test is 15uF, Shunt is 1 Ohms, Secondary has a 10 Ohm Load Resistor with 6.52vac across it.
Luc
I deleted this post since the Scope shot Math was an error
Luc
According to your curve all the power is active here :o :o :o
Look like also the power is reflected since the input (on DC side) is increasing, finally look like this experiment is failed. :'(
What do you guys think the peaks on the top of the Shunt Sine Wave are???
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on October 28, 2011, 02:28:53 PM
If so what do you think the peaks are on the top of the waves ???
Luc
THEY ARE FREE AND HAPPY HUMPBACK WHALES... NOT RELATED BUT REALLY WORTH WATCHING! 8)
http://www.wimp.com/humpbackwhale/
CHEERS
T
QuoteIf so what do you think the peaks are on the top of the waves ???
Luc
Harmonics distortion (maybe due to resonance and saturation of the core): you can see on the green curve also, and because you have "Zoomed" the MATHcurve (using high Volt/division the oscilloscope make the product of two and the deformation is "amplified" on the red curve, but nothing strange here, the most important is the red curve which is above the zero line: power doesn't return to source...
Hi Luc,
I still think the transformer core starts saturating (even though its primary AC current is just under 700 mA in your latest test when you had 22 Ohm shunt resistor in series with the primary coil). The time-coincidence of the red scope waveform's spikey peaks with that of the green input current shows this I believe.
In the link below you can see a scope shot on current shape through a saturating inductor (note: there is a misprint, D4 in the text below the schematic should read as D3).
Here is the link:
http://www.dos4ever.com/flyback/flyback.html#ind2
What output power is the sine wave inverter manufactured for, just curious, I do not think you overload it.
Gyula
Quote from: gotoluc on October 28, 2011, 02:28:53 PM
If so what do you think the peaks are on the top of the waves ???
Luc
hi Luc
try slowly varying the frequency, either side of that shown in the above trace - is there a maximum in the pk-pk o/p, nearby?
if so, select that frequency then slowly increase the i/p voltage from a lower initial value - do you get to an i/p voltage where those 'sharp peaks' suddenly snap into view on the regular waveform? (possibly accompanied by more noise from the trafo)?
i've seen something like this recently - will check
thanks
np
http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com (http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com)
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on October 28, 2011, 01:40:40 PM
According to your curve all the power is active here :o :o :o
Look like also the power is reflected since the input (on DC side) is increasing, finally look like this experiment is failed. :'(
Hi SchubertReijiMaigo and everyone
An Electronics Engineer looked at the scope shots and noticed the math did not make sense.
As I said in my post when I turned off one probe the Math changed. But what I did not notice is the Math automatically changed to multiply Channel A to Channel A.
So you were looking at NOTHING real. You guys must be on drugs
I Edited the posts above with the correct scope shot, DC current reading and Shunt Resistor
So it looks like it is reactive after all
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on October 28, 2011, 06:48:13 PM
So it looks like it is reactive after all
Luc
GOD'S LITTLE KNOW
12th COMMANDMENT: "THOU SHALT NOT UNDERESTIMATE MASTER LUC" ~ GOD... ;)
WHICH COMES RIGHT AFTER THE 11th AND IS OFTEN OVERLOOKED FOR SOME STRANGE REASON? :-[
CHEERS
T
Quote from: gotoluc on October 28, 2011, 12:34:19 PM
THIS POST WAS EDITED
I added an Amp meter on the DC side of the inverter and it idles at 400ma (nothing connected on output) and under load it's at 1,130ma - 10 Ohm Load Resistor with 6.52vac across it and the Shunt is 1 Ohms.
Luc
OK - THE OUTPUT IS 4.25 WATTS... WHAT IS THE DC INPUT VOLTAGE MR. MASTERBOATER?
12 VOLTS?
CHEERS
T
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on October 28, 2011, 03:29:32 PM
Harmonics distortion (maybe due to resonance and saturation of the core)
It's not Saturation!... this is a 300VA Toroid. It will not Saturate at this low of a Current input.
Please note that this only happens when using the Sine Wave Inverter and not when Connected to the Grid.
Luc
Quote from: nul-points on October 28, 2011, 06:06:34 PM
hi Luc
[...]
i've seen something like this recently - will check
thanks
np
yeah, this is what i remembered seeing - a YT video by user 'selfonlypath' showing results obtained with his 'Transverter' setup (2x MWO trafos modified & connected together, then driven with an 'H' bridge)
http://www.youtube.com/user/selfonlypath (http://www.youtube.com/user/selfonlypath) eg., see 'Transverter 1'
at a combination of resonance and with the i/p volts just passing thro' a threshold, the o/p sine wave 'snaps' into a more triangular waveform with elongated peaks
the snapshot below captures the moment when the o/p changes from a sine to a 'triangular' wave with peaks
of course, you may just dismiss people's contributions as 'being on drugs' ...but you did ask for feedback ;)
cheers
np
http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com (http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com)
Quote from: gyulasun on October 28, 2011, 04:34:23 PM
Hi Luc,
I still think the transformer core starts saturating (even though its primary AC current is just under 700 mA in your latest test when you had 22 Ohm shunt resistor in series with the primary coil). The time-coincidence of the red scope waveform's spikey peaks with that of the green input current shows this I believe.
In the link below you can see a scope shot on current shape through a saturating inductor (note: there is a misprint, D4 in the text below the schematic should read as D3).
Here is the link:
http://www.dos4ever.com/flyback/flyback.html#ind2
What output power is the sine wave inverter manufactured for, just curious, I do not think you overload it.
Gyula
Hi Gyula,
you may want to edit your post (if you still can) Please look at the Replacent scope shot above.
Regarding the peaks, it's not Saturation of the core. This is a 300VA Toroid, it takes much more current then that to Saturate it. Also, please note that these peaks only happen when connected to the sine wave Inverter. When connected to Grid there are no Peaks. See post with Grid scope shot on the next page
The Inverter is rated at 1000 Watts Continuous. Paid $300. for it
Thanks for your time
Luc
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 28, 2011, 07:54:25 PM
OK - THE OUTPUT IS 4.25 WATTS... WHAT IS THE DC INPUT VOLTAGE MR. MASTERBOATER?
12 VOLTS?
CHEERS
T
Yes, 12.3 Volts DC
Thanks
Luc
Here is the identical setup but connected to the Grid
15uf series capacitor, 1 Ohm Shunt, 10 Ohm Load @ 6.70vac
If this was Saturation then where are those Peaks?
Luc
Quote from: nul-points on October 28, 2011, 08:08:30 PM
yeah, this is what i remembered seeing - a YT video by user 'selfonlypath' showing results obtained with his 'Transverter' setup (2x MWO trafos modified & connected together, then driven with an 'H' bridge)
http://www.youtube.com/user/selfonlypath (http://www.youtube.com/user/selfonlypath) eg., see 'Transverter 1'
at a combination of resonance and with the i/p volts just passing thro' a threshold, the o/p sine wave 'snaps' into a more triangular waveform with elongated peaks
the snapshot below captures the moment when the o/p changes from a sine to a 'triangular' wave with peaks
cheers
np
Thanks nul-points for posting this video once again. It was posted on page 14 by plengo: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=11350.msg301689#msg301689
This great researcher explains and demonstrates that one needs an accurate timing circuit to recover energy from a Reactive circuit.
I have said and I believe we are subject to the same.
Anyone interested should study this technique and post their ideas of a recovery/recirculating circuit.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on October 28, 2011, 12:34:19 PM
THIS POST WAS EDITED
under load it's at 1,130ma
Luc
IS THIS 1.13 mA OR IS IT 1.13 A?
IT WOULD BE NICE IF WAS 1.13 mA BECAUSE YOU EFFICIENCY WOULD BE 32297.3% 8).
OTHERWISE INPUT CURRENT = 720 mA AND PRIMARY DC RESISTANCE = 0.3 OHMS
IF PRIMARY POWER FACTOR IS INDEED 0.0 THEN Pp = 0.216 WATTS WITH AN EFFICIENCY OF ONLY 2078.2%. :-[
IF THE PHASE SHIFT IS 81 DEGREES (AS I SEE IT) PF = 0.15 AND IF Pcurrent = 727 mA AND Pvoltage = 112 V THEN
Pin = 112 x 0.727 x 0.15
= 12.7 WATTS AND Pout = 4.49 WATTS AND EFFICIENCY = 35.4% :'(
A PHASE SHIFT OF 87 DEGREES OR PF = 0.052 GIVES AN EFFICIENCY OF 105%.
IF THE DC INPUT CURRENT IS 1.13 A AND THE DC VOLTAGE IS 12.3 VOLTS THEN THE EFFICIENCY IS 32.3%
PLEASE EXPAND YOUR TIME AXIS SO:
1) WE ONLY SEE 1/2 OF THE SINE WAVE (180 DEGREES) AND THEN
2) EXPAND THE VOLT/DIV SO THE LINES ARE STRAIGHT UP AND DOWN AND THEN
3) MAKE THE YELLOW LINES EQUAL ON BOTH SIDES.
NOW WE CAN CALCULATE THE PHASE ANGLE CORRECTLY.
ALSO NOTE POSITION OF RED "POWER" SINE WAVE IS SLIGHTLY HIGHER ON TOP AND NOT QUITE EQUAL FOR A PF OF 0.0 - CAN YOU TWEAK IT WITH ANOTHER CAP VALUE?
CHEERS
T
Hi Thane
it is 1.13 Amps and your math seems to be correct.
I always learn new stuff as I go so there is nothing wasted (other than power ;D)... I'm only going to get better at this.
Thanks for everyone's input
Luc
PS hey! nice scope shot. That is the ultimate one. We'll get there
Hey Thane,
have a look at these Shots
I decided to re-test my GTL-90 compared to the Toroid and the GTL-90 is better
First shot is GTL 90 with 22 ohm shunt, 1uf series cap, 10 ohm load @ 0.42vac
Second shot is Toroid with 22 ohm shunt, 1uf series cap, 10 ohm load @ 0.42vac
Let me know what you think
Luc
@ Gotuluc: don't worry, I'm not on the drug or anything illicit...
When you posted the first curve page 31, sorry but it was obvious that your MATH curve was totally active (PF=1), you have reedited your post and display a curve which is reactive...
The first curve in your post above is reactive while the second is slightly active...
So the cap have the ability to correct both L and the reflect R in the trafo ?
One problem in this setup: the output power is very low, 0.42 Volts through 10 Ohms is not very much, here a huge risk of measurement error must be take into account before any conclusion...
Hi Luc,
I accept the 300W toroid transformator cannot show signs of saturation, albeit the scope shots on the current (i.e. voltage drop across the shunt) shows, this is why I suspected starting saturation somewhere in the setup.
To explore where those spikes on the current peaks may come from it would be good to test the inverter output terminated with a resistor that draws about 1 Amper current from the 118V AC output and see on the 1 Ohm (or 10 Ohm) current shunt whether the spikes are there or not. I say this test because perhaps the sinewave inverter includes a low pass filter at its output make the sinewave from the 'uggly' switched waveforms and the low pass filter may include a choke coil with a core that may start saturating... a guess from me, one would not expect such behaviour from a 1000W inverter but those spikes must be caused by something...
Gyula
EDIT It occured to me a better way would be to load the inverter output with a 22 uF capacitor and see on the 1 Ohm series shunt how the current waveform looks like for a capacitive load (because your resulting load from the series LC was capacitive nature). The 22uF (or near to this value) means a 1 Amper capacitive load current for the inverter output.
Quote from: gotoluc on October 28, 2011, 08:09:50 PM
Hi Gyula,
you may want to edit your post (if you still can) Please look at the Replacent scope shot above.
Regarding the peaks, it's not Saturation of the core. This is a 300VA Toroid, it takes much more current then that to Saturate it. Also, please note that these peaks only happen when connected to the sine wave Inverter. When connected to Grid there are no Peaks. See post with Grid scope shot on the next page
The Inverter is rated at 1000 Watts Continuous. Paid $300. for it
Thanks for your time
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on October 29, 2011, 02:38:20 AM
Hey Thane,
have a look at these Shots... Let me know what you think
Luc
LUC,
WE NEED TO KNOW HOW HIGH THE TRANSFORMER EFFICIENCY HAS TO BE TO COMPENSATE FOR THE INVERTER EFFICIENCY... :P
CAN YOU PUT A LOAD IN THE INVERTER AND FILL IN THE BLANKS BELOW SO WE CAN CALCULATE THE EFFICIENCY OF THE INVERTER?
EVERY TEST YOU DO OUGHT TO INCLUDE THE DATA BELOW BECAUSE THAT INVERTER EFFICIENCY CHANGES AS IT HEATS UP RIGHT?
DC INPUT SIDEDC VOLTAGE =
DC CURRENT =
DC INPUT POWER =
AC OUTPUT SIDELOAD RESISTANCE =
LOAD VOLTAGE =
LOAD CURRENT =
LOAD PF =
(DON'T ASSUME YOUR RESISTORS ARE PURELY RESISTIVE BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT)
AC OUTPUT POWER =
DC INPUT POWER =
INVERTER EFFICIENCY = (AC OUTPUT / DC INPUT) x 100 = ? % CHEERS
T
Quote from: gotoluc on October 28, 2011, 12:34:19 PM
THIS POST WAS EDITED
Amp meter on the 12.2VDC side of the inverter shows the inverter consumes 400mA idle (nothing connected on output) Under load it goes up to 1.130 A
Luc
IF WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON LET'S LOOK AT THE (SOURCE) INPUT REACTION TO LOADING...
DC INPUT CURRENT ON IDLE (NO-LOAD) = 0.4 A
INPUT POWER ON NO-LOAD = 4.88 WATTSDC INPUT CURRENT ON LOAD = 1.13 A
INPUT POWER ON ON-LOAD = 13.8 WATTSINPUT POWER INCREASE % NO-LOAD TO ON-LOAD = 182%THIS MEANS THAT THE INVERTER HAS TO WORK HARDER TO DELIVER POWER TO THE LOAD REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE SCOPE SAYS...
MY SUGGESTION IF I WERE YOU WOULD BE TO DELIVER POWER ON THE AC SIDE WITHOUT ANY CURRENT INCREASE (REACTION) ON THE DC SIDE ;)
CHEERS
T
PS
IT WOULD ALSO BE GOOD TO KNOW WHAT THE CURRENT AND VOLTAGE IS TO THE INVERTER WITH
NO COIL ATTACHED AND THEN
WITH COIL ATTACHED?
@gotoluc
Maybe you should try this driving circuit from Romero at your secondary, it looks promissing...
Generator Coil Speedup Circuit Simulation (http://www.falstad.com/circuit/#%24+1+5.0E-6+20.712724888983452+47+5.0+50%0Av+144+320+144+192+0+1+100.0+10.0+0.0+0.0+0.5%0AT+240+240+320+240+0+100.0+1.0+-2.458856236047474+2.4624258819749305+0.999%0Aw+240+240+240+192+0%0Aw+240+272+240+320+0%0Ar+240+192+144+192+0+0.1%0At+304+160+304+208+0+-1+-4.9819908104487E-6+0.8284334583868054+100.0%0Aw+320+240+320+208+0%0Ac+320+272+448+272+0+8.999999999999999E-5+20.073435937681964%0Aw+448+208+448+272+0%0Ad+448+208+320+208+1+0.805904783%0Aw+288+208+256+208+0%0Aw+256+208+256+128+0%0Aw+256+128+480+128+0%0Aw+448+272+480+272+0%0Aw+448+160+448+208+0%0Ar+448+160+368+160+0+100.0%0Az+368+160+304+160+1+0.805904783+10.0%0Aw+480+128+528+128+0%0Aw+480+272+528+272+0%0Ac+144+320+240+320+0+1.4999999999999999E-5+7.574303202723141%0A162+528+128+528+272+1+10.0+1.0+1.0+1.0%0Ao+0+64+1+35+40.0+9.765625E-5+0+-1%0Ao+20+64+1+35+40.0+9.765625E-5+1+-1%0A)
In some of the 'acceleration under load' videos Romero showed this attached circuit to be responsible for the speedup effect.
I did a simulation of that replacing Hall sensor with a zener diode.
The result is blinking led with power disipation shown on the right graph and on the left we've got power taken from the rotor...
This can be done in 1:1 transformer too, I think so... ;)
This sim is just an example. You would have to play with parameters (right mouse button on a componetnt to edit) to make it right...
Hi gotoluc!
Could you please make another scope shot with the load 20W or 50W (i'm sure you have some automotive lightbulbs laying around) and with the capacitor retuned, so we can see what the power curve looks like?
Dann
Quote from: gotoluc on October 29, 2011, 02:38:20 AM
Let me know what you think
Luc
HAVE YOU SEEN THIS? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtI1CPBSm-o&feature=related
USE IT TO DRIVE YOUR PRIMARY?
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 29, 2011, 09:58:22 AM
IF WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON LET'S LOOK AT THE (SOURCE) INPUT REACTION TO LOADING...
DC INPUT CURRENT ON IDLE (NO-LOAD) = 0.4 A
INPUT POWER ON NO-LOAD = 4.88 WATTS
DC INPUT CURRENT ON LOAD = 1.13 A
INPUT POWER ON ON-LOAD = 13.8 WATTS
INPUT POWER INCREASE % NO-LOAD TO ON-LOAD = 182%
THIS MEANS THAT THE INVERTER HAS TO WORK HARDER TO DELIVER POWER TO THE LOAD REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE SCOPE SAYS...
MY SUGGESTION IF I WERE YOU WOULD BE TO DELIVER POWER ON THE AC SIDE WITHOUT ANY CURRENT INCREASE (REACTION) ON THE DC SIDE ;)
CHEERS
T
PS
IT WOULD ALSO BE GOOD TO KNOW WHAT THE CURRENT AND VOLTAGE IS TO THE INVERTER WITH NO COIL ATTACHED AND THEN WITH COIL ATTACHED?
Hi Thane,
I've been winterizing my sailboat and cleaning and re-packing my storage as I'm flying out of the Country this Tuesday.
I also returned the sine wave Inverter.
It uses 400ma @12.5vdc with nothing connected to the outputs.
Sorry but the time I had for testing is over for at least a month if not more
I'll be keeping an eye on the topic from abroad. However, Internet access is very limited where I'm going to be.
Talk to you in some time
Luc
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 30, 2011, 11:43:07 PM
HAVE YOU SEEN THIS? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtI1CPBSm-o&feature=related
USE IT TO DRIVE YOUR PRIMARY?
CHEERS
T
I have a video I did some years back (Jan 3, 2009) of a coil in resonance setup this way. It was a spool of speaker wire.
Link to my video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auFYEFBrwls
Anyways, there is a mutual Inductance and Capacitive coupling between his signal generator hot and ground. This YouTube experimenter just can't see the Current because he's using a moving coil Amp meter which is fine for low frequencies but it's not going to show any activity at 300KHz
He would need to use his scope and a shunt resistor to see the AC current at these frequencies.
Luc
Quote from: kEhYo77 on October 30, 2011, 05:43:52 AM
@gotoluc
Maybe you should try this driving circuit from Romero at your secondary, it looks promissing...
Generator Coil Speedup Circuit Simulation (http://www.falstad.com/circuit/#%24+1+5.0E-6+20.712724888983452+47+5.0+50%0Av+144+320+144+192+0+1+100.0+10.0+0.0+0.0+0.5%0AT+240+240+320+240+0+100.0+1.0+-2.458856236047474+2.4624258819749305+0.999%0Aw+240+240+240+192+0%0Aw+240+272+240+320+0%0Ar+240+192+144+192+0+0.1%0At+304+160+304+208+0+-1+-4.9819908104487E-6+0.8284334583868054+100.0%0Aw+320+240+320+208+0%0Ac+320+272+448+272+0+8.999999999999999E-5+20.073435937681964%0Aw+448+208+448+272+0%0Ad+448+208+320+208+1+0.805904783%0Aw+288+208+256+208+0%0Aw+256+208+256+128+0%0Aw+256+128+480+128+0%0Aw+448+272+480+272+0%0Aw+448+160+448+208+0%0Ar+448+160+368+160+0+100.0%0Az+368+160+304+160+1+0.805904783+10.0%0Aw+480+128+528+128+0%0Aw+480+272+528+272+0%0Ac+144+320+240+320+0+1.4999999999999999E-5+7.574303202723141%0A162+528+128+528+272+1+10.0+1.0+1.0+1.0%0Ao+0+64+1+35+40.0+9.765625E-5+0+-1%0Ao+20+64+1+35+40.0+9.765625E-5+1+-1%0A)
In some of the 'acceleration under load' videos Romero showed this attached circuit to be responsible for the speedup effect.
I did a simulation of that replacing Hall sensor with a zener diode.
The result is blinking led with power disipation shown on the right graph and on the left we've got power taken from the rotor...
This can be done in 1:1 transformer too, I think so... ;)
This sim is just an example. You would have to play with parameters (right mouse button on a componetnt to edit) to make it right...
Interesting circuit idea and Sim kEhYo77
Do you think it is realistic?... if so, I was able to tune it to return current ;D You just have to wait 3 or 4 minutes till it reaches the 44 Watts range.
Link to Re-tuned Generator Circuit Simulation (http://www.falstad.com/circuit/#%24+1+5.0E-6+13.654669808981877+47+5.0+50%0Av+144+320+144+192+0+1+100.0+10.0+0.0+0.0+0.5%0AT+240+240+320+240+0+100.0+1.0+-3.3095594223981086+3.2902461214900205+0.999%0Aw+240+240+240+192+0%0Aw+240+272+240+320+0%0Ar+240+192+144+192+0+0.1%0At+304+160+304+208+0+-1+6.37743308944394E-5+0.8356789246677933+100.0%0Aw+320+240+320+208+0%0Ac+320+272+448+272+0+9.169E-5+-30.662824193102452%0Aw+448+208+448+272+0%0Ad+448+208+320+208+1+0.805904783%0Aw+288+208+256+208+0%0Aw+256+208+256+128+0%0Aw+256+128+480+128+0%0Aw+448+272+480+272+0%0Aw+448+160+448+208+0%0Ar+448+160+368+160+0+100.0%0Az+368+160+304+160+1+0.805904783+10.0%0Aw+480+128+528+128+0%0Aw+480+272+528+272+0%0Ac+144+320+240+320+0+1.4699999999999998E-5+-299.9212039774782%0A162+528+128+528+272+1+10.0+1.0+1.0+1.0%0Ac+512+240+512+256+0+9.999999999999999E-6+0.0%0Ao+0+64+1+43+80.0+9.765625E-5+0+-1%0Ao+20+64+1+43+80.0+9.765625E-5+1+-1%0A)
Let me know what you think
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc
Do you think it is realistic?... if so, I was able to tune it to return current ;D You just have to wait 3 or 4 minutes till it reaches the 44 Watts range.
Link to Re-tuned Generator Circuit Simulation (http://www.falstad.com/circuit/#%24+1+5.0E-6+13.654669808981877+47+5.0+50%0Av+144+320+144+192+0+1+100.0+10.0+0.0+0.0+0.5%0AT+240+240+320+240+0+100.0+1.0+-3.3095594223981086+3.2902461214900205+0.999%0Aw+240+240+240+192+0%0Aw+240+272+240+320+0%0Ar+240+192+144+192+0+0.1%0At+304+160+304+208+0+-1+6.37743308944394E-5+0.8356789246677933+100.0%0Aw+320+240+320+208+0%0Ac+320+272+448+272+0+9.169E-5+-30.662824193102452%0Aw+448+208+448+272+0%0Ad+448+208+320+208+1+0.805904783%0Aw+288+208+256+208+0%0Aw+256+208+256+128+0%0Aw+256+128+480+128+0%0Aw+448+272+480+272+0%0Aw+448+160+448+208+0%0Ar+448+160+368+160+0+100.0%0Az+368+160+304+160+1+0.805904783+10.0%0Aw+480+128+528+128+0%0Aw+480+272+528+272+0%0Ac+144+320+240+320+0+1.4699999999999998E-5+-299.9212039774782%0A162+528+128+528+272+1+10.0+1.0+1.0+1.0%0Ac+512+240+512+256+0+9.999999999999999E-6+0.0%0Ao+0+64+1+43+80.0+9.765625E-5+0+-1%0Ao+20+64+1+43+80.0+9.765625E-5+1+-1%0A)
Let me know what you think
Luc
Well it seems to be working in this video so I think it is worth trying.
Speed under load! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGT4ML4m8i4&hd=1)
Like I said, you have to play with the parameters ;) I achieved even higher output at some point but we have to check it's performance in a real life setup.
Right now the inductance of the transformer is a bit unrealistic but this circuit is just a base to work on.
Hi everyone,
I couldn't resist to test kEhYo77 circuit simulation in real time.
It's now 2am and I fly out of the Country this afternoon, so I may not have internet access for a few days unless I get some free wi-fi in one of the airports I'll be going through.
For the test I used another Toroid that I have that has Dual 120vac coils which are 300mH each and 2.3 Ohm DC Resistance
Also, I only noticed (after the electronic store was closed) the Transistor was an PNP and not your standard NPN. However, I manage to find an old one in my salvage stuff. It's model A671. Probably not the best but it works. I tested its hfe and it about 67 to 70
Below is a link to the Simulation with all the correct values of components that I used. I also used 60Hz grid at 12.25vac adjusted by my variac.
Link to Re-tuned Generator Circuit Simulation (http://www.falstad.com/circuit/#%24+1+5.0E-6+19.056626845863+88+5.0+50%0Av+144+320+144+192+0+1+60.0+12.25+0.0+0.0+0.5%0AT+240+240+320+240+0+300.0+1.0+0.022170308195309473+-0.03555432992121884+0.999%0Aw+240+240+240+192+0%0Aw+240+272+240+320+0%0Ar+240+192+144+192+0+1.0%0At+304+160+304+208+0+-1+9.552326300489511+-0.664922859291486+67.0%0Aw+320+240+320+208+0%0Ac+320+272+448+272+0+7.999999999999999E-4+-15.236550225631504%0Aw+448+208+448+272+0%0Ad+448+208+320+208+1+0.805904783%0Aw+288+208+256+208+0%0Aw+256+208+256+128+0%0Aw+256+128+480+128+0%0Aw+448+272+480+272+0%0Aw+448+160+448+208+0%0Ar+448+160+368+160+0+100.0%0Az+368+160+304+160+1+0.805904783+10.0%0Aw+480+128+528+128+0%0Aw+480+272+528+272+0%0Ac+144+320+240+320+0+3.9999999999999996E-4+21.3090411984063%0Ar+528+128+528+272+0+10.0%0Ao+0+64+1+43+2.5+9.765625E-5+0+-1%0Ao+20+64+1+35+0.078125+9.765625E-5+1+-1%0A)
The scope shot below is with a 1 Ohm shunt resistor on the green trace. The the probes are setup in the standard way that I have been doing to measure current and voltage (yellow) on the input side.
I used my digital meter on the output side to measure the voltage across the 10 Ohm load Resistor. It is at 4 Volts AC = 1.6 Watts. I also included a second scope shot by moving the yellow voltage probe across the 10 Ohm load so you can see its wave form.
I did include the scopes Math function in the first scope shot as you can see but I'm not qualified to do the power calculations. Please help as I don't know what to do with Vmean with Negative reading ???
It definitely looks interesting
Luc
@Luc I'm glad you tried it. It is very interesting indeed.
The tuning should be more like this, I think:
Re-tuned Gotuluc's setup (http://www.falstad.com/circuit/#%24+1+5.0E-6+19.056626845863+39+5.0+50%0Av+144+320+144+192+0+1+60.0+12.25+0.0+0.0+0.5%0AT+240+240+320+240+2+0.3+1.0+0.07946485109572722+-1.0303016035814738E-13+0.999%0Aw+240+240+240+192+0%0Aw+240+272+240+320+0%0Ar+240+192+144+192+0+2.3%0At+304+160+304+208+0+-1+-8.501740977884253E-13+-0.017618967867491665+64.0%0Aw+320+240+320+208+0%0Aw+448+208+448+272+0%0Aw+288+208+256+208+0%0Aw+256+208+256+128+0%0Aw+256+128+480+128+0%0Aw+448+272+480+272+0%0Aw+448+160+448+208+0%0Aw+480+128+528+128+0%0Aw+480+272+528+272+0%0Ac+144+320+240+320+0+0.0020+-1.6341928304812852%0Ar+528+128+528+272+0+10.0%0Ar+320+272+368+272+0+2.3%0Ac+368+272+448+272+0+0.0010+-0.020859958010699838%0Ad+448+208+320+208+1+0.805904783%0Ar+304+160+448+160+0+100.0%0Ao+0+64+1+291+20.0+9.765625E-5+0+-1%0Ao+15+32+0+291+5.0+3.2+1+-1%0Ao+16+64+1+35+20.0+9.765625E-5+2+-1%0A)
A added resistors responsible for DC resistance of the transformer windings. I removed the zener diode too.
Now it seems that we have a win-win situation, where power is being returned to the grid (-17W) and at the same time power is being dissipated at the load (10W).
This circuit is much closer of the Transverter + Diode Plug extration (sine wave clipping) I have read once again over +200 pages of RV document that I keep inside my PC... basically the RV circuit use CAP transformer and resonance, tuned in very High Q mode... Then they extract power from CAP with some transistor (like here) when the capacitor is at full voltage and current at 0, so extraction from resonance doesn't affect it... The input power remain reactive (like here, according your red curve) while delivering real joule to the load... A formula (based upon empirical experience) give you the maximum amount of extractable energy in caps because if you over extract then you start to kill resonance oscillation... The formula is 0.618* the circulating VARS in the trafo without the diode plug...
And last Vmean is negative but very small it could be with some imprecision here, the most important is the input is PF=0 here see the red curve energy back and forth to the source !!!
Hi Kehyo
Thank's for the circuitery
Just a question about the transformer. In your setup you have 300 H and not 300 mH. Where do you find a so high inductance transformer ?
I have tried the circuit in the sim with 37 mH and 1.5 Ohm resistance and i can not go under 500 Hz at 10 volts input sig to get a higher output to input result in the sim.
Can you confirm the transformer at 300 H ?
Thank's
Laurent
@woopy Yes. It was my mistake, sorry for that. I have edited my previous post now the inductance of the primary and the secondary is 300mH. Now it should be OK in the simulation too, when it comes to the in/out power.
http://www.vortexnetworknews.com/
Vortex Network News 3-Hour Program on Radio Nsearch on Blog Talk Radio
(Sunday, October 30, 2011)
Host - Aurora Light
"The Inventor of the Infinity Generator - Thane Heins"
The 1st Hour - Aurora Light and Doctor Whodini talk about current events.
The 2nd Hour & 3rd Hour - Doctor Whodini's special guest is the inventor of an overunity device called the Infinity Generator, Thane Heins.
Thane says his Regenerative Acceleration Generator Technology represents a major breakthrough in EV and HEV design which will now allows all EVs to CONTINUALLY RECHARGE THEIR BATTERIES and may provide UNLIMITED RANGE.
Thane talks about his rotating and solid-state designs.
The device works by delaying the Lenz's Law Effect, which is Newton's Third Law.
Aurora's Health Website:
http://HealthGalleria.com
Michael's Channel For The Masters Website:
http://ChannelForTheMasters.com
Doctor Whodini's Websites:
http://ProgressiveTechCenter.org
http://Intalek.com
Guest, Thane Heins Youtube channel:
http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins
Doctor Whodini opens the segment talking about the speedy neutrino:
http://dvice.com/archives/2011/10/speedy-neutrino.php
I played with circuit and removed some components.
Could it be this simple?
-> Check out simplified circuit (http://www.falstad.com/circuit/#%24+1+5.0E-6+0.2954511527092107+39+5.0+50%0Av+80+352+80+224+0+1+60.0+12.25+0.0+0.0+0.5%0AT+176+272+256+272+2+0.3+1.0+0.8164045257958074+-0.8096984208189324+0.999%0Aw+176+272+176+224+0%0Aw+176+304+176+352+0%0Ar+176+224+80+224+0+2.3%0Ar+384+160+384+304+0+10.0%0Ar+256+304+304+304+0+2.3%0Ac+304+304+384+304+0+0.0010+-0.22478442913614316%0Ac+80+352+176+352+0+0.0020+-0.020359549099211303%0Aw+256+272+256+160+0%0Aw+256+160+384+160+0%0Ao+0+64+1+291+20.0+9.765625E-5+0+-1%0Ao+8+64+0+35+2.5+1.6+1+-1%0Ao+5+64+1+35+10.0+9.765625E-5+2+-1%0A)
ON BEHALF OF EVERYONE HERE I WOULD LIKE TO WISH LUC A SAFE AND ENJOYABLE FLIGHT TO AFRICA... 8)
FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO DON'T KNOW LUC VOLUNTEERS HIS CONSIDERABLE REPERTOIRE OF TALLENTS & SERVICES AT AN ASHRAM FOR THE BETTERMENT OF ALL. :D
YEP, SOUNDS LIKE LUC! ;)
CHEERS
T
Let There Be Light! (http://www.falstad.com/circuit/#%24+1+5.0E-6+26.59566520631553+37+5.0+50%0Av+192+288+192+160+0+1+50.0+230.0+0.0+0.0+0.5%0AT+288+208+368+208+2+0.3+1.0+1.5906036224774247+1.092800093052599+0.999%0Aw+288+208+288+160+0%0Aw+288+240+288+288+0%0Ar+288+160+192+160+0+2.3%0Ac+192+288+288+288+0+8.999999999999999E-5+-92.91599347758881%0Aw+368+208+368+160+0%0Ar+368+160+464+160+0+2.3%0Aw+368+240+368+288+0%0Ac+368+288+464+288+0+8.999999999999999E-5+-97.57038167636782%0A181+464+160+464+288+0+1732.4236712156078+600.0+230.0+0.4+0.4%0Ao+0+64+1+291+1197.2621413014756+4.8828125E-55+0+-1%0Ao+10+64+1+35+1197.2621413014756+9.765625E-55+1+-1%0Ao+5+64+0+35+299.3155353253689+11.972621413014757+2+-1%0Ao+9+64+0+35+299.3155353253689+11.972621413014757+3+-1%0A) 660W light out -700W back to the grid (European 230/50) :D
... I just have to try that! Thanks CRANKYpants
Hi all, so we're all on crack and drugs and drink ?
I'm having a cup of tea and a ciggy, but i'm boring like that ;+}
@Luc and Keyho, Romero's circuit is the same as the standard SSG driving circuit but with a Hall sensor rather than a coil.
@ Thane,
thanks for advising me not to connect them serially !
Results of multi-coil tests :
No coils present.
hz : 502
ma : 452
1 coil present open circuit.
hz : 417
ma : 472
1 coil present short circuit.
hz : 505
ma : 445
2 coils present, both open circuit.
hz : 393
ma : 475
2 coils present, both short circuited.
hz : 514
ma : 438
3 coils present, open circuit.
hz : 388
ma : 474
3 coils present, all SC
hz : 511
ma : 440
I think i understand why two coils outperformed three with my setup.
Because it is a single-magnet rotor, the two coils on opposite sides of the magnet are synchronised in the sense that they both experience the flux change at the same time, whereas the third coil, which is in the middle of the other two, experiences flux-change after the first coil and before the second of the other two coils, so the timing is wrong and possibly fights against the effect from the other two.
I confirmed this by moving the third coil closer to one of the others and performance goes up.
Obviously the single-magnet design has it's limitations, the physical space required for many coils isn't available and the timing problem.
I'll be making a multi-magnet rotor now but in the meantime i'll experiment with getting power out of this device, time to order some high-current wire ;+}
All the best,
DC.
Quote from: kEhYo77 on November 01, 2011, 11:56:01 AM
Let There Be Light! (http://www.falstad.com/circuit/#%24+1+5.0E-6+26.59566520631553+37+5.0+50%0Av+192+288+192+160+0+1+50.0+230.0+0.0+0.0+0.5%0AT+288+208+368+208+2+0.3+1.0+1.5906036224774247+1.092800093052599+0.999%0Aw+288+208+288+160+0%0Aw+288+240+288+288+0%0Ar+288+160+192+160+0+2.3%0Ac+192+288+288+288+0+8.999999999999999E-5+-92.91599347758881%0Aw+368+208+368+160+0%0Ar+368+160+464+160+0+2.3%0Aw+368+240+368+288+0%0Ac+368+288+464+288+0+8.999999999999999E-5+-97.57038167636782%0A181+464+160+464+288+0+1732.4236712156078+600.0+230.0+0.4+0.4%0Ao+0+64+1+291+1197.2621413014756+4.8828125E-55+0+-1%0Ao+10+64+1+35+1197.2621413014756+9.765625E-55+1+-1%0Ao+5+64+0+35+299.3155353253689+11.972621413014757+2+-1%0Ao+9+64+0+35+299.3155353253689+11.972621413014757+3+-1%0A) 660W light out -700W back to the grid (European 230/50) :D
... I just have to try that! Thanks CRANKYpants
Using that circuit simulator, you are graphing power consumed.
The source does not consume power , it generates power hence the negative power.
There is no overunity it that.
If you don't believe me, do your own calcs, graph the voltage ad current and multiply them, and you will get positive power.
Can anyone recommend a good circuit simulator ?
Cheers,
DC.
Hey Deep
Falstad.com has Circuit, as shown in posts above ^ =]
Its very decent for free.
Poynt uses Spice, he may be able to help you with that.
I havnt used it yet.
Mags
The negative power in sims is not OU: It's a manner to display the power draw from source, if you have for example -10 watts peak, its' meaning you REMOVE 10 watts peak from source and not you inject it !!! It's a beginner error that I've learned few day ago when experimenting. I'm skeptic to extract resonance directly like this without High Q and Transverter diode plug clipping circuit (extracting without killing the resonance...)
Cheers Magz :)
Hi you all,
I would like to let you know that I have removed my Free Energy replication videos from youtube, this because I am going to get really busy with my new job next months. And because I will be a-lot away (programming software outside the Netherlands next months) So that I cannot do any further commenting and experimenting at all. (Unfortunately, just like gotoluc)
So as a result of this I have decided to remove my youtube video's. Further I would like to let you know that I have had great times on experimenting with the Thane C Heins effect/experiments. I personally know that the claimed effect is there and I do think that great thinks can be accomplished with it in the near future. So I wish you all the very best and I hope that I have contributed on further explaining things that in the time of today are not well understood.
So especially Thane, thanks a-lot for your support and your always positive attitude.
I wish you all the very best, and I really can't wait to the time when I can buy off the shelf appliances with this technics in it.
The very best to you all and with Kind Regards, Overuntyguide
Hi OUG,
thanks for your contribution, it educated a lot of us. Good luck in your new job.
For anyone who needs to see OUG's videos, i have copies of them all and could upload them to my youtube account, if OUG doesn't want them seen by his employers or colleagues in the future, i can make the videos viewable only by certain users.
Thanks again OUG and all the best for the future,
Gary.
Thanks so much For all you Do OUG And LUC
We are working on something else Here
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/8999-peter-daysh-davey-water-heater-query-27.html
For making heat and cleaning [purifying ] water ,Some folks are finding amazing things??
If it works as advertised We'll send one to you in Africa Luc!!
You 2 Boss.........
Thanks
Chet
Hi everyone,
I have reached South Africa and the trip was perfect all the way.
Quote from: kEhYo77 on November 01, 2011, 06:33:50 AM
added resistors responsible for DC resistance of the transformer windings. I removed the zener diode too.
Now it seems that we have a win-win situation, where power is being returned to the grid (-17W) and at the same time power is being dissipated at the load (10W).
@kEhYo77, interesting simulation results once again. Can you explain what the 2.3 Ohm resistor on the primary side will do.
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on October 25, 2011, 05:25:17 AM
Hello Gotoluc I have DSO 2090, just a tips to measure the power, use the maths function (CannelA*ChannelB) to display power, if you see a curve that have equal pulse above and bottom the zero line you have reactive power
SchubertReijiMaigo posted this, so I started using it. In my previous post (prior page) the scope shot Math is showing this. Do we agree the circuit is operating on Reactive?... if so how do we calculate the power in with the negative Math data?
Can someone please calculate this.Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 01, 2011, 11:07:03 AM
ON BEHALF OF EVERYONE HERE I WOULD LIKE TO WISH LUC A SAFE AND ENJOYABLE FLIGHT TO AFRICA...
Thanks Thane
Quote from: DeepCut on November 01, 2011, 01:30:25 PM
No coils present.
hz : 502
ma : 452
2 coils present, both short circuited.
hz : 514
ma : 438
I think i understand why two coils outperformed three with my setup.
Because it is a single-magnet rotor, the two coils on opposite sides of the magnet are synchronised in the sense that they both experience the flux change at the same time, whereas the third coil, which is in the middle of the other two, experiences flux-change after the first coil and before the second of the other two coils, so the timing is wrong and possibly fights against the effect from the other two.
@DeepCut, great results you are having. I agree with your magnet rotor conclusion
Quote from: Overunityguide on November 02, 2011, 05:37:27 AM
Hi you all,
I would like to let you know that I have removed my Free Energy replication videos from youtube, this because I am going to get really busy with my new job next months.
I wish you all the very best, and I really can't wait to the time when I can buy off the shelf appliances with this technics in it.
The very best to you all and with Kind Regards, Overuntyguide
@Overuntyguide, thanks for sharing your experiments and results. Wishing you all the best in your new job.
Please drop in any time.
Quote from: DeepCut on November 02, 2011, 07:56:35 AM
For anyone who needs to see OUG's videos, i have copies of them all and could upload them to my youtube account, if OUG doesn't want them seen by his employers or colleagues in the future, i can make the videos viewable only by certain users.
@DeepCut, it seems Overuntyguide has not objected to you hosting his videos on your youtube account so please go ahead as it could be usefull to other researchers.
Thanks for your help
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on November 04, 2011, 06:15:28 PM
Hi everyone,
I have reached South Africa and the trip was perfect all the way.
Luc
Hey Luc.
Any chance you'll be in CapeTown? Consider paying a visit to Rosemary if you are.
.99
@ Luc
Ye i messaged him on toitube, i thought it best to ask permission.
This whole phenomenon we're all dealing with is really interesting, it's contains parts of all the famous pulse-motors and translating that idea to the transformer seems to be achievable.
I am trying to find 'E' laminations that fit my coil-former barrel and have space for the wound coil.
My gf would love me to go solid-state, the rotor's an awful noise @ 500 Hz ;+}
Best to all,
DC.
Quote from: poynt99 on November 04, 2011, 07:28:50 PM
Hey Luc.
Any chance you'll be in CapeTown? Consider paying a visit to Rosemary if you are.
.99
Hey .99,
it's been a while since we've exchanged.
I'm in Durban now and will be in Johannesburg later in December. I went for a short visit to Cape Town last year (beautiful place) but at the time I didn't realize (or remembered) Rosemary lived there. If I happen to go this year I'll contact her in advance to see if we can meet. Anything in particular you want me to check for you?... you can email me (if you wish) at gotoluc@yahoo.com
BTW, could you calculate the power input to the circuit using the scope shot data I posted in the previous page?
Thanks
Luc
Quote from: ramset on November 02, 2011, 12:32:55 PM
Thanks so much For all you Do OUG And LUC
We are working on something else Here
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/8999-peter-daysh-davey-water-heater-query-27.html
For making heat and cleaning [purifying ] water ,Some folks are finding amazing things??
If it works as advertised We'll send one to you in Africa Luc!!
You 2 Boss.........
Thanks
Chet
All the best to you Chet with your experiments. Give us an update when you're satisfied with the results.
Luc
Quote from: DeepCut on November 02, 2011, 07:56:35 AM
Hi OUG,
thanks for your contribution, it educated a lot of us. Good luck in your new job.
For anyone who needs to see OUG's videos, i have copies of them all and could upload them to my youtube account, if OUG doesn't want them seen by his employers or colleagues in the future, i can make the videos viewable only by certain users.
Thanks again OUG and all the best for the future,
Gary.
Hi Gary, thank you.
And yes, you may post all of the videos on youtube without any restrictions. The only reason that I have removed them is that, from now on I cannot comment with a high enough update rate any more.
But one more thing about the videos, I think it would be good to ask Thane himself about re-uploading my videos. After all it concerns a replication of his great work...
All the best to you all. And with Kind Regards, OUG
Quote from: Overunityguide on November 06, 2011, 02:08:24 AM
Hi Gary, thank you.
But one more thing about the videos, I think it would be good to ask Thane himself about re-uploading my videos. After all it concerns a replication of his great work...
YES ACTUALLY I DO WANT TO PUT THE VIDEOS ON MY YOUTUBE PAGE -
CAN SOMEONE TELL ME HOW TO DO IT ???ALSO OUG (WHOEVER THE HECK YOU ARE :-X) MY JOB OFFER STILL STANDS!
YOU ARE ONE TALENTED DUDE - I HOPE YOUR EMPLOYER APPRECIATES YOU...
THANKS AGAIN FOR NOT ONLY REPLICATING THE WORK SO BEAUTIFULLY BUT BY ALSO TAKING SUCH A CLEAN SCIENTIFIC APPROACH WHICH NO ONE CAN REFUTE.
CHEERS
T
Thane you need a web browser plugin to download youtube videos.
For firefox :
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/bytubed-bulk-youtube-video-dow/
For internet explorer :
http://www.ieaddons.com/en/addons/detail.aspx?id=442
The new test-bed for a multi-magnet setup is now ready :
http://i1235.photobucket.com/albums/ff437/deepcut71/DSC01475.jpg
24 neos 10x10mm, N42, 0.52 Tesla going North/South around the rotor.
Same drive coil/circuitry before, a-la-Bedini SSG with the charging component removed.
Wil post results,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on November 08, 2011, 12:36:44 PM
The new test-bed for a multi-magnet setup is now ready :
Same drive coil/circuitry before, a-la-Bedini SSG with the charging component removed.
Wil post results,
DC.
HEY DC,
VERY NICE... IS YOUR ROTOR LEXAN OR PLEXIGLASS?
CAN YOU POST THE MOTOR CIRCUIT PLEASE?
AND ROTOR MAGNET ORIENTATION IS?
CHEERS
T
RECENT CORPORATE TECHNOLOGY DEMO IN TORONTO...
Here is a better video...
https://myaccount.dropsend.com/file/4e8d4ef88fd5c9d7
Cheers
T
Hi it's polycarbonate.
I got it for free because there is a 2mm wobble, so i only had to pay for the magnets.
Circuit :
http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?q=bedini+ssg+circuit&num=10&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&gbv=2&biw=1280&bih=831&tbm=isch&tbnid=BgmiJK5hfZ520M:&imgrefurl=http://www.overunity.com/index.php%3Ftopic%3D4792.0&docid=1o1sRhVL5lBI0M&imgurl=http://www.overunity.com/index.php%253Faction%253Ddlattach%253Btopic%253D4792.0%253Battach%253D27836%253Bimage&w=644&h=437&ei=1ta6TovxOtKp8QPL7r2uBw&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=512&vpy=492&dur=1341&hovh=185&hovw=273&tx=156&ty=91&sig=112908379085770085207&sqi=2&page=1&tbnh=126&tbnw=186&start=0&ndsp=23&ved=1t:429,r:13,s:0
I tried having them all same pole out but they are too close to trigger a change in the drive coil so i have to have them N/S or get weaker amgents.
I've been testing the new setup, with occasional pauses for sleep and food ;+}
It seems that it generates more power than it uses but i will have to wait until i get a scope (new year).
Here's a vid :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBDOOSOhbz0
Thanks for reading,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on December 08, 2011, 08:50:09 AM
I've been testing the new setup, with occasional pauses for sleep and food ;+}
It seems that it generates more power than it uses but i will have to wait until i get a scope (new year).
Here's a vid :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBDOOSOhbz0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBDOOSOhbz0)
Thanks for reading,
DC.
Excellent looking setup DC!
Does the coil Voltage output stay at 446vdc when you connect the Amp meter?
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Thanks Luc :)
The voltage RISES due to the amp meter being a small load and the acceleration-under-load effect taking place !
*** EDIT ADD ***
it shows that in the video but my voice is a bit mufled
*** EDIT ADD ***
On Thane's advice i will try them connected in parallel, but i tried that with the old setup and got no AUL but we'll see.
As it is the effect only supports a very small range of loads.
I'm having trouble measuring voltage and current at the same time, sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't, on one occasion i got a shock from one wire only which surprised me.
I'm testing smaller coils as well, 50 grammes rather than 500 grammes of copper. The effect is much better with the 50g coils for some reason.
Cheers,
DC.
hello
have you guys tried to put inductor in series with load ? it also changes the cos(phi) by 90 degrease!
something similar to stanley meyer circiut but just one inductor??
oh maybe stans work was based on phase change so the primary side of transformer didnt see the load? so he could make hydrogen by regular electrolysis but transformer didnt see the amp draw? he used few khz so xl=2(pi)f*L the bigger the (f) frequency the bigger the phase shift!!
well we cant get very high L without high wire resistance because L=uN^2A/l so many turn are needed (or high (u) core ) the resistance is problematic, only one figure which is frequency is left to play !
so we can get cos (phi) with the formula
(http://img861.imageshack.us/img861/946/cosphi.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/861/cosphi.jpg/)
so if we do hi L hi R or low L low R it really doesnt mater whats mater is the frequency!!
you can put figures to formula for diferent coils and you see that only figure you can play is FREQUENCY!!!
you can find some more calculation here
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/rlimp.html#c1
cheers from poland
wojsciech
hello
and once again mr Tesla did it first !!! pat 512,340 COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS
Quote
I have found that in every coil there exists a certain relation between its self-induction and capacity that permits a current of given frequency and potential to pass through it with no other opposition than that of ohmic resistance, or, in other words, as though it possessed no self-induction. This is due to the mutual relations existing between the special character of the current and the self-induction and capacity of the coil, the latter quantity being just capable of neutralizing the self-induction for that frequency. It is well-known that the higher the frequency or potential difference of the current the smaller the capacity required to counteract the self-induction; hence, in any coil, however small the capacity, it may be sufficient for the purpose stated if the proper conditions in other respects be secured. In the ordinary coils the difference of potential between adjacent turns or spires is very small, so that while they are in a sense condensers, they possess but very small capacity and the relations between the two quantities, self-induction and capacity, are not such as under any ordinary conditions satisfy the requirements herein contemplated, because the capacity relatively to the self-induction is very small.
In order to attain my object and to properly increase the capacity of any given coil, I wind it in such way as to secure a greater difference of potential between its adjacent turns or convolutions, and since the energy stored in the coil considering - the latter as a condenser, is proportionate to the square of the potential difference between its adjacent convolutions, it is evident that I may in this way secure by a proper disposition of these convolutions a greatly increased capacity for a given increase in potential difference between the turns.
I have illustrated diagrammatically in the accompanying drawings the general nature of the plan which I adopt for carrying out this invention.
Figure 1 is a diagram of a coil wound in the ordinary manner.
Figure 2 is a diagram of a winding designed to secure the objects of my invention. Let A, Figure 1, designate any given coil the spires or convolutions of which are wound upon and insulated from each other. Let it be assumed that the terminals of this coil show a potential difference of one hundred volts, and that there are one thousand convolutions; then considering any two contiguous points on adjacent convolutions let it be assumed that there will exist between them a potential difference of one-tenth of a volt.
If now, as shown in Figure 2, a conductor B be wound parallel with the conductor A and insulated from it, and the end of A be connected with the starting point of B, the aggregate length of the two conductors being such that the assumed number of convolutions or turns is the same, viz., one thousand, then the potential difference between any two points in A and B will be fifty volts, and as the capacity effect is proportionate to the square of this difference,
the energy stored in the coil as a whole will now be two hundred and fifty thousand as great.
Following out this principle, I may wind any given coil either in whole or in part, not only in the specific manner herein illustrated, but in a great variety of ways, well-known in the art, so as to secure between adjacent convolutions such potential difference as will give the proper capacity to neutralize the self-induction for any given current that may be employed. Capacity secured in this particular way possesses an additional advantage in that it is evenly distributed, a consideration of the greatest importance in many cases, and the results, both as to efficiency and economy, are the more readily and easily obtained as the size of the coils, the potential difference, or frequency of the currents are increased.
Coils composed of independent strands or conductors wound side by side and connected in series are not in themselves new, and I do not regard a more detailed description of the same as necessary. But heretofore, so far as I am aware, the objects in view have been essentially different from mine, and the results which I obtain even if an incident to such forms of winding have not been appreciated or taken advantage of.
In carrying out my invention it is to be observed that certain facts are well understood by those skilled in the art, viz: the relations of capacity, self-induction, and the frequency and potential difference of the current. What capacity, therefore, in any given case it is desirable to obtain and what special winding will secure it, are readily determinable from the other factors which are known.
What I claim as my invention is: A coil for electric apparatus the adjacent convolutions of which form parts of the circuit between which there exists a potential difference sufficient to secure in the coil a capacity capable of neutralizing its self-induction, as herein before described.
A coil composed of contiguous or adjacent insulated conductors electrically connected in series and having a potential difference of such value as to give to the coil as a whole, a capacity sufficient to neutralize its self-induction, as set forth.
NIKOLA TESLA Witnesses: Robt. F. Gaylord
Parker W. Page
so what he means is we can wind coil bifilar connect in series we can multiply inductance (energy stored) of our coil by
250,000 !!! or squere voltage diference between wires!
thats very intresting!!
so then we can reduce frequency or eliminate the core which is not perfect anyway!!!
what you guys think
cheers from poland
wojsciech
Is to say that the enormous power stored, is taken from the source?
Ive read it before, but thanks for posting it. ;]
Mags
well not really, from the source!
source see this power in real time P=U*I*cos(phi) where cos(phi)=>0 degrease which is 1 so it have time to react with lenz effect, but we need this momentearli power storage for phase shift so our source would not see the the consumed power (or will not have time to response with more energy consumption) which is also P=U*I*cos(phi) where cos(phi)=>90 degrease which is 0
so basicaly by delaying current on generators coil we can avoid lenz effect, magnet passes and just after we consume the power stored between wires...
cheers from poland
wojsciech
The magnetic and electric fields of a coil or magnet
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 11, 2011, 10:28:10 PM
Hello Everyone,
The coils employed in this prototype are 4.5 ohms, 16 gauge bi-filar wound series connected with M1 core laminations and create acceleration at 1800 RPM with a 10 ohm light bulb. Each coil can produce 50 Watts or more and the magnets are 90 lb pulling weight. They create so much torque and acceleration that two set screws on each rotor were not enough to keep them secured to the drive shaft and they had to be returned to the machinist to have key-ways installed. Even now the air gap on each side is about 1/2 an inch. When properly balanced with three rotors and offset cores the cogging torque is virtually zero and the core "cost" was very low - which is reduced as speed increases anyway and is NOT an issue.
http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins?feature=mhee#p/u/4/u3gVfltiO-E (http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins?feature=mhee#p/u/4/u3gVfltiO-E)
I will post the test data when I find it to end this discussion (which is a waste of time BTW) because all generators have coils and cores with some hysterisis losses inherent in them but not all generators accelerate when a load is applied which is the REAL issue.
Cheers
Thane
Hi Thane,
I am confused about the size of the coil referred to in this message.
I had a look at the link you provided and took a still image of the side view of the generator.
Assuming the magnet dia is about 25mm, The stators look to be about 12mm thick and the spacing between the stators around 71mm.
Allowing for the coil bobbin end thickness, this give about a 67mm winding length. The coil diameter looks to be about 60mm.
Now the coil is bifilar series connected, so I assume the 4.5 ohms is the total resistance for the two coils in series.
4.5 ohms of 16AWG is about 341m, so in the winding space there would have to be about 1596T, 50T per layer and 32 layers.
The problem with this is that results in a coil diameter of about 112mm, assuming a 27mm diameter former over the core.
Even though these are just rough estimates, the coil diameter is grossly different to what I would expect for a 16AWG 4.5ohm coil.
Could you put me straight here?
Thanks
Barry
i have been studying Delayed lenz effect and it is interesting.. i just wondering that if what we looking for is phase shift between primary current and secondary current, why not tuned primary and secondary to resonance. At resonance the primary current 45 degree out phase with each other. Simulation in attachment
"sorry for bad English"
Hi juan_86,
thanks for your post.
You are right! at Resonance Voltage and Current are 90 degrees out of phase. However, as soon as you try to pull some power out of the circuit everything changes. That is my experience anyways.
The one who can find a way to extract energy form a Resonant circuit without affecting it will have achieved a great thing
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on May 04, 2012, 10:13:28 AM
Hi juan_86,
thanks for your post.
You are right! at Resonance Voltage and Current are 90 degrees out of phase. However, as soon as you try to pull some power out of the circuit everything changes. That is my experience anyways.
The one who can find a way to extract energy form a Resonant circuit without affecting it will have achieved a great thing
Luc
Ive put out this document a few times. This may be a cure for the resonant ills. ;]
In the first couple pages, variant 2, it is said that the output from the secondary does not kill the primary resonance. ;]
Mags
Hi Dave45, It is really important when posting info to make sure it is correct and while reversing your drawings would create the correct opposite scenario it requires that the drawing be correct in the first place. Others are going to see this and assume it is correct and go off using it to formulate thier ideas and projects. Your top drawings are wrong in the spin direction through the coils in that you have clearly defined a coil that has equal and opposing fields at each end and at the bottom your drawing shows a horrizontal alignment which is actually only correct when applied vertically to the left and right pair. I tried to quote your post here but it wouldnt work and im about to try and add a picture here that i have never done before to show what i am talking about here.
Garry
thanks Luc for the reply.
yes, introducing load will change the resonance balance. my idea is like this, what if we set the secondary to resonance at high voltage. As you can see, the secondary voltage increase slowly like energy collector. then we setup spark gap at secondary tuned circuit to discharge the energy collected into capacitor. Spark gap could transfer the energy fast enough to not change the resonance.
Quote from: Magluvin on May 04, 2012, 07:31:46 PM
Ive put out this document a few times. This may be a cure for the resonant ills. ;]
In the first couple pages, variant 2, it is said that the output from the secondary does not kill the primary resonance. ;]
Mags
Hi Mags,
thanks for you post.
I remember seeing this document some years back. I don't know if any of these techniques work?
If you know of any researcher who have built this please post a link.
Luc
Quote from: juan_86 on May 04, 2012, 11:07:58 PM
thanks Luc for the reply.
yes, introducing load will change the resonance balance. my idea is like this, what if we set the secondary to resonance at high voltage. As you can see, the secondary voltage increase slowly like energy collector. then we setup spark gap at secondary tuned circuit to discharge the energy collected into capacitor. Spark gap could transfer the energy fast enough to not change the resonance.
Hi juan_86,
sounds like a good idea!... have you built and tested it yet?
Please let us know
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Here is the code for Falstad.com/circuit simulator.
Click and release the switch at the top right to start the charge of the LC, which consists of the primary of a 1 to 1 transformer.
The spdt switch in the middle switches in and out the additional inductor on the loaded secondary.
You will see that when the inductor is added to the secondary in series with the load that the primary resonance is preserved and without the inductor it is dead.
$ 1 5.0E-6 9.78399845368213 50 5.0 43
r 192 80 400 80 0 0.1
s 400 80 464 80 0 1 true
w 192 80 192 352 0
c 192 352 400 352 0 1.4999999999999999E-5 4.0E-323
v 464 352 464 80 0 0 40.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.5
r 400 352 464 352 0 9.92
T 336 176 400 256 0 0.01 1.0 0.0 -2.5E-323 0.999
w 400 80 400 176 0
w 400 256 400 352 0
S 336 176 272 176 0 0 false 0
w 224 160 272 160 0
w 272 256 224 256 0
w 272 256 272 192 0
r 272 256 336 256 0 10.0
l 224 256 224 160 0 0.01 0.0
o 3 64 0 35 7.62939453125E-5 9.765625E-5 0 -1
o 0 64 0 35 7.62939453125E-5 9.765625E-5 1 -1
o 4 64 1 291 7.62939453125E-5 9.765625E-5 2 -1
Mags
Hi Mags,
I played with this circuit simulator last year and then built the circuit. The real results are not the same as the simulator. Its name is very close to false ;D
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on May 06, 2012, 11:33:01 PM
Hi Mags,
I played with this circuit simulator last year and then built the circuit. The real results are not the same as the simulator. Its name is very close to false ;D
Luc
Hey Luc
Well I wasnt going for ou in the sim. Just showing an example of how to keep the primary resonating while taking from the secondary.
Mags
I understand but chances are it won't work as this simulator shows
Luc
You cant delay lenz in the real world. Thanes setup is clearly showing forward emf and yet he is careful to leave that conclusion up to the viewer rather than state it in any of the video's i have seen. Compare what he is doing to Adams, Bedini etc collecting the colapse and suddenly you can see what causes this. Whats also missing from thane is the numbers eg what the actual draw is relative to say speed on the scooter and what speed would be achievable on a standard motor on said scooter with the same draw, same can be said for the generator part of it. Just like a bedini setup it only looks good as a test bench device because the output from the colapsing flux field remains the same even though the draw increases to do any work. Thanes system isnt delaying lenz it is converting bemf to femf to add to the drive input rather than take from it.
Gotoluc, Gyula, Mags ?
I've been at this on and off and am getting good results with small transformers and loads, anyone else still doing this ?
Gotoluc isn't answering emails or youtube messages, anyone know what he's up to ?
Thanks,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on December 06, 2012, 08:06:58 PM
Gotoluc, Gyula, Mags ?
I've been at this on and off and am getting good results with small transformers and loads, anyone else still doing this ?
Gotoluc isn't answering emails or youtube messages, anyone know what he's up to ?
Thanks,
DC.
Hey Deep
Been working on a sound system for this guy. 1974 Impala. He is nuts. 4 10s in each door, + 1 8 and 2 tweets. Trunk lid motorizes up and 10 8s, 4 tweets.
And theres more. 12000 watts, not including the 4 15s subs. :o :o
I told ya he was nuts. ;]
Can ya show us what you got going? ;]
Mags
There is beautiful. I would want one of those in Brazil. We would have a nice party!
Fausto.
Quote from: plengo on December 06, 2012, 10:23:40 PM
There is beautiful. I would want one of those in Brazil. We would have a nice party!
Fausto.
Thanks ;]
He will probably be deaf before most rock stars. ;]
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on December 06, 2012, 09:44:02 PM
snip...
Been working on a sound system for this guy. 1974 Impala. He is nuts.
snip...
Mags
If you're talking about Impala amplifiers ? they were affectionately known in the hey day, as
"the great impalers".
Brian Eno made his debut as a music producer in the early seventies, releasing new state of the art, hi fidelity "wall of sound" recordings of prominant 70's bands.
In the studio he listened to every post mixed session on headphones, blasted at max through his "impaler".
LOL
I wonder how his hearing is these days.!
Cheers ...... P.S. if you're talking about Impala - the car, ignore everything I've just said .... LOL
Hey Mags :)
Hey Toad :)
Can't believe those ten 8's in the back !
Excellent-looking job you're doing on them.
I've been a bit busy with other stuff (life !) so i have only been able to experiment off and on, so i haven't really gone much further. Just been trying to nail down the characteristics of acceleration under load (AUL from now on!).
I made a transformer version that performs better than the pulse-motor version. With the transformer i attach a load, say a light bulb, the bulb lights and the current draw to the transformer primary goes down a lot more than it did with the pulse motor.
This is a 12V/65mA bulb, and when i attach it the input power drops 60mA, while the bulb is drawing 65mA at full brightness.
We are lucky in that you get greater rewards from this effect the more power you put in. With increased input power your percentage return gets bigger !
I don't know if it has OU potential but it certainly saves a lot of energy, it's ideal for anything with an alternator and that runs on batteries.
Even as it stands, you could scale up the transformer a little and run a table light off it, but at 90%+ energy savings !
It's a crazy effect and i can't believe research on it seems to have gone quiet.
All the best,
DC.
Anyone know what's up with Luc ?
No reply to my emails or YT messages. No appearance on forums since May :(
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on December 07, 2012, 06:13:06 AM
snip...
I made a transformer version that performs better than the pulse-motor version. With the transformer i attach a load, say a light bulb, the bulb lights and the current draw to the transformer primary goes down a lot more than it did with the pulse motor.
This is a 12V/65mA bulb, and when i attach it the input power drops 60mA, while the bulb is drawing 65mA at full brightness.
We are lucky in that you get greater rewards from this effect the more power you put in. With increased input power your percentage return gets bigger !
snip...
Do you have a circuit diagram and list of components you could share ?
Quote from: DeepCut on December 07, 2012, 08:57:30 PM
Anyone know what's up with Luc ?
No reply to my emails or YT messages. No appearance on forums since May :(
DC.
Maybe he is hanging out with oilpiggy.
This was Lucs last post here at ou.
http://www.overunity.com/13068/friction-heater-running-in-my-house/msg342382/#msg342382
That was the first I looked at that thread. Interesting. Maybe try asking Oilpiggy if he has heard from Luc.
Mags
Quote from: hoptoad on December 07, 2012, 09:25:24 PM
Do you have a circuit diagram and list of components you could share ?
hoptoad of course i do :)
You remember it was your article that got me so inspired with this when i was looking at Adams' motors ?
I'm a bit drubk just now so keep it short. I'm getting a better camera next week plus a few pounds of wire, or maybe the week after for the wire.
my old stuff is on the youtube channrl :
https://www.youtube.com/user/deepcut66?feature=mhee (https://www.youtube.com/user/deepcut66?feature=mhee)
but that was a tiny effect, 5 hertz and 5 mA.
Will do some videos, but it's nothing new or groundbreaking, just confirmation of Thane's stuff.
All the best,
DC/
e2a :
this article :
http://www.totallyamped.net/adams/
i mesaged you anda raved about it to the acceleration under load people.
Quote from: Magluvin on December 07, 2012, 10:47:44 PM
Maybe he is hanging out with oilpiggy.
This was Lucs last post here at ou.
http://www.overunity.com/13068/friction-heater-running-in-my-house/msg342382/#msg342382 (http://www.overunity.com/13068/friction-heater-running-in-my-house/msg342382/#msg342382)
That was the first I looked at that thread. Interesting. Maybe try asking Oilpiggy if he has heard from Luc.
Mags
Cheers Mags :)
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on December 08, 2012, 12:00:02 AM
snip.....
You remember it was your article that got me so inspired with this when i was looking at Adams' motors ?
snip....
i mesaged you anda raved about it to the acceleration under load people.
LOL Forgive my memory.... it ain't what it used to be!
Cheers and KneeDeep
Here's Skycollection' newest regenerative acceleration effect video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEzQUz_efGA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEzQUz_efGA)
Quote from: hoptoad on December 08, 2012, 12:15:04 AM
LOL Forgive my memory.... it ain't what it used to be!
Cheers and KneeDeep
How do you know it's not what is used to be
;+}
Quote from: DeepCut on December 07, 2012, 08:57:30 PM
Anyone know what's up with Luc ?
No reply to my emails or YT messages. No appearance on forums since May :(
DC.
Hi DC and everyone,
sorry for the delay in reply.
I'm still around!... just been real busy doing a house renovation job for a month and had no internet access. I've got internet now but I've got no home, so no lab to do experiments.
Wishing you the best in your experiments.
I've been assisting skycollection to help him achieve a Lenz free generator. I asked him to redo the video (posted above) but this time turn on and off the bulb (load) so we can see the generator has no effect on the prime mover.
Luc
Oh thank god !
I thought you'd been living on reactive power and the MiBs had got ya ;+}
I must look into skycollection's new stuff, i'm sure i subscribe to his channel but haven't had updates.
Are you well Luc ? Any develpoment with the transformer ?
I've had a year mostly-off the forums, reading up and learning.
I recently got back to experimenting, took the AUL motor/generator a bit further along the way, i'm just following Thane's path of discovery.
I'm now on hybrid coils, AUL coils with high inductance but also fair current-carriers (0.5 amps), i hope to have something useful to show within a week, not OU, just useful :)
Glad you're still around :)
All the best,
nibs.
Quote from: DeepCut on December 08, 2012, 12:50:04 PM
How do you know it's not what is used to be
;+}
LOL - That's a great question !
Quote from: hoptoad on December 08, 2012, 06:53:25 PM
LOL - That's a great question !
Speaking of (sort of) time travel, you seen that trillion frames-per-second camera ?
We can now watch a discrete packet of photons as they move through the air in front of this amazing camera from MIT :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_9vd4HWlVA
Cheers,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on December 08, 2012, 07:17:51 PM
Speaking of (sort of) time travel, you seen that trillion frames-per-second camera ?
We can now watch a discrete packet of photons as they move through the air in front of this amazing camera from MIT :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_9vd4HWlVA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_9vd4HWlVA)
Cheers,
DC.
We live in amazing times! Thanks for posting that!
Cheers and KneeDeep
Quote from: DeepCut on December 08, 2012, 07:17:51 PM
Speaking of (sort of) time travel, you seen that trillion frames-per-second camera ?
We can now watch a discrete packet of photons as they move through the air in front of this amazing camera from MIT :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_9vd4HWlVA
Cheers,
DC.
absolutely phenomenal!
Quote from: DeepCut on December 08, 2012, 05:07:14 PM
I must look into skycollection's new stuff, i'm sure i subscribe to his channel but haven't had updates.
This is the video I mentioned: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEzQUz_efGA&lc=ed_cMyY6wQ1Je1KZ7GCFtj7_GJAFVhfjeydtVeiUXc4
However, he is not turning on and off the load so it cannot be conclusive that there is no generator effect. I posted a comment that he should make a new video to demonstrate this and here is his private reply to me:
"Hi Luc, i apreciate very much your commentaries, but i am not in position to make more videos about the same matter, i have not implements, laboratory, economic support to continue with this experiments, or make new experiments about something is clear, my motor-generator is product of my imagination only....! thanks for watching"Looks like he's taking all credit that this is a product of his imagination... :-\ when I have sent him many emails to explain how to build a pancake generator coil that will have self capacitance to give the effect. Better be careful with this guy
Quote from: DeepCut on December 08, 2012, 05:07:14 PM
Are you well Luc ? Any develpoment with the transformer ?
I'm doing very well DC ;) ... thanks for asking
All the best in your experiments
Luc
I am beginning to think that, in a multi-magnet rotor, driven by a DC motor, the acceleration and current drop aren't just due to retarding the rise time in the coils.
If it is that way, then when frequency is increased there should be a sweet spot, then a dead zone, etc ...
So i can't see how it is just about 'releasing the energy just after TDC', as Thane is quoted as saying in a couple of interviews.
At higher frequencies the rotor can do more than one revolution before the rise-time of the coil is met which implies that either positioning of the magnet is unimportant after a certain frequency or all of us have been very lucky not to have found dead zones ...
I think there's something else going on, thoughts ?
All the best,
DC.
Take look at this video (http://youtu.be/SHbQXnXK6Xc?t=5m48s).
It seems to show a delayed magnetic effect.
The shorted coil "freezes" the magnetic field in the core through the Lenz effect.
Normally the magnetic field produced by electric current flowing in a coil decays very quickly, but in this experiment the attractive magnetic field is not produced by the coil but by the atoms of the core and the coil only prevents the randomization those atoms ...hence the coil delays the decay of the magnetic field created by those atoms.
Hi NoBull,
If you have not seen the second part of those tests, here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BsN2sr3U0PY
I agree with what you wrote. You can find a new thread on these videos on this forum started by Hel who speculated whether the test was a hoax and where I have given a possible explanation for the phenomena.
This is the link to that thread: http://www.overunity.com/13313/please-disproof-this-video-it-could-be-a-hoax/msg353207/
rgds, Gyula
Thanks nobull, and thanks gyula for the second link.
What do you think of the effect in a rotor riven by a DC motor, both current draw decrease and rotor speed increase ?
Cheers,
DC.
Hi Deepcut,
It would help me if you explain a bit more details on the setup you think of... sorry. You mean the phenomena in the video NoBull referred to here or something else?
Gyula
I mean delayed lenz, is it something more than just increasing the rise time in the coil ?
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on February 19, 2013, 08:25:40 PM
I mean delayed lenz, is it something more than just increasing the rise time in the coil ?
DC.
With reference to a rotor driven by a dc motor, the rise time of the generating coils is not the cause of the AUL (acceleration under load) and the resultant reduced dc motor drive current.
Rather, when the generator coil is sufficiently loaded at a given rpm, (frequency), the current delivered by the coil will be phase shifted with respect to the voltage, within the coil.
It is a delayed current phase with respect to voltage (within the generator coil) that causes the "delayed lenz" effect.
The magnetic drag of the cores and the counter mmf produced by the coils with respect to the inducing rotor magnets are both greatly reduced by the delayed current (phase shifted wrtV).
It is specifically
the ratio between the total combined
resistance of the load and the coil itself,
and the inductive reactance of the coil, that matters most.
Since the inductive reactance of
any coil increases with frequency, then the frequency of the generated AC will determine whether current phase (within the coil) lags (i.e delayed wrtV) and AUL occurs, or whether normal counter mmf occurs with a resultant DUL, because the current phase shift is less than 45 degrees.
The same coil that causes DUL (deceleration under load ) when the rpm of a given rotor is, lets say, 2000 rpm, will likely surprise you by showing AUL when the rpm is 3000, because at the higher rotor speed, (higher frequency), there will be a greater coil current phase shift when under load, than at 2000 rpm.
Hope that's clearer than mud ....... KneeDeep
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on February 20, 2013, 01:16:33 AM
The same coil that causes DUL (deceleration under load ) when the rpm of a given rotor is, lets say, 2000 rpm, will likely surprise you by showing AUL when the rpm is 3000, because at the higher rotor speed, (higher frequency), there will be a greater coil current phase shift when under load, than at 2000 rpm.
May be you are right. I don't believe in any 'delayed lenz effect'. Actually action and reaction happen at the same instant. Force always happens in pairs. Action cannot be performed without reaction and reacion cannot exist without action. If reaction is delayed beyond action then Newton's third law itself becomes invalid which is highly impossible. ' delayed lenz effect' is the funniest name that you can give to this phenomenon. If AUL happens because of delayed lenz's effect, then it should happen at all speeds of the rotor but we know that it happens only after crossing certain minimum speed.
I feel that AUL happens because of remenance or residual force which is also portrayed in another experiment posted in this forum in which two U shaped cores with a shorted coil stick together even after switching off the source current.
QuoteActually action and reaction happen at the same instant...
And this is where you are wrong...
When it comes to induction the reaction is not instant.
It is restricted by the speed of light! That is why there is a possibility for that 'trick' (Delayed Lenz) to happen.
Tesla knew that and that is why his transformer is so interesting.
Imagine pulsing a one turn primary (d=2m) with a nano second HV pulse and turning of the power...
The secondary in the middle will receive that disturbance of the field (which 'travels' through the air at the speed of light @~0,3 m/ns) ~3ns later!
So any EMF induced in the secondary is decoupled from the primary power, and that '
reflected BackEMF WAVE' can be harvested back in the primary.
Is it not?
Quote from: kEhYo77 on February 20, 2013, 02:55:55 AM
The secondary in the middle will receive that disturbance of the field (which 'travels' through the air at the speed of light @~0,3 m/ns) ~3ns later!
So any EMF induced in the secondary is decoupled from the primary power, and that 'reflected BackEMF WAVE' can be harvested back in the primary.
Is it not?
But that is not the principle used in Thane Hein's device. Is it not? I am talking about the motor - generator set which is shown by overunityguide at the beginning of this thread. Can you meet the above said condition in that motor - generator set?
That was an example for the speed of the 'disturbace' in air.
In the case of using a ferromagnetic core as a transfer medium for 'momentum' the speed will be much lower than the speed of light :)
For a conductive core, where there is lots of eddy currents the 'wave' slows down the most, hence the delayed effect can be observed at lower frequencies with solid iron cores. Laminated silicon steel cores are 'a bit faster highway' and ferrites are like a race track ;)
Take a look at this video from MrAnguswangus (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=653JgoBT1Uc)
He can obtain the effect at very low frequencies as the core (a bunch of solid iron rods in 'U' shape) he is using provides significant delay because of its length (long path to travel for the wave) and eddy currents, IMHO.
Now a clue from Ed Leedskalnin's notes to use, solid, aluminium bobbins for the generator coils with ferromagnetic cores might be understood this way. It provided a closed loop flywheel effect for eddy current, slowing down the wave... like a permanent magnet slowly falling down through a copper pipe :)
Quote from: Newton II on February 20, 2013, 02:24:41 AM
snip.....
I feel that AUL happens because of remenance or residual force which is also portrayed in another experiment posted in this forum in which two U shaped cores with a shorted coil stick together even after switching off the source current.
The dynamics of the two different systems give rise to two different phenomenon. In the case of the two U shaped cores experiment, predominant reason for the sticking is residual magnetism.
In the case of the moving rotor magnets and generator coils, phase delays in coil current cause a phase delay in the core/coil's self induced magnetic field. It is this self induced field created by the coil's current, when the coil has a load, that normally has a breaking effect on the driver.
Cheers
OK, quite a few things to absorb there.
Hoptoad you said "the rise time of the generating coils is not the cause of the AUL".
You then said "It is specifically the ratio between the total combined resistance of the load and the coil itself, and the inductive reactance of the coil, that matters most."
Well, the rise time of the generator coil IS the ratio between the total resistance and the inductance ?
Newton, you said "If AUL happens because of delayed lenz's effect, then it should happen at all speeds of the rotor but we know that it happens only after crossing certain minimum speed. ".
If it happens because of a delayed rise time then it SHOULDN't happen at all speeds of the rotor, if it was about releasing CEMF when the magnet was at TDC then we would have dead zones and normal generator action zones.
Cheers,
DC.
Sorry to be off topic, but
Quote from: kEhYo77 on February 20, 2013, 02:55:55 AM
And this is where you are wrong...
When it comes to induction the reaction is not instant. It is restricted by the speed of light!
That is why there is a possibility for that 'trick' (Delayed Lenz) to happen.
Tesla knew that and that is why his transformer is so interesting.
Imagine pulsing a one turn primary (d=2m) with a nano second HV pulse and turning of the power...
The secondary in the middle will receive that disturbance of the field (which 'travels' through the air at the speed of light @~0,3 m/ns) ~3ns later!
So any EMF induced in the secondary is decoupled from the primary power, and that 'reflected BackEMF WAVE' can be harvested back in the primary.
Is it not?
So in theory a radio emitter/receiver which is basically a loosely coupled air core transformer can be OU at condition the receiver is at 1/4 wave from the emitter.
Natural over-unity !? This concept could be applied to any frequencies and radio wave man made or natural !?
So first, a coil emit a wave then the receiver absorb that wave and produce a "back wave" 180° opposed (as per Lenz Law explain). Before that "back wave" cut the emitter coil, the power is stopped or polarity reversed (to recharge source with that back wave). Then you have OU...
I speak about that because I 've put in the download section some scientific Chinese paper that explain the possibility of such weird things.
Thanks Schubert, i will read the papers.
DC.
Schubert
A primer wave goes out but is reflected eventually. On it's return back it stacks up against more outbound waves and gains some power relative to the outbound wave. A transmission of information can be piggybacked onto this wave to increase distance of transmission with out adding extra power. Normal use is to filter out everything but the information. If a freaquency matching a wavelength of a steady nture not man made can be sent out the extra power can be drained off as a surplus. Cell phones use very unique patch antannas,very small. When you operate on made made frequencies they claim theft even though they except no resposibillty for trespass. You go round and round, hairpin ect..I even went as far as looking into pizzo transducers weapons grade to see if it could be used as a collector if tickled with RF. Mostly I see a lot of red tape. Good luck
Quote from: DeepCut on February 20, 2013, 05:27:45 AM
OK, quite a few things to absorb there.
Hoptoad you said "the rise time of the generating coils is not the cause of the AUL".
You then said "It is specifically the ratio between the total combined resistance of the load and the coil itself, and the inductive reactance of the coil, that matters most."
Well, the rise time of the generator coil IS the ratio between the total resistance and the inductance ?
snip...
The rise time (of a loaded coil) is affected by the combined impedance of the inductive reactance and the circuit resistance.
Lets look at the two following scenarios (examples only, for the purpose of depicting the ratio difference).
CCt 1. A) Coil and cct resistance = 5 ohm B) Coil impedance (inductive reactance) at a given rpm = 2ohm
Total Impedance = square root of ((5*5)+(2*2)) = square root (29) = 5.385 ohms
Reactance less than resistance: Result = DUL
CCt 2. A) Coil and cct resistance = 2 ohm B) Coil impedance (inductive reactance) at a given rpm = 5ohm
Total Impedance = square root of ((2*2)+(5*5)) = square root (29) = 5.385 ohms
Reactance greater than resistance: Result = AUL
Same total impedance, with same effective rise time, but different ratio between inductive reactance & total circuit resistance.
The voltage rise time and the current phase shift are two different phenomena, though both are affected by impedance.
Rise time is affected by total impedance, while phase shift is affected by the ratio of resistance and reactance which forms the total impedance.
Cheers
Thanks HT. You have added to my meagre knowledge ;+}
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on February 20, 2013, 05:04:57 PM
Thanks HT. You have added to my meagre knowledge ;+}
DC.
Glad to help
Cheers
Quote from: kEhYo77 on February 20, 2013, 04:05:06 AM
Take a look at this video from MrAnguswangus (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=653JgoBT1Uc)
Magnetic flux can travel through only certain distance of length through any magnetic material. That is the reason why magnetic material like iron or steel is used as magnetic shielding materials since they absorb the flux and limit their distance of flow (length wise). If you use a very lengthy core, the magnetic flux of the rotory magnet will be absorbed at the beginning of the core itself and this flux will not reach the coil at all. In that case you have to use very strong magnets to pump the flux through out the core. For that you have to use very huge magnets. ( in the above said video the experimenter has used set of huge magnets). For rotating huge magnets you have to supply more input power to the motor. With all that even if the generator produces acceleration under load the power out put cannot be more than the power input.
In any of the generators showing AUL, can out put of the generator be fed back to the motor making the unit perpetual ? If not what is the use of AUL?
Have a look at this wiki page : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perepiteia
As per this wiki page critics say that acceleration under load may indicate only higher effeiency or it is attained at the expense of torque. Which means when rotor accelerates it loses its torque and there will not be any considerable gain in output.
Is there any relationship between torque and speed characteristics of a motor? Can somebody expalin things correctly?
Quote from: Newton II on February 22, 2013, 09:29:58 AM
Is there any relationship between torque and speed characteristics of a motor? Can somebody expalin things correctly?
There is definitely relationship between torque and speed of a motor. Torque is inversely proportional to the speed of the motor shaft.
Here is the copy of personal message which I had sent to Deepcut since I felt that he is very much interested in this experiment. I don't claim that what I have written is 100% correct but still it can throw some light on the subject.
Quote :
I saw few videos showing 'acceleration under load' effect in which they are using one DC motor, one generator with
some adjustments in coil or core. This generator gains speed of about 200 to 300 RPM when connected to load. I
don't think this is of any practical use because the out put of the generator will still be lesser than the input to the
motor. If you feed the output of generator back to the motor, the system will not become perpetual.
As for my knowledge goes there are two types of DC motors. One is torque motor and the other is speed motor.
In a torque motor the stator magnets will be of lesser strength inorder to limit the back emf in the rotor winding.
This motor develops high torque with less speed.
In a speed motor the stator magnets will be very strong which produces high speed of the rotor with lesser torque.
Even a small force is enough to stop this rotor.
In most of the videos demonstrating accelerating effect, I have observed that they have used torque motors. This
raises (accelerates) the speed of rotor under load to a small extent about 200 to 300 RPM because torque motors
are not designed to run at higher speeds.
I conducted this experiment using a speed motor. For this, I had to remove the existing weak magnet from the
DC motor and replace it with strong, thick magnets without enclosure. Once you convert torque motor to speed
motor, it cannot run under high torque. So it cannot withstand lenz's forces produced in the generator under load.
To compensate this, I reduced the gap between the cores so that the strength of the output current from the
generator goes down thereby reducing the lenz's forces.
Then I coupled the speed motor with generator having minimum gap between successive cores. I raised the speed
of motor to a critical speed by using power from a DC source. When I shorted the output terminals of the generator,
the generator rotor developed tremendous speed with huge noise causing vibration of the entire setup and to an
extent it vibrated the table also. The difference beween noload speed and speed under load was few thousand
RPMs.
If you use a larger diameter rotor in generator, it developes a very strong torque at center with very high speed.
This entire setup of motor and generator can be used as a single motor unit and torque output from this motor
unit has to be coupled with standard, conventional generator to get standard AC / DC power output.
Incase if you don't get sufficient torque output in one unit, you may have to use several such units with torque
from preivious one coupled to successive one with slightly widened gap between the cores and you have to
feed the torque output from the last unit to a standard generator.
The final usable power output has to be got from a standard generator only. Any modification of the standard
generator will not produce the required strong power output. These standard generators have evolved from
decades of research work and they donot have any drawbacks.
It is all not that easy as Mr.Thane Heins thinks. I don't think that his bicycle will ever run!
I had posted this experiment in OU.com under following link. In that I have not mentioned that I have used
a speed motor.
http://www.overunity.com/10774/over-unity-by-reaction-helping-action/msg287484/#msg287484 (http://www.overunity.com/10774/over-unity-by-reaction-helping-action/msg287484/#msg287484)
Sorry for my clumsy english. I hope you will understand what I have written. Waiting for reply.
Regards,
Vineet.K.
Unquote
I'll tell you what use i think AUL will be, when i get there (if i get there!).
Say our rotor does 2000 RPM for 10 watts of power when there is no AUL coil assembly present, just a rotor with no coils/cores.
Then we present our shorted coil assembly to the rotor, the rotor does 2,100 RPM and draws 9 watts.
That is what i am aiming for, a coil that accelerates the rotor beyond its no-coil speed.
The last coil i tried weighed 2 pounds, had an inductance of over 10 Henries and a resistance of a couple of hundred ohms, it's time constant was around 28ms.
When i presented this coil to the rotor the speed dropped by5 hertz and the input current rose by only 5mA.
My point is, each time i use a better coil (high inductance/low resistance) the results are getting better and better, i can only assume that a 3lb coil will extend the performance graph in the direction it's been going : up :)
Obviously there's lots i don't know, i'm not trained in nor do i have any expertise in things electric/electronic, so i can only go on what i see in my hands.
Also, the AUL effect doesn't break any laws of physics, if we believe Thane's model it uses the CEMF, so you are using the 'equal and opposite reaction', not negating it.
I am extending my DC motor-driven version to allow for longer coils (200mm) :
(http://i1235.photobucket.com/albums/ff437/deepcut71/Energy%20Experiments/side_zps3fe5faeb.png (http://i1235.photobucket.com/albums/ff437/deepcut71/Energy%20Experiments/side_zps3fe5faeb.png))
The thing is only half-built at the moment as i am awaiting more parts, the wooden base will be replaced by acrylic, the plastic coil-former barrel is on the right, it is 200mm long :
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1235.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fff437%2Fdeepcut71%2FEnergy%2520Experiments%2FAULtwinrotor_zps1eb4cc07.jpg&hash=0da6e3b2b5ce7e9592453b0d20c2489bbbb6dccf) (http://s1235.beta.photobucket.com/user/deepcut71/media/Energy%20Experiments/AULtwinrotor_zps1eb4cc07.jpg.html?sort=3&o=8)
12 magnets and 6 coils :
(http://i1235.photobucket.com/albums/ff437/deepcut71/Energy%20Experiments/planview_zps45f39ebd.png (http://i1235.photobucket.com/albums/ff437/deepcut71/Energy%20Experiments/planview_zps45f39ebd.png))
Cheers,
DC.
@Vineet.K.
You are first converting torque motor to a speed motor. Then you are reducing the gap between the cores of a standard generator to reduce lenz's forces. Then you are suggesting to use a bigger diameter rotor to get mechanical advantage from weak lenz's forces. Obviously this cannot produce reuired torque output for overunity in one stage. So you have to do it in several stages each time slightly widening the gap between the cores of respective generator to get stronger lenz's forces hence stronger torque.
Think that you will get required torque output for overunity after ten such stages then what would be the total length and total weight of the entire set? What would be its total cost?
Suppose Mr.Thane Heins connetcs this entire motor - generators set to his bicycle, he has to provide one separate lorry to carry this motor - generator set . Is it not?
@Deepcut,
Quote :
Say our rotor does 2000 RPM for 10 watts of power when there is no AUL coil assembly present, just a rotor with no coils/cores.
Then we present our shorted coil assembly to the rotor, the rotor does 2,100 RPM and draws 9 watts.
End of quote
I don't think it is the correct test for overunity. May be you are trying to make a energy effiecient device. A tungston bulb consuming 40 watts gives lesser light than set of LED bulbs consuming just 15 watts. But this doesnot prove any overunity.
I want to see a motor-generator set in which power generated in the generator is fed back to the motor and this set runs on its own without consuming energy from any external source. Can anybody show such a device?
Quote from: Newton II on February 23, 2013, 10:37:46 AM
@Vineet.K.
You are first converting torque motor to a speed motor. Then you are reducing the gap between the cores of a standard generator to reduce lenz's forces. Then you are suggesting to use a bigger diameter rotor to get mechanical advantage from weak lenz's forces. Obviously this cannot produce reuired torque output for overunity in one stage. So you have to do it in several stages each time slightly widening the gap between the cores of respective generator to get stronger lenz's forces hence stronger torque.
Think that you will get required torque output for overunity after ten such stages then what would be the total length and total weight of the entire set? What would be its total cost?
Suppose Mr.Thane Heins connetcs this entire motor - generators set to his bicycle, he has to provide one separate lorry to carry this motor - generator set . Is it not?
You are absolutely right. Achieving overunity is not so easy. Atleast as for my knowledge it has to be done in stages.
If you have a coil that adds to the rotor speed and subtracts from the input current, compared to the rotor running free, then you have OU if many coils are used.
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on February 23, 2013, 12:47:08 PM
If you have a coil that adds to the rotor speed and subtracts from the input current, compared to the rotor running free, then you have OU if many coils are used.
DC.
Not so simple. Multiple coils split the output along with the Lenz delay effect.
OK well i haven't gone beyond single-coil testing so i hear you :)
Just wquickly thinking (whikle drunk) multiple coils connected share properties, but what if the shorted overspeed coil is used to offset a pure gen coil ?
That's a shit thought, must not post when drubnk :)
Thane's way was the hybrid coil, thick diameter but many, many turns. I calculated his coils on the multi-magnet rorotr AUL device weighed nine pounds.
Quote from: DeepCut on February 23, 2013, 08:03:55 PM
Thane's way was the hybrid coil, thick diameter but many, many turns. I calculated his coils on the multi-magnet rorotr AUL device weighed nine pounds.
What happenned to Thane Heins? What happenned to his 7000% efficiency transformer? Is it available in the market?
Quote from: Newton II on February 24, 2013, 10:03:12 AM
What happenned to Thane Heins? What happenned to his 7000% efficiency transformer? Is it available in the market?
Naudin recently confirmed the BITT as an OU device.
Heins is working with an electric vehicle company to install his regenx technology in their cars and bikes.
DC.
I have a sneaking suspicion that Thane Heins is gone for good. I just did some searching and I can't find anything new on the web. He pulled his YouTube account so a lot of online articles link to dead videos now.
My pet theory is that when he linked up with that electric motorcycle company last year the field testing failed. All of Thane's claims about extended range for the electric motorcycle did not come true with real world testing. Perhaps it was the first time he had a chance to really test his alleged system with a real partner that had a real electric vehicle. So perhaps Thane imploded after that. After about a year there should have been some positive news coming out of that venture and there has been none.
The roots behind my sneaking suspicion go back to a few years ago when Poynt99 and myself and others debated with Thane about one of his clips showing a strangely wired transformer setup. To my great surprise Thane was not demonstrating a mastery of the basic concepts about magnetic flux and magnetic circuits in relation to his setup. It was a shocker.
MileHigh
Quote from: DeepCut on February 23, 2013, 08:23:50 AM
snip...
That is what i am aiming for, a coil that accelerates the rotor beyond its no-coil speed.
snip...
I wish you the best of luck with that.
Cheers
http://www.youtube.com/user/PDiCanada1/videos?view=0 (http://www.youtube.com/user/PDiCanada1/videos?view=0)
Quote from: MileHigh on February 24, 2013, 01:21:04 PM
I have a sneaking suspicion that Thane Heins is gone for good. I just did some searching and I can't find anything new on the web. He pulled his YouTube account so a lot of online articles link to dead videos now.
...
MileHigh
Hi!
No, he is still active - see his new YT channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/PDiCanada1/
On SlideShare: http://www.slideshare.net/ThaneCHeins/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/PDIResearch
The Heins Effect (the Delayed Lenz Effect) confirmed:
http://www.magistrala.cz/freeenergy/category/tv/channel/jean-louis-naudin/
http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/indexen.htm
I don't think you looked very hard MH.
He has a new youtube channel and is still working with the EV guy.
Quote from: MileHigh on February 24, 2013, 01:21:04 PM
I have a sneaking suspicion that Thane Heins is gone for good. I just did some searching and I can't find anything new on the web. He pulled his YouTube account so a lot of online articles link to dead videos now.
My pet theory is that when he linked up with that electric motorcycle company last year the field testing failed. All of Thane's claims about extended range for the electric motorcycle did not come true with real world testing. Perhaps it was the first time he had a chance to really test his alleged system with a real partner that had a real electric vehicle. So perhaps Thane imploded after that. After about a year there should have been some positive news coming out of that venture and there has been none.
The roots behind my sneaking suspicion go back to a few years ago when Poynt99 and myself and others debated with Thane about one of his clips showing a strangely wired transformer setup. To my great surprise Thane was not demonstrating a mastery of the basic concepts about magnetic flux and magnetic circuits in relation to his setup. It was a shocker.
MileHigh
I stand corrected about Thane Heins going off of YouTube. But at this point my assumption is still that the deal he worked out with the electric motorcycle company is dead because his alleged technology did not prove itself to be valid when they did field trials. It would seem to be the logical reason that the videos and the YouTube channel was pulled. By the same token, the development cycle for something like this could easily take two years or more so who knows.
The "delayed Lenz effect" is another issue that I think is misunderstood by many experimenters. Seeing a rotor speed up when you short a pick-up coil or whatever is not necessarily confirming that there is some kind of effect related to Lenz' Law or some kind of excess energy effect. Also, I believe that J.L. Naudin has a history of doing experiments and then retracting his conclusions after the fact when more data becomes available.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on February 25, 2013, 12:39:29 PM
I stand corrected about Thane Heins going off of YouTube. But at this point my assumption is still that the deal he worked out with the electric motorcycle company is dead because his alleged technology did not prove itself to be valid when they did field trials. It would seem to be the logical reason that the videos and the YouTube channel was pulled. By the same token, the development cycle for something like this could easily take two years or more so who knows.
The "delayed Lenz effect" is another issue that I think is misunderstood by many experimenters. Seeing a rotor speed up when you short a pick-up coil or whatever is not necessarily confirming that there is some kind of effect related to Lenz' Law or some kind of excess energy effect. Also, I believe that J.L. Naudin has a history of doing experiments and then retracting his conclusions after the fact when more data becomes available.
MileHigh
Looking at a couple of Thane's latest videos, he's just going around in circles like his rotors. One video he posted just over 2 weeks ago is the same experiment performed by him over 4 years ago. Thane never shows a baseline for driving his rotors, that is, he never shows the rotor speed and power consumption to drive the rotor when there are no cores/coils present at all.
If he did, his whole circus would come to a screeching halt, because it would show that the rotor goes faster and the driving motor uses less current when there are no cores/coils present at all.
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on February 26, 2013, 05:38:33 PM
Looking at a couple of Thane's latest videos, he's just going around in circles like his rotors. One video he posted just over 2 weeks ago is the same experiment performed by him over 4 years ago. Thane never shows a baseline for driving his rotors, that is, he never shows the rotor speed and power consumption to drive the rotor when there are no cores/coils present at all.
If he did, his whole circus would come to a screeching halt, because it would show that the rotor goes faster and the driving motor uses less current when there are no cores/coils present at all.
Cheers
I agree. And I think i said close to the same earlier. ;]
Another thing is, what causes the speedup? Is it that the freq of the rotor is at a point where the pulses of the rotor exceed a freq that cant pass through the coil as well as lower freq? cutoff freq. And if so, does that mean that the output is less at this time also? If so, there is no gain here.
But, if the coil is resonant at these freq 'and' near cutoff freq of the coil, then there may be delay and an upward climb in output in this range. Like as I perceive Romero's motor accomplished.
Mags
Quote from: hoptoad on February 26, 2013, 05:38:33 PM
Looking at a couple of Thane's latest videos, he's just going around in circles like his rotors. One video he posted just over 2 weeks ago is the same experiment performed by him over 4 years ago. Thane never shows a baseline for driving his rotors, that is, he never shows the rotor speed and power consumption to drive the rotor when there are no cores/coils present at all.
If he did, his whole circus would come to a screeching halt, because it would show that the rotor goes faster and the driving motor uses less current when there are no cores/coils present at all.
Cheers
Yes that baseline test is the one i would like to see, i'm chasing it as you know and i hope it's not my tail ;+}
I think there is something else at play not just the rise time, there is odd behaviour at times.
If it were just the risetime then pushing the frequency would result in AUL bands and DUL bands ?
Also one thing these coils do, at certain frequencies, if you unshort them the rotor stays at the accelerated speed, what is happening there do you think ?
Cheers,
DC.
I wound a thread spool with a bifilar wrap, series wired, and powered a 1/2" diametric tube magnet on 1/4" ceramic bearings. The coil was wired in series to a Reed switch and a 12 volt 6 amp hour Radio Shack battery and an amp meter. I Laser tached the reflective tape marked magnet spinner. At 25k, a burst of speed developed that practically doubled the r.p.m's while the amp draw dropped to zero. I called this effect Lenz propulsion, and developed a theory. No output coil was present. What's this say about a baseline?
Quote from: synchro1 on February 26, 2013, 07:48:12 PM
I wound a thread spool with a bifilar wrap, series wired, and powered a 1/2" diametric tube magnet on 1/4" ceramic bearings. The coil was wired in series to a Reed switch and a 12 volt 6 amp hour Radio Shack battery and an amp meter. I Laser tached the reflective tape marked magnet spinner. At 25k, a burst of speed developed that practically doubled the r.p.m's while the amp draw dropped to zero. I called this effect Lenz propulsion, and developed a theory. No output coil was present. What's this say about a baseline?
@ Synchro : at 25k rpm, the comparison between your setup and thanes is like comparing a rocket (yours) with a cessna airplane (Thanes). But that aside, your result is fascinating to say the least. However, it is possible that at that level of rpm, the rotor induced back emf into the drive coil may be causing a current phase shift within the drive coil (or interfering with the drive current) which in turn is masking (negating) the magnetic drag of the coil's core (assuming it has one!), thus allowing a marked increase in rpm, and decrease in drive current - but I must admit, I really don't know.
@ Deepcut - Continued high speed after unshorting the coil - that's another fascinating observation to which I also do not know the answer.
The best thing about your postings (DC) and Synchro - is that for the first time in a long time, I actually don't have a clue as to the cause of your results. I like mysteries in need of solving.
Cheers
@Hoptoad,
That's a good one, perhaps the best. Another is skipping, and a third, the coil's pole shift lags. I really have no idea either. Pirate Twinbeard has his own unique explanation as well.
Quote from: synchro1 on February 26, 2013, 08:32:22 PM
and a third, the coil's pole shift lags.
That should be the main reason for this effect. Another is the speed characterics of motor which depends on back emf which in turn depends on the strength of the stator magnets. I think at last this research work has come on a right track after 38 pages of misguiding information.
Quote from: Magluvin on February 26, 2013, 06:23:55 PM
snip...
Another thing is, what causes the speedup?
snip..
You may find this explanation satisfactory (written in 2007) ...... then again you may not ! ..... LOL
http://www.totallyamped.net/adams
Go to Page 11 for an explanation of the speed up under load effect (AUL).
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on February 26, 2013, 10:21:35 PM
You may find this explanation satisfactory (written in 2007) ...... then again you may not ! ..... LOL
http://www.totallyamped.net/adams (http://www.totallyamped.net/adams)
Go to Page 11 for an explanation of the speed up under load effect (AUL).
Cheers
Hi hoptoad,
Since you are the author of this blog, i'm sure you have explored the AUL effect more than us Here,
Is there a posibility of overunity with this effect?
Regards
Cc
Quote from: crazycut06 on February 26, 2013, 11:59:50 PM
Hi hoptoad,
Since you are the author of this blog, i'm sure you have explored the AUL effect more than us Here,
Is there a posibility of overunity with this effect?
Regards
Cc
Possibility - I'd like to think it may be possible ...... Probability ? That's another prospect altogether.
I'm sad to say that all my research thus far has yielded a zero result. Based only on my own personal experience, I'd say the probability in favour of OU is negligible to almost nil. - But still possible (maybe) LOL
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on February 27, 2013, 01:36:22 AM
Possibility - I'd like to think it may be possible ...... Probability ? That's another prospect altogether.
I'm sad to say that all my research thus far has yielded a zero result. Based only on my own personal experience, I'd say the probability in favour of OU is negligible to almost nil. - But still possible (maybe) LOL
Cheers
Thank you for the quick reply, it sounds like you have given up on this? ;)
Regards
Cc
Quote from: hoptoad on February 26, 2013, 10:21:35 PM
You may find this explanation satisfactory (written in 2007) ...... then again you may not ! ..... LOL
http://www.totallyamped.net/adams (http://www.totallyamped.net/adams)
Go to Page 11 for an explanation of the speed up under load effect (AUL).
Cheers
Toad that is really funny, because it was the Adams and Muller devices that brought me to your article and got me started on all this, you may remember my emails before i realised you were on OU.com ;+}
DC.
One thing i've been pondering.
The 2LB coil i wound (bifilar/series), when shorted and presented to the rotor caused the following changes to frequency and input current :
Frequency : Dropped from 486Hz to 482Hz (0.8% drop)
Input Current : Rose from 410mA to 413mA (0.73% rise)
This coil was producing 4.2 watts of power (measured by DMM and analogue meter) to an incandescent bulb load and caused very small changes to rotor speed and input current.
Presumably two such coils would cause around a 2% drop in RPM and a 2% rise in current draw and give us a little less than double that figure of 4.2 watts, lets be conservative and say that two coils output 8 watts of power or even 7.5.
The input to the rotor started at 18VDC @ 410mA = 7.38 watts.
Still waiting on my perspex parts, they should have arrived by now.
Cheers,
DC.
Quote from: crazycut06 on February 27, 2013, 06:01:48 AM
Thank you for the quick reply, it sounds like you have given up on this? ;)
Regards
Cc
I've given up personally trying to achieve O/U with these sorts of motor circuits, but I still like to see what others are up to.
The research by others has still been enlightening. Sometimes for what is discovered and sometimes for what is disproved.
Cheers
Hi synchro1,
If I got you correctly, you rotated a diametrically magnetized cylinder magnet (fixed axially on ceramic bearings) by a bifilarly wound coil. And a reed switch connected in series with the coil insured the correct pole should appear to the coming magnet pole and here I assume a simple attract mode?
This is very interesting because even if you had no output coil, the mass of the rotor magnet obviously needed work to maintain the 25k rpm while you noticed the current draw dropped to zero. I wonder if you can repeat this test any time or it was a single phenomena? IS it ok to consider a zero current draw indeed or it went down to the some mA range versus the some ten or hundred mA draw while speeding up?
Thanks, Gyula
Quote from: synchro1 on February 26, 2013, 07:48:12 PM
I wound a thread spool with a bifilar wrap, series wired, and powered a 1/2" diametric tube magnet on 1/4" ceramic bearings. The coil was wired in series to a Reed switch and a 12 volt 6 amp hour Radio Shack battery and an amp meter. I Laser tached the reflective tape marked magnet spinner. At 25k, a burst of speed developed that practically doubled the r.p.m's while the amp draw dropped to zero. I called this effect Lenz propulsion, and developed a theory. No output coil was present. What's this say about a baseline?
Quote from: synchro1 on February 26, 2013, 07:48:12 PM
I wound a thread spool with a bifilar wrap, series wired, and powered a 1/2" diametric tube magnet on 1/4" ceramic bearings. The coil was wired in series to a Reed switch and a 12 volt 6 amp hour Radio Shack battery and an amp meter. I Laser tached the reflective tape marked magnet spinner. At 25k, a burst of speed developed that practically doubled the r.p.m's while the amp draw dropped to zero. I called this effect Lenz propulsion, and developed a theory. No output coil was present. What's this say about a baseline?
Hi synchro1,
thanks for posting your interesting result. Could you post a video to show the burst effect. Also a picture of your setup would be helpful.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
These are pictures of perhaps the World's first Internaly Motorized Alternator, minus the output wrap.
Left to right:
1- View of the 3/4 inch spinner in the 2 1/2 inch PVC core.
2- Miniature 1/4 O.D. , 1/8 I.D. all ceramic bearing on top of a Radio Shack 12 volt 6 amp hour battery.
3- Position of the 12 volt Reed Switch on the Hi Voltage Spool Coil. Pins should point away from the magnet..
4- Top secured for runing with coil seated down partly inside the output core.
5- The six main componants: Power coil on core, 1/8 inch brass axel, ceramic bearing, battery and Reed Switch and 3/8" diametric tube magnet.
Quote from: DeepCut on February 27, 2013, 08:32:43 AM
One thing i've been pondering.
The 2LB coil i wound (bifilar/series), when shorted and presented to the rotor caused the following changes to frequency and input current :
Frequency : Dropped from 486Hz to 482Hz (0.8% drop)
Input Current : Rose from 410mA to 413mA (0.73% rise)
This coil was producing 4.2 watts of power (measured by DMM and analogue meter) to an incandescent bulb load and caused very small changes to rotor speed and input current.
Presumably two such coils would cause around a 2% drop in RPM and a 2% rise in current draw and give us a little less than double that figure of 4.2 watts, lets be conservative and say that two coils output 8 watts of power or even 7.5.
The input to the rotor started at 18VDC @ 410mA = 7.38 watts.
Still waiting on my perspex parts, they should have arrived by now.
Cheers,
DC.
Hi DC,
good experiments you have going.
One thing I noticed is, the lower the resistance (load) on the shorted coil the less effect it has on the prime mover. You mentioned you have a bulb as load. That may go up to 10 ohms or more when lit. Try a 30 watt 1 ohm resistor instead. The coil may now have zero effect on the prime mover.
Let us know how that worked or if I have misunderstood your test.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Quote from: synchro1 on February 28, 2013, 10:07:32 AM
These are pictures of perhaps the World's first Internaly Motorized Alternator, minus the output wrap.
Left to right:
1- View of the 3/4 inch spinner in the 2 1/2 inch PVC core.
2- Miniature 1/4 O.D. , 1/8 I.D. all ceramic bearing on top of a Radio Shack 12 volt 6 amp hour battery.
3- Position of the 12 volt Reed Switch on the Hi Voltage Spool Coil. Pins should point away from the magnet..
4- Top secured for runing with coil seated down partly inside the output core.
5- The six main componants: Power coil on core, 1/8 inch brass axel, ceramic bearing, battery and Reed Switch
WOW, that was fast!... thanks for the pictures synchro1 ;)
Could you do a video demo?
Thanks for sharing
Luc
ADDED: just noticed you added other pictures, thanks that helps. I'm interested as to what the CD's are used for.
The pictures are out of order, but the descriptions identify them. The key element to this unit is the precision ceramic bearing from Bocas. I only use one in the center.
The coil pole of the bifilar is determined by the magnet pole facing it.
I'm in Costa Rica now away from the shop. Try reading from this thread:
http://www.energeticforum.com/john-bedini/4026-one-magnet-no-bearing-bedini-motor-25.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/john-bedini/4026-one-magnet-no-bearing-bedini-motor-25.html)
@Gotoluc,
The C.D.'s just hold the coil in position over the magnet spinner. The r.p.m.'s are way over the switching speed for the Radio Shack reed switch. You have to manipulate the coil by moving it up, down and around to stay on the sweet spot!
Quote from: synchro1 on February 28, 2013, 10:27:13 AM
The pictures are out of order, but the descriptions identify them. The key element to this unit is the precision ceramic bearing from Bocas. I only use one in the center.
The coil pole of the bifilar is determined by the magnet pole facing it.
I'm in Costa Rica now away from the shop. Try reading from this thread:
http://www.energeticforum.com/john-bedini/4026-one-magnet-no-bearing-bedini-motor-25.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/john-bedini/4026-one-magnet-no-bearing-bedini-motor-25.html)
Okay synchro1 thanks. Costa Rica is a beautiful place!
I'll read up on the topic.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Quote from: synchro1 on February 28, 2013, 10:27:13 AM
@Gotoluc,
The C.D.'s just hold the coil in position over the magnet spinner. The r.p.m.'s are way over the switching speed for the Radio Shack reed switch. You have to manipulate the coil by moving it up, down and around to stay on the sweet spot!
Thanks for adding that. I was also wondering how the reed switch can handle that kind of speed.
Quote from: gotoluc on February 28, 2013, 10:10:57 AM
Hi DC,
good experiments you have going.
One thing I noticed is, the lower the resistance (load) on the shorted coil the less effect it has on the prime mover. You mentioned you have a bulb as load. That may go up to 10 ohms or more when lit. Try a 30 watt 1 ohm resistor instead. The coil may now have zero effect on the prime mover.
Let us know how that worked or if I have misunderstood your test.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Hi Luc,
looking forward to when you have a lab up and running again :)
Your suggestion is good and would probably work, but i am working toward a coil that can cope with a wide range of loads, not just getting it to overspeed the rotor.
Cheers,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on February 28, 2013, 10:53:01 AM
Hi Luc,
looking forward to when you have a lab up and running again :)
Your suggestion is good and would probably work, but i am working toward a coil that can cope with a wide range of loads, not just getting it to overspeed the rotor.
Cheers,
DC.
Thanks for the reply DC
Keep us updated of your findings. My research shows that as resistance increases the positive effect decreases. Would love to see the opposite ;D
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on February 28, 2013, 11:15:25 AM
Thanks for the reply DC
Keep us updated of your findings. My research shows that as resistance increases the positive effect decreases. Would love to see the opposite ;D
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Yes exactly, it's all in the time-constant of the coil, so the higher the resistance, the less retarded the TC is.
That's why i am aiming for a high TC of around 100ms.
Aside from the TC, as you know it's also the frequency you drive the coils at.
I've driven them from 200 to 500 Hertz and the effect just gets better, the stronger the CEMF, the stronger the effect.
One important point to note is that there is no cycle from acceleration-under-load to deceleration-under-load as the frequency is driven higher.
This is a very important point as it implies the effect is not solely due to CEMF peaking at just the right time, when the magnet is just at the right position.
The effect is happening regardless of magnet position at rise-time.
I've made a spreadsheet with it all there, the properties of the rotor and magnets as well as the mechanical maths to see how far a magnet would have travelled in x amount of TC units, anyone can use it for any rotor :
http://www.mediafire.com/?bjlt2njkf3n69tr (http://www.mediafire.com/?bjlt2njkf3n69tr)
Some of my perspex has arrived, i can't begin testing until my coil plates arrive tho. Hopefully this weekend.
All the best,
DC.
First.
Please excuse my interruption into your conversation, if you will.
This is the first time I have logged into O.U., I am trying to get attention upon a new electropermanentmagnet motor /generator
design, and I would very much like for you gentlemen to take a Quick look at the brief attached PDFs. I have filed a provisional patent in the U.S.. I want this design in the public domain !!! If you think the design has merit, Please ! copy, publish, build, experiment with, use, or sell
the design, as far and wide as you can, and as quickly as you can. I think that it is possible that this innovation could push a conventional high efficiency DC motor / generator over unity. I
It is beyond my capacity to get the design out to very many people. I lack both the means and the technical skills to so.
Please view the attached files and if you think, I may right about this, please act swiftly.
Thank you for your time and consideration
Floor
Hello Floor and welcome :)
I can't understand why the device may be OU, could you provide us with a description of what you think is going on, what is the main concept ?
Thanks,
DC.
A permanent magnet only motor would be a simple thing to design, if there were a way to rapidly turn permanent magnets on and off, without expending a lot of energy to do so. Electro permanent magnets are sometimes used in lifting cranes, now that we have very powerful "rare earth" magnets. In these lifting cranes, an electromagnet is used in a magnetic polarity opposite to the permanent magnet, to neutralize the permanent magnet, (in effect, "turning the permanent magnet off"). This prevents the dropping of a pay load in the event of a power failure, and requires power only to release the payload. This however would use too much power to be effective in an electric motor.
Similarly, an electromagnet can be combined with a permanent magnet to create a magnetic field which is stronger than either the electromagnet or the permanent magnet alone. The combination results in an electromagnet which has a magnetic field that is greater than the wattage input alone can produce.
In the design presented, by proximity, (the distance from the other component / elements), the electro permanent magnets (E P M's)
are in effect"turned off" until the electromagnet elements are energized. When the electromagnet elements are energized, their magnetic
fields will have a percentage of the permanent magnets, magnetic fields added to them.
If a conventional all electromagnet, DC motor or generator of a design, that was of say 91% efficiency, had also this type of E P M integrated into it's design, it would be O U if the E P M's can contribute 10% to the efficiency. Can they?
Thanks again for your time
Floor
OK that's made it clearer, thanks. I like the sound of it.
Have you built a prototype ?
DC.
@Floor,
Art Porter's Magnetic Amplification and Neutralization Generator does exactly that:
http://www.gap-power.com/ (http://www.gap-power.com/)
JLN'S new Lenz Delay replication experiment starts with 18 N-S stator magnets at 600 Hz. 18 times 600 equals 10,500. The diametric magnet stator Lenz delay threshold speed of around 25k divided by two yields approxametly the same amount! Those are the pole shifts the coil makes per second. At that speed, the magnet stator simply begins moving a tiny bit faster then the coil's pole shift rate and gets a push, with or without an output coil.
http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE08en.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE08en.htm)
Quote from: synchro1 on March 01, 2013, 10:54:25 AM
JLN'S new Lenz Delay replication experiment starts with 18 N-S stator magnets at 600 Hz. 18 times 600 equals 10,500. The diametric magnet stator Lenz delay threshold speed of around 25k divided by two yields approxametly the same amount! Those are the pole shifts the coil makes per second. At that speed, the magnet stator simply begins moving a tiny bit faster then the coil's pole shift rate and gets a push, with or without an output coil.
http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE08en.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE08en.htm)
Thanks for that synch, it's good to see Naudin taking this up :)
DC.
Hi synchro1,
Thanks for the pictures and the link to the energetic forum, I read through it again. Unfortunately you had camera problems and my questions remained unanswered and albeit later you made even some videos, actual measurements did not turn out and later the thread went down on the topic and abandoned...
Would you mind telling when you find the current goes to zero Amps, how much current is still flowing, really zero or there is a few milliAmpers flowing which needed to maintain the +15k rpm? After the many tests you did in that era what is your present understanding on the phenomena: any chance to go higher than 1 in COP? Do you need technical help perhaps?
Regarding Naudin's tests you mention below, he has showed detailed input power measurements which is very good indeed but miraculously this time he did not show the corresponding output voltage and current values... ( http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE10en.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE10en.htm) )
IT is ok that he confirms the regeneration effect but from his demo it is not clear whether there is any benefit from it COP wise? Afterall, this is what we are interested in, are we not?
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: synchro1 on March 01, 2013, 10:54:25 AM
JLN'S new Lenz Delay replication experiment starts with 18 N-S stator magnets at 600 Hz. 18 times 600 equals 10,500. The diametric magnet stator Lenz delay threshold speed of around 25k divided by two yields approxametly the same amount! Those are the pole shifts the coil makes per second. At that speed, the magnet stator simply begins moving a tiny bit faster then the coil's pole shift rate and gets a push, with or without an output coil.
http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE08en.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE08en.htm)
@Gyulasum,
I tried to self loop the gizmo and blew up a cap. I discovered that a seperate bifilar series wrapped pick up coil with two coupled diametric magnets back to back in the air core of a plastic Radio Shack magnet wire spool with a 1/2" core did the trick. This magnet core output coil caused the 3/8" magnet rotor to speed up while held errect over the axled spinner. Self looped, it charged the run battery vigorously. Definitly way O.U. I've been over this lots on the Romero thread, but I know of no one who has as yet replicated the results. The Lenz delay effect threshold drops dramaticly with coupled diametric magnets snug in the output coil core. Don't forget to tape the holes closed or they'll wind up stuck to the stator magnet.
"THE OUTPUT COIL POLE SHIFTS HAVE TO FIGHT THE POWERFUL CORE FIELD."
Yes so collection of back EMF will be absolutely necessary ?
A large 4" diametric magnet spinner with perhaps eight magnet core output coils could attach to an A.C. induction moter at the axel. The motor could run the spinner up to threshold speed, then after the output coils began to power the spinner, a shunt could turn the motor into a powerful A.C. alternator. All the coils and the alternator could tie into the same rectifier, and maybe charge a large D.C. battery bank. This would generate kilowatts of free energy!
Quote from: synchro1 on March 01, 2013, 10:07:33 PM
A large 4" diametric magnet spinner with perhaps eight magnet core output coils could attach to an A.C. induction moter at the axel. The motor could run the spinner up to threshold speed, then after the output coils began to power the spinner, a shunt could turn the motor into a powerful A.C. alternator. All the coils and the alternator could tie into the same rectifier, and maybe charge a large D.C. battery bank. This would generate kilowatts of free energy!
When you convert the motor into powerful AC alternator, it (alternator) will produce powerful lenz's forces which inturn will slowdown your spinner. Even if your spinner rotates at 50k, it will not have enough torque to overcome strong lenz's forces. Eventually your spinner will stop.
Build the machine and see. Then you will know the exact practical problems.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 01, 2013, 10:07:33 PM
A large 4" diametric magnet spinner with perhaps eight magnet core output coils ....
When you use a large diametric magnet, you may get powerful torque at the center of the magnet. But I don't think you will be able to achieve OU in single stage. You may have to do it in several stages.
Quote from: vineet_kiran on March 02, 2013, 07:41:25 AM
When you use a large diametric magnet, you may get powerful torque at the center of the magnet. But I don't think you will be able to achieve OU in single stage. You may have to do it in several stages.
The alternator acts as a torque converter, and governor, like balls on a steam engine and has a hydrolic clutch. The spinner R.P.M. is controled by charging the alternator windings, to best run it in resonance.
Hi Synchro,
There is a patent that I thought was pretty clever, you might be able to try with your spinning magnet.
US8120225 - External split field generator
http://www.google.com/patents/US8120225
The patent shows how to use a spinning diametric or other magnet near the center of a coil to aid an already established flux path. I'm not sure how Lenz will effect the spinning magnet as it is 90 degrees to the coil and positioned at the coils bloch wall. Something to look into maybe.
And they have the Internal split field generator as well:
http://www.google.com/patents/US8089188
Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on March 02, 2013, 10:25:36 AM
And they have the Internal split field generator as well:
http://www.google.com/patents/US8089188 (http://www.google.com/patents/US8089188)
Gyula
I see your points. That's what caused me to replicate Leon Dragone's solid state generator. I made videos of it. Dragone patented the Magnet pump Generator. Two disk magnets on each end of a core winding. The field oscillation inside the magnet core output coil accounts for a good share of the abundant amperage. All the time, the slowed pole shift from very powerful magnet core field interference, motors the prime mover like a pulse coil. The power agitated by the spinner hepls drive the rotor magnet with greater force. Three great advantages in one!
Are not, both those patents, very close, if not, a direct description on Willis' comments on dragons den of his magnacoaster !!!!!
Garry
I built a Cook battery. I filled 8" of electrical conduit with 8 1/2" diamectric tube magnets and wraped it with first 1 layer of 32 gauge magnet wire, then one layer of household 16 gauge. This bifilar was then series wired Tesla style.. A capacitor and Schottky diode were wired in series. A spontaneous charge built in the capacitor untill it reached a ceiling level.
I held the cook battery up to a large rotating 3/4" diametric neo tube spinner, to see how the cap charged, and Lo and behold! The spinner took off like crazy and peaked the cap charge. I then simply scaled the Cook battery down to the 28 guage 2 magnet core design That went O.U.
I want to stress that theory followed results, not vica versa. As of now I can explain the effect in simple terms we have grown familiar with through the course of our intrest in the "Thane Hien's" effect. I think nearly all of us are prepared to fully understand what this is in Mandrian:
"Diametric magnet core bifilar output coil, PM field induced Lenz delay pole shift interferance lag retro-pulse propulsion" as a principle of electromagnetic physics both here and at home in China..
.
How's this one?
"Linear Tesla output coil Lenz poleshift retarding permanent diametric magnet core, retro pulse propulsion overunity."
At first I thought the magnet coil generated current. I ended up understanding how "Entropy" was doubling back to re-emerge in it's mirror image as a power mover..
Speeding the rotor up to 25k goes past the threshold, but any output is too hgh in voltage to self loop. Dampening the pole shift with diametric magnet cores, brings the rotor speed down enough to charge a 12 volt run battery off a rectifier. Measured around 20 volts. The strong magnet cores kill the coil efficency off by a good 95%.! The output coil needs a load to generate Lenz delay propulsion. The rotor winds down when the output hot lead is disconnected from the run battery as a load!
Synchro1:
QuoteThat went O.U.
I am not sure if you have have discussed your setups and associated clips on the forum but it would be prudent to do so. You make a couple of references t your setups giving you over unity without ever questioning the results or trying alternative measurements. For example, I think that you mentioned that your current measurement went to zero when one of your rotors doubled its RPM. Since you are talking about very high RPM speeds, it very possible that the AC current was too high in frequency for your meter to measure properly. Therefore the meter showed zero current simply because it was unable to measure the signal.
QuoteLinear Tesla output coil Lenz poleshift retarding permanent diametric magnet core, retro pulse propulsion overunity.
I have a challenge for you. Take your setup and assuming that you have an oscilloscope measure the all of the voltages and currents associated with your setup, both on the input side and the output side. Take scope shots or even better construct a timing diagram on paper, and then explain the voltage and current waveforms and and the timing relationships between them and relate the measurements back to your setup.
For example, when you make a change to your setup the current consumption might drop and the RPM might increase. So what is really happening here? If you understand all of the voltages and currents in the setup before you make the change, and then go through the whole process of understanding the voltages and currents after you make the change, you should be able to figure out exactly why the rotor speeds up.
In other words, you need to make the leap from observing a change in your setup and theorizing the reason for the change, to actually making all of the measurements and actually explaining why the change happened. It's not easy and it's hard work. But at the end of the day you get the satisfaction of truly understanding what you are observing and being able to explain it to your peers.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on March 03, 2013, 04:40:39 PM
Synchro1:
I am not sure if you have have discussed your setups and associated clips on the forum but it would be prudent to do so. You make a couple of references t your setups giving you over unity without ever questioning the results or trying alternative measurements. For example, I think that you mentioned that your current measurement went to zero when one of your rotors doubled its RPM. Since you are talking about very high RPM speeds, it very possible that the AC current was too high in frequency for your meter to measure properly. Therefore the meter showed zero current simply because it was unable to measure the signal.
I have a challenge for you. Take your setup and assuming that you have an oscilloscope measure the all of the voltages and currents associated with your setup, both on the input side and the output side. Take scope shots or even better construct a timing diagram on paper, and then explain the voltage and current waveforms and and the timing relationships between them and relate the measurements back to your setup.
For example, when you make a change to your setup the current consumption might drop and the RPM might increase. So what is really happening here? If you understand all of the voltages and currents in the setup before you make the change, and then go through the whole process of understanding the voltages and currents after you make the change, you should be able to figure out exactly why the rotor speeds up.
In other words, you need to make the leap from observing a change in your setup and theorizing the reason for the change, to actually making all of the measurements and actually explaining why the change happened. It's not easy and it's hard work. But at the end of the day you get the satisfaction of truly understanding what you are observing and being able to explain it to your peers.
MileHigh
You sure cut a pile of work out for me. How about you trying it? I don't have access to that kind of equipment. It would help if JLN labs tried it for us. Maybe I'll email Jean Louis and ask him if he would subject a replication to strict standards of scientific scrutiny.
@MileHigh,
I just finished emailing JLN a hyperlink to the thread. Jean Louis has been kind enough to reply to my email in the past. He's currently set up to run this kind of experiment. Maybe he can help Leapfrog this discovery to the forefront of cutting edge science where it belongs.
QuoteYou sure cut a pile of work out for me. How about you trying it?
I am just giving you some advice on how to get more out of what you are doing. It's up to you if you want to understand your setups fully or not.
Sorry, I am not making any claims or doing any tests myself. The old line that "you can't make any statements or comments unless you build yourself" is a false claim. I have tons of bench experience and even made measurements on motors a long time ago. So I am offering you my advice based on real-world experience.
For example, you state, "The output coil needs a load to generate Lenz delay propulsion." If I understand what you are stating you mean that as the rotor magnet leaves the output coil, the output coil may push on the rotor to make it turn faster. It may be true that there is a push from the output coil like you state. The question that you are not asking yourself is where the push came from. In all likelihood, the output coil does three things when the rotor magnet passes it. 1) It gets energy induced into it when the magnet is approaching. This causes classic Lenz drag on the rotor and slows it down. 2) The energy induced in the coil causes a push on the rotor when the magnet is moving away. 3) Since the output coil is driving a load, by definition it is causing Lenz drag on the motor. Then net result from all three components is a Lenz drag on the rotor.
I am just throwing some ideas at you for you to think about. The real answer to these questions is to analyze the dynamics of your motor with your scope. You put some current sensing resistors in different places and then measure the voltages and currents and relate that back to the angular displacement of the rotor and the magnets passing by the output coils.
I don't have the answers for you, I am just telling you what you should consider doing if you want to find the answers for yourself. If you produced a timing diagram that tracked the rotor position, the supply voltages and currents, the output coil voltages and currents, etc, then you should be able to figure out for yourself if I am on the right track (or not) for the three output coil effects that I am talking about above. Certainly there is no "magic push" from an output coil. If the output coil gives a push to the rotor then the energy for that push has to come from somewhere. A properly done timing diagram should reveal all of that to you if you know how to interpret the waveforms.
I just did a Google image search on "pulse motor timing diagram." Try it yourself and you will see what I am talking about.
MileHigh
@MilgHigh,
You try it! There is no Lenz drag, because the rotor has two poles, or n-s as in JLN'S 18 magnet alternator. The approaching magnet starts a pole shift in the bifilar. It's so slow, it's on the other side of TDC when it appears.
You have no right to say I'm wrong with no proof. Break down for the pocket change cost for a few magnets and prove me wrong. I'm telling it putt putt's the rotor!
Enough parts have arrived for me to do some basic testing, once i have the coil wound.
While thinking about the device and the next coil test i have realised a HUGE flaw in my thinking :(
I was previously getting 600VAC for around 30KRPM with the single diametric magnet setup, obviously a fast spinner since it was light and powerful (0.6 Tesla).
With the new 12-magnet rotor, driven by a DC motor, although i will get the same frequency in the coil at a lower speed of 2KRPM, i will only get an output of 40VAC.
What a f***ing dickhead :( Can't believe i hadn't thought of that while designing and then ordering all these bits and pieces.
We live and learn ...
::sniff::
DC.
Synchro1:
I am making generic comments. Are you referring to a specific setup of yours? I looked back though several pages and I did not notice a link.
Thanks,
MileHigh
View of the 3/4 inch spinner in the 2 1/2 inch PVC core above. The coil is a Radio Shack green wire spool, wpapped bifilar with the same green wire. One coil wall has to be removed so the output coil can squeeze through the hole cut through the CD griping cap. This coil has the two snug 1/2" neo magnet core diametrics taped inside. The coil need's to be positioned after the main 3/8" rotor reaches Lenz threshold r.p.m. for the magnet core output coil which is much lower then the threshold for the spinner and the power coil alone. Remeber, the "output coil need the Lenz delayed kickback field to keep the coil core magnets from slowing the rotor down with magnetic drag! Also a load needs to be attached, just a capacitor and diode to get the delay propulsion.
Synchro1:
I looked at the pictures and read your comments and read some of the EF thread from 2010. All that I see is a variation on a pulse motor like countless others around here have made. I don't see any measurements.
Honestly, you are getting carried away and drawing conclusions without any real evidence that anything special is going on. Anybody can take a magnet that rotates on a shaft and a reed switch and a coil and make a motor like you show in your pictures. Have fun but it's unwise to "over-interpret" what you are observing.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on March 05, 2013, 10:04:05 PM
Synchro1:
I looked at the pictures and read your comments and read some of the EF thread from 2010. All that I see is a variation on a pulse motor like countless others around here have made. I don't see any measurements.
Honestly, you are getting carried away and drawing conclusions without any real evidence that anything special is going on. Anybody can take a magnet that rotates on a shaft and a reed switch and a coil and make a motor like you show in your pictures. Have fun but it's unwise to "over-interpret" what you are observing.
MileHigh
What do you mean you didn't see any measurements? You don't believe that diametric magnets will cause Lenz delay placed in the core of an output coil simply because you're being told that by me? Why don't you try it and find out. This is an important discovery.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 06, 2013, 02:19:02 AM
What do you mean you didn't see any measurements? You don't believe that diametric magnets will cause Lenz delay placed in the core of an output coil simply because you're being told that by me? Why don't you try it and find out. This is an important discovery.
You carry on doing what you're doing synch.
The only thing some people seem capable of building is a bad reputation for themselves.
All the best,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on March 06, 2013, 06:31:56 AM
You carry on doing what you're doing synch.
The only thing some people seem capable of building is a bad reputation for themselves.
All the best,
DC.
Lay off the ad hominums!
Quote from: synchro1 on March 06, 2013, 07:13:01 AM
Lay off the ad hominums!
Yes you're right, i shouldn't waste my time.
Synchro1:
QuoteWhat do you mean you didn't see any measurements? You don't believe that diametric magnets will cause Lenz delay placed in the core of an output coil simply because you're being told that by me?
Did I miss something? Do you show any measurements anywhere with a multimeter or an oscilloscope? Just because somebody says something doesn't necessarily mean it's true. You built a pulse motor and that's all that I see. I don't see any "discovery" unless you can clearly articulate and document what you are talking about. That's real life for you.
DeepCut:
QuoteThe only thing some people seem capable of building is a bad reputation for themselves.
You are back to sulking in a corner. Another gratuitous ad hominem attack from you for no reason. Indeed, stop wasting your time and get yourself together. I don't need your nonsensical sourpuss bashing. If I thought that Synchro1 had something unique and of merit I would say that but all that I see is an ordinary pulse motor. Life is so tough sometimes.
Anyway, I am going to leave this thread because there is nothing here.
MileHigh
Coil gauss is directly proportional to Lenz delay: Wether rotor induced in a single primary, or by diametric output core magnet; The flux saturation retards the pole shift in proportion to it's strength in both cases. I achieved self motoring from both ends. Once the coil gauss reaches delay saturation, the pole shit lags behind TDC and produces a shove. Lenz's law states that as the rotor magnet pole nears the output coil it induces an opposite pole that repels it. Forced to fight a powerful background field, the slowing pole can't fully manifest itself in time to slow the rotor down, and lags so far, it gives it a kick instead. Lenz delay overunity is that simple to understand and to succeed at replicating.
The effect jumps at Barkhausen intervals, not linearly. "These magnetization jumps are interpreted as discrete changes in the size or rotation of ferromagnetic domains. Some microscopic clusters of atomic spins (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin_(physics)) aligned with the external magnetizing field increase in size by a sudden reversal of neighboring spins; and, especially as the magnetizing field becomes relatively strong, other whole domains suddenly turn into the direction of the external field". (Wikipedia).
"SUDDEN REVERSAL OF NEIGHBORHOOD SPINS" 'WHOLE DOMAINS SUDDENLY TURN INTO THE DIRECTION OF THE EXTERNAL FIELD".
Quote from: synchro1 on March 02, 2013, 10:40:50 AM
... Dragone patented the Magnet pump Generator. Two disk magnets on each end of a core winding. The field oscillation inside the magnet core output coil accounts for a good share of the abundant amperage. All the time, the slowed pole shift from very powerful magnet core field interference, motors the prime mover like a pulse coil. The power agitated by the spinner hepls drive the rotor magnet with greater force. Three great advantages in one!
Hi synchro1,
I searched for Dragone Magnet pump Generator but I found only one patent (application) by Leon Dragone: Electro Entropic Generator, patent (application) number is GR871255. Is that what you meant? If you did not mean that please refer to his patent you really meant.
(this is a link to the Greek patent (application): http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=GR&NR=871255A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=19870814&DB=worldwide.espacenet.com&locale=en_EP )
I know there have been a Dragone paper on the net for many years but it not a patent (if you meant that).
Gyula
This PDF of Leon's is somewhat turgid, but in the final diagram, one can see that the permanent magnet field is pushed over to one side at an angle of 45 Degrees by the coil charge sandwiched between the disk magnets. Note the size of the disk magnets and their polarity.
http://www.esmhome.org/library/leon-dragone/energetics-of-ferromagnetism-leon-dragone.pdf (http://www.esmhome.org/library/leon-dragone/energetics-of-ferromagnetism-leon-dragone.pdf)
The conclusion is that PM magnorestriction by coil field, generates power, because the PM has to do more work to realign itself, and eats ambient room heat to restructure on the quantum plane. Leon mentions the "barkhausen" interval too. I believe the same effect helps make the magnet core output coil O.U. My Dragone experiments demonstrated the PM field return generating power in the relaxation phase of the pulse coil.
There is "Magnorestriction" around the PM fields in the output coil, when the tardy pole shift finaly manifests itself. A current appears in the output coil from relaxation phase. This event follows and reinforces the retro-pulse.
Quote from: MileHigh on March 06, 2013, 08:43:39 AM
...
DeepCut:
You are back to sulking in a corner. Another gratuitous ad hominem attack from you for no reason. Indeed, stop wasting your time and get yourself together. I don't need your nonsensical sourpuss bashing. If I thought that Synchro1 had something unique and of merit I would say that but all that I see is an ordinary pulse motor. Life is so tough sometimes.
Anyway, I am going to leave this thread because there is nothing here.
MileHigh
Always with the 'sulking in a corner', what corner of your consciousness is that coming from, i wonder ?
You know why you were kicked off OUR and you know your reputation with most of us so you know exactly where i'm coming from.
You have a reputation for being so repeatedly negative that you have ruined threads and scared off more sensitive souls than i.
Anyway i'm glad you've left the thread and i'm even more glad you've learnt a little Latin while you were here.
I hope you find some positivity somewhere MH.
DC.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 06, 2013, 01:28:02 PM
This PDF of Leon's is somewhat turgid, but in the final diagram, one can see that the permanent magnet field is pushed over to one side at an angle of 45 Degrees by the coil charge sandwiched between the disk magnets. Note the size of the disk magnets and their polarity.
http://www.esmhome.org/library/leon-dragone/energetics-of-ferromagnetism-leon-dragone.pdf (http://www.esmhome.org/library/leon-dragone/energetics-of-ferromagnetism-leon-dragone.pdf)
The conclusion is that PM magnorestriction by coil field, generates power, because the PM has to do more work to realign itself, and eats ambient room heat to restructure on the quantum plane. Leon mentions the "barkhausen" interval too. I believe the same effect helps make the magnet core output coil O.U. My Dragone experiments demonstrated the PM field return generating power in the relaxation phase of the pulse coil.
There is "Magnorestriction" around the PM fields in the output coil, when the tardy pole shift finaly manifests itself. A current appears in the output coil from relaxation phase. This event follows and reinforces the retro-pulse.
So it IS more than simply retarding the rise-time.
That explains why the effect is stronger and stronger at higher and higher frequencies and there is no wrap-around into deceleration-under-load bands.
It may also explain why it is possible to short or load the coil, get your acceleration and your current input drop, then UN-short/load the coil and the
decreased curent draw and increase acceleration remain in effect.More and more interesting, thanks synchro.
All the best,
DC.
Leon Dragone outlines the very simple nature of his electrical 'heat pump'
effect. His system consists of nothing more than a coil, a magnet, a power
supply, and a switch. He places a permanent magnet within a copper coil and
energizes the coil so that the external field of the magnet is
removed/compressed from the space around the magnet, without changing the
polarity domains within the magnet itself. He then employs an arc switch
(simple contacts) to quickly disconnect the power supply from the coil, and
leaves the coil open circuit. Suddenly the field of the permanent magnet is
free to expand back out to its 'normal' geometry around the magnet. But the
process of expanding this field requires work. The coil is open circuit, so
the energy can not be drawn from current in the coil. The field must
reinstate itself. Energy is drawn from the vibrating molecular domains
within the magnet, causing a measured drop in temperature of the magnet.
Essentially, ambient heat is transformed into work to reinstate the field.
Any inductive load applied while the field is expanding/relaxing is driven
by extraction of ambient heat energy from the surrounding enviroment.
Dragone claims to have measured experimental system energy gains on the
order of 20:1, using this approach.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 06, 2013, 05:29:56 PM
Leon Dragone outlines the very simple nature of his electrical 'heat pump'
effect. His system consists of nothing more than a coil, a magnet, a power
supply, and a switch. He places a permanent magnet within a copper coil and
energizes the coil so that the external field of the magnet is
removed/compressed from the space around the magnet, without changing the
polarity domains within the magnet itself. He then employs an arc switch
(simple contacts) to quickly disconnect the power supply from the coil, and
leaves the coil open circuit. Suddenly the field of the permanent magnet is
free to expand back out to its 'normal' geometry around the magnet. But the
process of expanding this field requires work. The coil is open circuit, so
the energy can not be drawn from current in the coil. The field must
reinstate itself. Energy is drawn from the vibrating molecular domains
within the magnet, causing a measured drop in temperature of the magnet.
Essentially, ambient heat is transformed into work to reinstate the field.
Any inductive load applied while the field is expanding/relaxing is driven
by extraction of ambient heat energy from the surrounding enviroment.
Dragone claims to have measured experimental system energy gains on the
order of 20:1, using this approach.
I wonder if this is what Magnacoaster (Richard Willis) found?
Interesting ;)
Thanks for sharing
The following's the abstract from the Magnacoaster Patent. Identical to Leon's Magnet Pump in construction:
"An electrical generator comprises an induction coil having a first end and a second end. There is a first magnet disposed adjacent the first end of the induction coil so as to be in the electromagnetic of the induction coil when the induction coil is energized, and for creating a magnetic field around at least the first end of the induction coil. There is also a second magnet disposed adjacent the second end of the induction coil so as to be in the electromagnetic field of the induction coil when the induction coil is energized, and for creating a magnetic field around at least the second end of the induction coil. A power input circuit portion provides power to the induction coil. A timer is disposed in the power input circuit portion for creating electrical pulses and controlling the timing of the electrical pulses to the induction coil. A power output circuit portion receives power from the induction coil".
Check this new Lenz delay video out from MrAnguswangus:
Output coil adjacency raises gauss levels in each and other coil through mutual reinforcing "Field Lock.". The PMH background field reduces Lenz delay threshold propulsion R.P.M. These Leedskalnin coils, reverse wound to one another, generate a strong background field in attraction. This strong background field interferes with the rotor induced output coil magnetic pole shift interval, and creates the propulsion lag at lower R.P.M ' S. This is the same effect I get with the diametric core magnets, minus the Magnacoaster output. He's setup to neasure his COP in horse power.
Reconnecting the horseshoe laminations with a small pancake coil in between to regulate magnetic density in the output coils, would help control delay threshold r.p.m's. The question remains wether or not additional pairs of ridgid field reinforcing pole shift dampening coils would help or not.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTXV3tURiH4&feature=em-subs_digest&list=TLtuh4M0PVF_4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTXV3tURiH4&feature=em-subs_digest&list=TLtuh4M0PVF_4)
Quote from: synchro1 on March 09, 2013, 09:58:16 AM
Check this new Lenz delay video out from MrAnguswangus:
Output coil adjacency raises gauss levels in each and other coil through mutual reinforcement, and reduces Lenz delay threshold propulsion R.P.M. These Leedskalnin coils, reverse wound to one another, generate a strong background field in attraction. This strong background field interferes with the rotor induced output coil magnetic pole shift interval, and creates the propulsion lag at lower R.P.M ' S. This is the same effect I get with the diametric core magnets, minus the Magnacoaster output. He's setup to neasure his COP in horse power.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTXV3tURiH4&feature=em-subs_digest&list=TLtuh4M0PVF_4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTXV3tURiH4&feature=em-subs_digest&list=TLtuh4M0PVF_4)
Im amazed that he can still get speed underload even if the core is divided into two? Wonder if the effect is still present if he move the coils 180 degrees apart?
I've searched his channel but can't find a video of a test i'd like to see, the rotor speed with no coil/core present. I must message him.
DC.
If he's happy with that, wait till he figures out using backing magnets
Quote from: garrypm on March 09, 2013, 02:45:09 PM
If he's happy with that, wait till he figures out using backing magnets
The "Horseshoe Magnet Field" as Flynn demonstrates, has not only the power of each coil, but the power of a third invisable magnet. Muller builders turned to that "Back Magnet" trick when a "C" core with proper permeability, clamped around the outside, and connecting the opposing output coil cores with a magnetic flux path, would greatly increase the magnetic pole shift drag. The additional ferrite would by necessity slow the magnet rotor down untill threshold speed was attained and "Lenz Propulsion" commenced. Diametric cores work better then axial's at the core ends.
A tiny pancake coil seperating the C core in the center would be able to cut the field in two, or with current reversed, raise the field strengh, as patented by Hienrich Kunel.
Here's what magnetic inductance looks like between counterwound coils. The L/H formula for Lenz delay threshokd does not include the "B" field pole shift intereferance factor. The coil inductance remains the same, and a seperate factor emerges. The Henries over Ohms needs a "B" field coefficient to round it out. The magnetic density of the "B" field, measured in Tesla's, needs to be added to the L/H diividend. So it should read: L/H x T. One tesla (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_(unit)) is equal to 104 gauss. It dosen't matter how the "B" field poles are set, so long as the domains are rigid in proportion to gauss in Teslas.. Tesla strength has no effect on inductance, and needs to be included in the threshold formula as a distinct factor. MrAnguswangus could measure the effect simply by comparing the results of running only one coil.
"Domain Ridgity" = T. Pole shift reluctance.
A fluxgate magnetometer consists of a small, magnetically susceptible core wrapped by two coils of wire. An alternating electrical current is passed through one coil, driving the core through an alternating cycle of magnetic saturation; i.e., magnetised, unmagnetised, inversely magnetised, unmagnetised, magnetised, and so forth. This constantly changing field induces an electrical current in the second coil, and this output current is measured by a detector. In a magnetically neutral background, the input and output currents will match. However, when the core is exposed to a background field, it will be more easily saturated in alignment with that field and less easily saturated in opposition to it. Hence the alternating magnetic field, and the induced output current, will be out of step with the input current. The extent to which this is the case will depend on the strength of the background magnetic field. Often, the current in the output coil is integrated, yielding an output analog voltage, proportional to the magnetic field. Here's a video on theL/H formula from the archives:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OufL9ssiyjM&list=UUDz1_S1kOhi9nYZB0KV7znA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OufL9ssiyjM&list=UUDz1_S1kOhi9nYZB0KV7znA)
I've finished a very raw version (CLI) of my virtual coil builder program.
You give it the coil-former dimensions, the wire gauge and resistance per metre and the target number of turns.
It gives you the resistance, inductance, number of layers blah, blah ...
I've tested it against 7 actual coils and the results are very good.
I want to stick a GUI on it so that it is nice and friendly for testing.
I will use BlitzPlus, very easy to use, good for knocking something up quickly, free for a short while.
Get BlitzPlus from the following link :
www.blitzbasic.com/Products/_index_.php
You won't need BP to run the compiled program but you will need it to control the source.
Cheers,
DC.
JLN has looped a Lenz delay circuit and charges his run battery while underload! Note that he accomplishes this with merely two coils like my self loop OU Diametric spinner.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMjHNJEuzHw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMjHNJEuzHw)
Quote from: synchro1 on March 17, 2013, 12:26:22 PM
JLN has looped a Lenz delay circuit and charges his run battery while underload! Note that he accomplishes this with merely two coils like my self loop OU Diametric spinner.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMjHNJEuzHw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMjHNJEuzHw)
Hi synchro1,
thanks for posting JLN new test. I don't want to sound negative here but I would like to point out that JLN new test is not a self loop. The input to his prime mover is from a power supply set at 29vdc and 3.12amps = over 90 watts.
JLN is only demonstrating that the coils under load (one on the LED bulbs and one charging a battery) will not affect the prime mover.
JLN needs to find a prime mover that is much more efficient then the outrunner motor he is using to consider a self loop.
I'm glad he is doing these experiments as it may encourage others to research.
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 17, 2013, 01:06:58 PM
Hi synchro1,
thanks for posting JLN new test. I don't want to sound negative here but I would like to point out that JLN new test is not a self loop. The input to his prime mover is from a power supply set at 29vdc and 3.12amps = over 90 watts.
JLN is only demonstrating that the coils under load (one on the LED bulbs and one charging a battery) will not affect the prime mover.
JLN needs to find a prime mover that is much more efficient then the outrunner motor he is using to consider a self loop.
I'm glad he is doing these experiments as it may encourage others to research.
Luc
You're right, thanks. He'd get the self loop OU if he positioned a diametric tube magnet snugly in the output coil core, and replaced that juice hog motor with a large tube spinner like Skycollection's.
Here is the link to my virtual coil builder program :
http://www.mediafire.com/?op72vvb361ovw80 (http://www.mediafire.com/?op72vvb361ovw80)
and here is the link to the BASIC language compiler that runs it, scroll down to the BlitzPlus item that is free :
http://blitzbasic.com/Products/_index_.php (http://blitzbasic.com/Products/_index_.php)
The program can be set to go for a resistance target or a number of turns target.
It then reports the coils dimensions as well as projected properties like inductance and resistance.
I have checked nearly 20 actual coils now and have also compared it with online calculators and i'm very pleased with it, the inductance calculation has been within around 3% accurate.
It has saved me from shooting in the dark and i can now confidently wind a coil having first simulated it to see the perfect coil-former length and diameter to maximise its inductance, i hope it's helpful to others.
DC.
The latest video from skycollection on delayed Lenz:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8c319GQhEA&list=UUWqI0GXGprm81g3gkVa5v_w&index=1 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8c319GQhEA&list=UUWqI0GXGprm81g3gkVa5v_w&index=1)
Hi everyone,
a warning to everyone. I contacted skycollection around 2 months ago when he started experimenting with bi-filar pancake coils as generator coils. At that time he did not have the delayed Lenz effect. Some of you may know that I worked with Thane Heins.
I thought skycollection high rpm magnetic bearing motor would be able to demonstrate a good effect so I freely shared how to connect the many layers of bi-filar pancake coils in a way to raise the self capacitance. We exchanged many emails.
To make a long story short, about a week after our exchange he got the effect, so I made some more suggestions and he replied this was all his own ideas. That's when I realized this guy is in it for himself. Notice he does not show how to builds anything.
Just thought I would share that
Luc
We don't need to involve all that extra wire to raise the equivilant Lenz delay "Self Capacitance", all we need to do is push a diametric plig in the air core of any Tesla bifilar configuration output coil.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 18, 2013, 05:03:26 PM
We don't need to involve all that extra wire to raise the equivilant Lenz delay "Self Capacitance", all we need to do is push a diametric plig in the air core of any Tesla bifilar configuration output coil.
Hi,
Could you elaborate on "all we need to do is push a diametric plig in the air core of any Tesla bifilar configuration output coil."?
What is a plig?
A diametric tube magnet, plugged into a solinoid tesla bifilar outpt coil core!
I have a spare diametric cylinder magnet.
I will try using it as a coil-core on my diametric AUL testbed this week.
I can't imagine the advantage of having this as a core but i will try it ?
DC.
@Deepcut,
Make sure the coil is bifilar series wired. Place a load on it like Skycollection's rextifier LED. Domain priority and Barkhausen!
Quote from: gotoluc on March 18, 2013, 04:11:49 PM
Hi everyone,
...
so I freely shared how to connect the many layers of bi-filar pancake coils in a way to raise the self capacitance.
Luc
I should hope so too ! Freely-sharing should be the default and not be said as if one were being especially magnanimous !
atb,
DC.
@gotoluc
i just watched his video, he is definitely looking for cash in his pocket and it seems he thinks you've taught him magic ;+}
atb,
DC.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 18, 2013, 06:59:23 PM
@Deepcut,
Make sure the coil is bifilar series wired. Place a load on it like Skycollection's rextifier LED. Domain priority and Barkhausen!
Yup, all my coils are bifilar serial.
I don't use LED's though, i am going for a very high time constant and 6 x 3LB coils in order to support a larger range of loads.
I'd appreciate if you could tell me what you think is happening when you use a magnet as a core ?
atb,
DC.
The strong PM core field retards the pole shift in the output coil as opposite approaching magnet poles influence it. This has the same effect as the addition of pancake coils one on the othe to increase "Self Inductance ". This timing retardation generates the propulsion.
Sounds good.
I should be able to give that a go tomorrow, cheers synchro :)
atb,
DC.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 18, 2013, 07:21:05 PM
The strong PM core field retards the pole shift in the output coil as opposite approaching magnet poles influence it. This is like the addition of pancake coils one on the other. This generates the propulsion.
Hi synchro1, lets see if I understand you correctly.
Generator coil:Wind a cylinder (solenoid style) bi-filar series connected coil with a center opening large enough to accommodate a free
spinning cylinder
diametric polarized magnet in its inside center will result in a Lenz free generator at any rpm?
Thanks
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 18, 2013, 04:11:49 PM
Hi everyone,
a warning to everyone. I contacted skycollection around 2 months ago when he started experimenting with bi-filar pancake coils as generator coils. At that time he did not have the delayed Lenz effect. Some of you may know that I worked with Thane Heins.
I thought skycollection high rpm magnetic bearing motor would be able to demonstrate a good effect so I freely shared how to connect the many layers of bi-filar pancake coils in a way to raise the self capacitance. We exchanged many emails.
To make a long story short, about a week after our exchange he got the effect, so I made some more suggestions and he replied this was all his own ideas. That's when I realized this guy is in it for himself. Notice he does not show how to builds anything.
Just thought I would share that
Luc
That's sad :(
Quote from: gotoluc on March 18, 2013, 07:51:22 PM
Hi synchro1, lets see if I understand you correctly.
Generator coil:
Wind a cylinder (solenoid style) bi-filar series connected coil with a center opening large enough to accommodate a free spinning cylinder diametric polarized magnet in its inside center will result in a Lenz free generator at any rpm?
Thanks
Luc
That's a cool idea, with the main rotor magnet spinning, creating induction to the coil and inside it there's a free spinning magnet also, causing induction to the coil hmmm... I wonder What would be the effect?
Regards
Cc
Hello all
I´ve been watching the skycollection videos from the beginning, and although I admire his craftmanship, I cannot say the same of his speech.
Always showing things, and always hiding the main details or the circuit schematics, . . . . fustrating
here is the translation of this last video. . . . (take your own conclusions)
-well
-in this occasion we`re gonna make a small sketch of what is the magnetic induction
-well so. . . the magnetic induction is the difference of potential or the voltage produced through a conductor when it is exposed to a variable field
-well here is the case
-here we have an inductor, but this inductor is a special case because it does not have alternate currents that could disrupt the rotor rotation
-here has been removed (eliminated) mostly the induction generated by the magnets, or the Lenz effect was here eliminated.
-and we´re gonna prove it with this magnets rotor, and we have here four inductors some coils that are driving the motor and the others are inductors
-well we´re gonna test it
- well here the current starts to be generated in the inductors
-practically all of them were turned on
-and as you can see there is no resistance to impede the rotor to turn
-and this is what is consumed in this motor
-we´re making subsequently a calculation about the production in each one of the inductors
-and here the Lenz effect is been deleted
-we have no resistance, just the air
-and this leads me to produce in the future this interesting coil which has not the Lenz effect
-well thank you very much for your attention
regards
Alvaro
@Alvaro
Don't be frustrated, his driving circuit can't be very good as he is using 8 watts to spin a very light rotor.
As for his coils, they are bifilar-serial sections connected in parallel - there is no mystery though he obviously wants people to think he's a wizard.
gotoluc advised me to try this config which i have only tried with two sections but it did help.
atb,
DC.
Hello.
I know that a bifilar coil (or pancakes) does not heat the iron, but what I wanted to know is when a bifilar coil is wound on an iron core of high permeability (nanocrystalline for exemple) and we do the same thing than skycollection is that the primary intensity decreases more than if the permeability where less?
I wonder if a bifilar coil in low frequency can do the same thing as a ordinary coil on high frequency.
This reduction will inevitably accelerate the craft.
Thank you in advance for the answer.
@Piced
In my tests, a bifilar-wound, serial-connected coil outperforms a straight-wound coil of the same amount of wire by 400%.
Connect your serial-connected, bifilar sections in parallel and you get acceleration at lower RPM's due to increased current.
atb,
DC.
@DeepCut
thanks for your answer
Does it work well with an air core ?
@Alvero
I haven't experimented with air cores. I met with Romero the other day and he says he has got the effect with an aircore, his website is :
http://www.underservice.org
I use very thin laminations of grain-oriented M6 steel with gaps of about 0.2mm between them and this works well.
atb,
DC.
Quote from: gotoluc on March 18, 2013, 07:51:22 PM
Hi synchro1, lets see if I understand you correctly.
Generator coil:
Wind a cylinder (solenoid style) bi-filar series connected coil with a center opening large enough to accommodate a free spinning cylinder diametric polarized magnet in its inside center will result in a Lenz free generator at any rpm?
Thanks
Luc
The Magnacoaster effect generates the power, not a free spinning magnet. The Magnet should be stationary! Low threshold Lenz free r.p.m.
Very good prices on magnets from a supplier in Germany.
They beat ALL my UK suppliers even including postage and currency conversion!
http://www.neomagnete.com/
DC.
A stack like these should work fine:
Quote from: synchro1 on March 19, 2013, 08:37:19 AM
The Magnacoaster effect generates the power, not a free spinning magnet. The Magnet should be stationary! Low threshold Lenz free r.p.m.
Hi syncro1,
How about solid magnets? Not ring mags.
Crazycut,
Solid ones should work just as good. I never tried solid ones, so I can't say for sure.
@crazycut
I'd imagine the centre hole isn't necessary but may be useful if you want to stop the magnet rotating by putting some threaded brass (non magnetic) rod through it and clamping it with nuts and washers.
atb,
DC.
@ syncro1,
I've tried it with solid mags, i got more power out but with more drag, maybe my configuration isn't right...
@Dc,
Thanks for the info.
Regards
Cc
Quote from: crazycut06 on March 19, 2013, 09:37:33 AM
@ syncro1,
I've tried it with solid mags, i got more power out but with more drag, maybe my configuration isn't right...
@Dc,
Thanks for the info.
Regards
Cc
Try speeding the rotor up! You're below threshold r.p.m.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 19, 2013, 09:49:33 AM
Try speeding the rotor up! Your below threshold r.p.m.
My rotor is 12 inch dia. With 8 1"x1/2" mags, i think i need to add more magnets or cut the rotor to a smaller size? What do u think guys...
P.s. my rotor speed is about 1,500 rpm.
Regards
Cc
Quote from: crazycut06 on March 19, 2013, 10:00:35 AM
My rotor is 12 inch dia. With 8 1"x1/2" mags, i think i need to add more magnets or cut the rotor to a smaller size? What do u think guys...
P.s. my rotor speed is about 1,500 rpm.
Regards
Cc
The important thing is the frequency the coils are being pulsed at by the magnets.
Your rotor has 8 magnets and is doing 1,500 RPM so the frequency is :
RPM/60 x number of magnets
= 1500/60 (25) x 8 = 200 Hertz.
Good results are to be had from about 400Hz up.
You need to double the frequency by either doubling the number of magnets or doubling the RPM.
I have done some spreadsheets and a couple of programs that you may find handy, let me get the links and i'll post it for you with explanations.
All the best,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on March 19, 2013, 10:06:53 AM
The important thing is the frequency the coils are being pulsed at by the magnets.
Your rotor has 8 magnets and is doing 1,500 RPM so the frequency is :
RPM/60 x number of magnets
= 1500/60 (25) x 8 = 200 Hertz.
Good results are to be had from about 400Hz up.
You need to double the frequency by either doubling the number of magnets or doubling the RPM.
I have done some spreadsheets and a couple of programs that you may find handy, let me get the links and i'll post it for you with explanations.
All the best,
DC.
Actually im not paying too much attention on computations, just trying and experimentingf irst on coils to get "aul" but no luck until now, so another approach is needed, i havn't touch my rig for a month now because of frustrations ;D Nah! Just giving my brain a little rest once in a while... i'll think of what you have told,
Thanks!
Regards
Cc
You will end up needing to do calculations, trust me :)
OK i've uploaded some of my spreadsheets and programs that you may find helpful.
They are in a RAR archive, you can open them by getting WinRAR :
http://download.cnet.com/WinRAR-32-bit/3000-2250_4-10007677.html (http://download.cnet.com/WinRAR-32-bit/3000-2250_4-10007677.html)
The programs need BlitzPlus (a BASIC compiler) to run.
You can get BlitzPlus for free here, just scroll down until you see the BlitzPlus product on the left :
http://www.blitzbasic.com/Products/_index_.php (http://www.blitzbasic.com/Products/_index_.php)
Programs.
The program called 'rotor.bb' enables you to visualise how your coils and magnets interact using a simple 2D drawing.
The program is a bit rough and ready as it's just for my use, but if you've never seen code before, don't worry, it's easy to modify.
You need to enter your own falues for the following variables that you will easily spot in the listing :
rot_diam (Your rotor diameter in millimetres)
num_mags (The number of magnets on your rotor)
num_coils (The number of coils in your setup)
mag_diam (The diameter of your magnets, sorry if yours are square but it's just for visualisation)
coil_diam (The diameter of your coil)
core_diam (The diameter of your core)
Then run the program and press any key to step through a rotation of the rotor.
The program called 'vcb_core.bb' is a virtual coil builder, i have checked it with real coils and quite a few online calculators and it compares well, with around 3% accuracy.
The variables you have to enter your own values for here are :
barrel_length (The length of your coil-former's central tube)
barrel_diam (The diameter of your coil-former's central tube)
wire_diam (The diameter of your wire in millimetre)
wire_res (Your wire resistance per millimetre)
target_coil_res (The target resistance you want the final coil to have)
Run the program and it will tell you the inductance/resistance plus physical properties of the coil as well as drawing a side profile of the final coil.
I use this to calculate the barrel length and coil dimensions that will maximise my inductance.
So, if i have a pound of wire, this program will tell me the best way to wind it because i know the resistance of a pound of wire of a certain gauge and can set that as the target.
Spreadsheets.
The spreadsheets are in MS Excel format, if you don't have MS office you can use it online here :
https://skydrive.live.com/ (https://skydrive.live.com/)
Or get OpenOffice here :
http://www.openoffice.org/ (http://www.openoffice.org/)
The spreadsheet called 'Coil Output' will tell you how many turns you need on a coil to get a specific, average, rectified DC output.
You input the blue sections and it outputs the green and yellow sections.
If you have rectangular magnets, just set the circular magnet diameter to zero.
If you have circular magnets, set the rectangular magnet sides to zero.
The spreadsheet called 'Time Constant' calculates lots of handy info.
You input lines 1 to 8 and it outputs all the rest.
They are all here in one file :
http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?udx87dxy472dfk2
I hope you (and anyone else) finds them as handy as i do :)
All the best,
DC.
@synchro1: Just for the dumb ones like me.
I attach a picture of a "diametric polarized ring magnet". Is that what you talk about?
http://www.magnet-shop.net/Neodym-Magnete/Ringmagnete/Ringmagnet-200-x-40-x-70-mm-N35-Nickel-DIAMETRAL::1568.html
Greetings, Conrad
Yes conrad that is it, magnetized through it's axis so that one curved side is N and the other curved side is S.
all the best,
DC.
HERE IS YOUR ("INGNORANCE IS NOT BLISS") LESSON FOR THE DAY BOYS AND GIRLS...
Cheers
Thane
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: ReGenX and Impedance Matching...
From: Stefan Hartmann hartiberlin@gmail.com
Date: Mon, March 18, 2013 8:09 pm
To: thaneh@potentialdifference.ca,
Hi Thane,
to me "impedance matching" also means:
DEAR STEFAN,
WHAT IT "MEANS" TO YOU IS IRRELEVANT SINCE,
EVERYONE IS ENTITLED TO THEIR OWN OPINIONS - BUT NOT THEIR OWN FACTS. ~ Daniel Patrick Moynihan
Reducing the load on the input power by matching the right load at the output...
Exactly this you are doing...
NOT TRUE AT ALL (AND THIS IS A FORM OF MALICIOUS SCIENTIFIC SLANDER BASED IN IGNORANCE WHICH SHOULD NOT BE TOLERATED), AND WOULD BE A VIOLATION OF THE OVER UNITY FORUM TERMS OF USE IF SHARED: "You agree, through your use of this forum, that you will not post any material which is false, defamatory, inaccurate"...
SINCE A DEAD SHORT IS AN INFINITE LOAD AND YOU CAN'T GET A HIGHER LOAD THAN THAT. AND THE ReGenX GENERATOR CREATES THE MOST ACCELERATION WITH A DEAD SHORT (IE AN INFINITE NUMBER OF LIGHT BULBS (LOADS) CONNECTED IN PARALLEL) AND WORKS BEST WITH PURELY RESISTIVE LOADS.
THE "IMPEDANCE MATCHING" IDEA IS COMPLETLY FALSE, INACCURATE AND PURE BALONEY!
But you don´t yet get more power out than in.
YES WE DO (ANOTHER FALSE AND INACCURATE STATEMENT BASED IN IGNORANCE) AND I EXPLAIN WHY BELOW... TO THOSE WHO ARE EDUCATED ENOUGH TO COMPREHEND IT WILL BE CLEAR.
I ALWAYS FIND IT AMAZING THAT THE FOUNDER OF AN OU FORUM CAN'T EVEN SEE OU WHEN IT HAS BEEN STARING HIM IN THE FACE FOR OVER 5 YEARS.
If you are still using your yellow motor for testing and still no flywheel, you will not see, if you can raise the RPM on the purely passive flywheel by appling your Regen-X coil load...
Only this test would be valid and will show, if adding your Regen-X system will not drag the Flywheel RPM totally down over time.
NO IT WILL NOT (AND AGAIN MORE IGNORANCE)...
SINCE THERE IS NOT A SINGLE CORE MATERIAL ON THE PLANET THAT DOES NOT PRODUCE SOME SORT OF HYSTERESIS EFFECT (MAGNETIC DRAG), AND REMNANT FLUX IN THE CORE REQUIRING ADDITIONAL DRIVE SHAFT COERCIVE FORCE TO EXTRACT IT. (THE COMPANY THAT CREATES ONE WILL RULE THE WORLD BTW)
THE ReGenX GENERATOR OPERATES ON THE VERY SAME PRINCIPLE AS DO ALL GENERATORS I.E. COILS WITH CORES - SO IN THAT SENSE IT IS EXACTLY IDENTICAL TO ANY OTHER GENERATOR ON THE PLANET (THAT HAS CORES).
HYSTERESIS, REMNANT FLUX, AND DRIVE SHAFT COERCIVE FORCE REQUIREMENTS WILL ALL BE DEALT WITH IN MANUFACTURING IN A COUPLE OF MONTHS.
So putting a Regen-X system on any motor will just need additional input power, cause your coil rods are dragging the motor down.
WE DON'T USE "RODS" WE USE M3 AND ABOVE FERROMAGNETIC LAMINATIONS TO MINIMIZE CORE HYSTERESIS AS DO ALL GOOD GENERATORS AND MOTORS ON PLANET EARTH.
Why aren´t you just doing the run test on your E-Bike ?
WHO SAYS WE ARE NOT? ???
Just let the E-Bike run WITHOUT the Regen-X system and see how long the 36 Volts batteries will last and the attach again the Regen-X system and let the bike again run the 36 Volts Battery pack run down by recharging the 36 Volts battery pack from the output of your coils.
THE 24 COILS ON THE INFINITE RANGE eBIKE PROJECT WILL DELIVER A MINIMUM OF 384 WATTS OR 16 WATTS/COIL. THE BIKE MOTOR WILL CONSUME A MAXIMUM OF 360 WATTS.
ONCE COMPLETE THE INFINITE RANGE eBIKE WILL RUN "FOREVER" AS PLANNED JUST AS WE DID AT OU (OTTAWA U WITH THE BYONX eBIKE). 8)
As you already have all the parts in place, why don´t you do these tests ?
Regards, Stefan.
MORE IGNORANCE AND MORE FAULTY ASSUMPTIONS - ALL THE PARTS ARE NOT IN PLACE...
ALL 24 COILS HAVE TO BE REWOUND AND 2 MORE ROTORS HAVE TO BE MADE AND INSTALLED WITH 2 NEW COIL JIGS ETC. :P
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OVER-UNITY AND PERPETUAL MOTION
BELLOW IS THE CORRECT WAY TO EVALUATE ANY ELECTRIC GENERATOR:
AN ELECTRIC GENERATOR IS A DEVICE WHICH CONVERTS MECHANICAL POWER INTO ELECTRICAL POWER.
THE INPUT TO THE GENERATOR IS THE MECHANICAL POWER IN THE DRIVE SHAFT WHICH IS EQUAL TO THE TORQUE X THE SPEED.
THE OUTPUT IS THE ELECTRICAL POWER DELIVERED TO THE LOAD.
ALL GENERATORS ARE EVALUATED (EFFICIENCY WISE) BY WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THEY ARE PLACED ON-LOAD NOT BEFORE (DURING NO-LOAD).
FOR EXAMPLE:
THE HYDROELECTRIC GENERATOR ON THE RIVER IN OUR TOWN REQUIRES 500 KW OF MECHANICAL DRIVE SHAFT POWER JUST TO IDLE ON NO-LOAD! :P
A LARGE WIND TURBINE WOULD BE EVEN WORSE AND REQUIRE EVEN MORE NO-LOAD IDLING ENERGY AND OFTEN THE WIND TURBINE'S GENERATOR IS USED AS A MOTOR TO BRING THE BLADES UP TO SPEED. ALSO OFTEN DONE TO TRICK THE TOWN FOLK WHEN THE WIND IS LOW BUT THE PEOPLE WANT TO SEE THEIR TURBINE TURNING INSTEAD OF SITTING IDLE.
A DIESEL MOTOR WILL POWER A LARGE GENERATOR ON NO-LOAD WITH A LARGE FUEL CONSUMPTION - WITH ZERO POWER IN THE DRIVE SHAFT, ZERO GENERATOR OUTPUT AND ZERO EFFICIENCY.
THE IDLING NO-LOAD MECHANICAL ENERGY REQUIREMENTS ARE NEVER EVER PART OF THE EFFICIENCY CALCULATION. IF THEY WERE MOST GENERATORS WOULD BE LESS THAN 10% EFFICIENT AND THIS IS NOT THE CASE.
IT IS THE ON-LOAD MECHANICAL ENERGY INPUT INCREASE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE IMPORTANT NOT THE NO-LOAD IDLING PRIME MOVER POWER CONSUMPTION.
I.E. A GENERATOR THAT DELIVERS 0.8 WATTS TO THE LOAD WITH A 1 WATT INCREASE IN ON-LOAD MECHANICAL DRIVE SHAFT POWER OVER THE NO-LOAD STARTING POINT IS 80% EFFICIENT - EVEN THOUGH THE NO-LOAD MECHANICAL ENERGY INPUT MAY BE 500 KW AND THE TOTAL INPUT 500,001 WATTS WITH AN OUTPUT OF 0.8 WATTS!
SO IF YOU HAVE A GENERATOR THAT ACCELERATES ON-LOAD ANY LOAD (AND YOU ARE NOT SOMEHOW REDUCING NO-LOAD MECHANICAL LOSSES IN THE PROCESS THEN YOU HAVE OVER-UNITY) CONGRATULATIONS! ;)
SATURATING THE CORE AND REDUCING ROTOR FLUX PENETRATION WOULD BE A FORM OF NO-LOAD LOSS REDUCTION BECAUSE THE HYSTERESIS EFFECTS WOULD BE REDUCED (BUT THE CORE WOULD QUICKLY OVERHEAT AND FAIL) :o
AS WOULD LEVITATING THE GENERATOR OFF THE BEARINGS OR SUPERCONDUCTING YOUR COILS ETC. WHEN PLACING IT ON-LOAD.
BTW THE NET MECHANICAL INPUT POWER TO ANY GENERATOR AT ANY STEADY STATE SPEED IS 0.00 WATTS BECAUSE THE NET TORQUE WILL ALWAYS BE ZERO AND MECHANICAL INPUT POWER = TORQUE X SPEED.
IF THE SYSTEM ACCELERATES ON-LOAD THEN THE MECHANICAL DRIVE SHAFT POWER INCREASES (OVER THE NO-LOAD STARTING POINT) + THE LOAD POWER ADDED TOGETHER ARE MORE THAN THE NO-LOAD STARTING POINT ... THE GENERATOR IS OVER-UNIY ALTHOUGH NOT PERPETUAL MOTION. :'(
IF YOU CAN DELIVER SUSTAINED POWER TO A LOAD (OR LOADS) WITH A REDUCTION IN NO-LOAD IDLING INPUT POWER REQUIREMENT THEN EVEN BETTER. ;D
ANY GENERATOR THAT CAN DELIVER 1 WATT OF ELECTRICAL POWER WITH ONLY A 1 WATT INCREASE IN MECHANICAL DRIVE SHAFT INPUT POWER INCREASE (OVER THE N0-LOAD STARTING POINT) IS 100% EFFICIENT.
IT GOES UP OR DOWN FROM THERE... NOT HAVING TO INCREASE THE MECHANICAL INPUT WHILE DELIVERING 0.0000000000000000000000000001^N=INFINITY WATTS IS OVER-UNITY. :D
THE ReGenX GENERATOR DELIVERS 1 WATT OF ELECTRICAL POWER TO ITS LOADS + AN INCREASE IN MECHANICAL OUTPUT WITHOUT AN INCREASE IN DRIVE SHAFT MECHANICAL INPUT POWER AND INCLUDES A REDUCTION IN PRIME MOVER INPUT.
PERPETUAL MOTION IN THIS CASE REQUIRES AN OVER-UNITY GENERATOR CONFIGURATION WHEREBY THE ELECTRICAL OUTPUT EXCEEDS THE ELECTRICAL INPUT POWER AND ALL THE RESISTIVE LOSSES IN THE SYSTEM WHICH IS A TALL ORDER BECAUSE THE RESISTIVE LOSSES INCREASE AS SYSTEM SPEED INCREASES :P
BUT IT CAN AND HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE AND WILL BE DONE AGAIN. ;)
REGARDS Thane
ps
THE DAY I CREATED A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE AT OTTAWA UNIVERSITY (ATTACHED)
Here is a video of AUL in my diametric setup :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8lI1VvM6Es&list=UUDz1_S1kOhi9nYZB0KV7znA&index=4
atb,
DC.
Quote from: conradelektro on March 19, 2013, 11:11:06 AM
@synchro1: Just for the dumb ones like me.
I attach a picture of a "diametric polarized ring magnet". Is that what you talk about?
http://www.magnet-shop.net/Neodym-Magnete/Ringmagnete/Ringmagnet-200-x-40-x-70-mm-N35-Nickel-DIAMETRAL::1568.html (http://www.magnet-shop.net/Neodym-Magnete/Ringmagnete/Ringmagnet-200-x-40-x-70-mm-N35-Nickel-DIAMETRAL::1568.html)
Greetings, Conrad
Yes! The PM fields are pushed and pulled over the copper windings by the AC rotor. At the same time, this undulating field delays the induced magnet coil pole shift and inversely generates a propulsive pulse. This acts just like six panckaes in parallel. Combined with the Magnacoaster output, this type of output coil is OU beyound delay threshold r.p.m. Too simple to patent.
Hi DeepCut,
Thank you for the useful programs. :)
There is another language called Processing which is open source. It can handle 2D/3D graphics and gui input.
It works on Linux, Win and Mac. Programs can also be exported to Android OS with Android SDK for tablets or phones.
http://processing.org/
Hi DTB, long time no speak :)
I've never used processing, but that's what my arduino's language is based on i think ?
I think you've advised me in the past to check it out, i'll have a look :)
How are things with you, what are you dreaming/thinking/building ?
All the best,
DC.
Quote from: gotoluc on March 18, 2013, 04:11:49 PM
Hi everyone,
a warning to everyone. I contacted skycollection around 2 months ago when he started experimenting with bi-filar pancake coils as generator coils. At that time he did not have the delayed Lenz effect. Some of you may know that I worked with Thane Heins.
I thought skycollection high rpm magnetic bearing motor would be able to demonstrate a good effect so I freely shared how to connect the many layers of bi-filar pancake coils in a way to raise the self capacitance. We exchanged many emails.
To make a long story short, about a week after our exchange he got the effect, so I made some more suggestions and he replied this was all his own ideas. That's when I realized this guy is in it for himself. Notice he does not show how to builds anything.
Just thought I would share that
Luc
I'm sorry for completely getting the context wrong and being rude !
Apologies,
DC.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 19, 2013, 08:37:19 AM
The Magnacoaster effect generates the power, not a free spinning magnet. The Magnet should be stationary! Low threshold Lenz free r.p.m.
@synchro: Again for the stupid ones like me.
How do you want the magnet inside the bifilar coil? Please see my drawing. Type A or Type B or am I completely wrong?
You say "the magnet should be stationary". Does it mean, the ring magnet is fixed inside the bifilar coil like a core?
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: conradelektro on March 19, 2013, 02:18:07 PM
@synchro: Again for the stupid ones like me.
How do you want the magnet inside the bifilar coil? Please see my drawing. Type A or Type B or am I completely wrong?
You say "the magnet should be stationary". Does it mean, the ring magnet is fixed inside the bifilar coil like a core?
Greetings, Conrad
Type "A'. A snug fit is best. It's O.K to wedge something in there, like a flat toothpick.
Your picture A is the correct one.
Asking questions isn't dumb :)
atb,
DC.
The PM fields are at right angles to the wire coil's axial poles. The Magnetic Interferance is strong enough to delay the rotor induced pole shift in the spindle coil. This is above the delay threshold r.p.m's, nothing for a bearingless spinner. Multiple magnets can gain with a really good bearing like the VCR type, but it requires a feat of engineering to balance.
@synchro1 and DeepCut: thank you for the answers, that clarified a lot.
A attached a picture taken from the latest video of skycollection with two questions.
What do you think?
Are the magnets in skycollection's rotor S N S N or S S S S or N N N N ? Does it matter?
Using synchro1's (I called them Type A) coils instead of skycollection's coils? Would it work?
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: conradelektro on March 19, 2013, 03:06:41 PM
@synchro1 and DeepCut: thank you for the answers, that clarified a lot.
A attached a picture taken from the latest video of skycollection with two questions.
What do you think?
Are the magnets in skycollection's rotor S N S N or S S S S or N N N N ? Does it matter?
Using synchro1's (I called them Type A) coils instead of skycollection's coils? Would it work?
Greetings, Conrad
The idea is to multiply the alternations per second. Makes no sense to double up on pole orientation. JLN's is NSNS
Your magnet orientation is dependent upon how you drive the rotor and what you want to get out of it.
If you are driving your rotor with induction, as in the Adams motor or Bedini's SSG, you want all the same poles facing the coils, because the driving coil can only pulse N or S, depending how it is wound.
For power generation, N/S is better because you get a larger min/max voltage, but this works best if you are driving your rotor with a DC motor or some other, non-inductive, driver.
You also have to think about what is happening when a magnet is entering/exiting a coil (moving close toward or moving away from).
As the magnet enters the coil, depending on coil winding and magnet face, let's say we create a North pole in the coil. Then, as the magnet exits, it creates the opposite pole (in this case South) because it is going from the inside to the outside of the coil rather than the outside to the inside, so it's cutting the coil in a different direction, thereby reversing the polarity.
So, for good output power on a multi-magnet rotor, you want to have one magnet entering the coil as the magnet ahead of it is starting to move away from the centre of the coil.
Having said all that, i do remember in one of my old setups, the AUL effect seemed to be stronger when the magnets were close together and creating (i would have thought) opposing poles in the coil at the same time.
This may be due to the same principle that synchro describes when using a diametric magnet as the core.
But we're in unknown territory so odd things happen.
In my first succesful AUL setup, at certain frequencies, having shorted the coil and got acceleration, i would then unshort the coil and the rotor stayed at the accelerated speed ! I am still unsure as to why this happened and so are people i have asked who know a lot more than i do.
Can you describe and/or do you have a picture of your setup ?
I'm about to watch a video but i will be back on in about an hour.
All the best,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on March 19, 2013, 03:32:28 PM
Can you describe and/or do you have a picture of your setup ?
All the best,
DC.
Some time ago I built a fairly efficient pulse motor. See the attached pictures.
I might build a bigger version (larger disk) which would allow me to place up to four (or even more) of synchro1's generator coils around the rotor (disk with the magnets) in addition to the drive coils and the sensor coils.
In my design the magnets had all the same orientation.
I used two pairs of drive coils and one pair of sensor coils. The sensor coils were the best option for controlling the pulses. In my case better than a hall sensor (which needs power, whereas the sensor coils generate the small power for the control signal). A reed switch is too slow and too unreliable for high speed turning.
The type of rotor I built allows for coil pairs (future generator coils, two drive coils and sensor coil all come in pairs), which according to my opinion is more efficient than single coils because both sides of the magnets (in the rotor) are utilized.
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: conradelektro on March 19, 2013, 04:14:09 PM
Some time ago I built a fairly efficient pulse motor. See the attached pictures.
I might build a bigger version (larger disk) which would allow me to place up to four (or even more) of synchro1's generator coils around the rotor (disk with the magnets) in addition to the drive coils and the sensor coils.
In my design the magnets had all the same orientation.
I used two pairs of drive coils and one pair of sensor coils. The sensor coils were the best option for controlling the pulses. In my case better than a hall sensor (which needs power, whereas the sensor coils generate the small power for the control signal). A reed switch is too slow and too unreliable for high speed turning.
The type of rotor I built allows for coil pairs (future generator coils, two drive coils and sensor coil all come in pairs), which according to my opinion is more efficient than single coils because both sides of the magnets (in the rotor) are utilized.
Greetings, Conrad
Nice platform. All your output coils need to be bifilar tesla wired, and the rotor magnets alternating polarity. The power coil can improve as a bifilar too, with the bipolar rotor. DeepCut's the one really set up to test this kind of coil. He's doing a great favor for us replicating this with scope shots.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 19, 2013, 04:34:43 PM
Nice platform. All your output coils need to be bifilar tesla wired, and the rotor magnets alternating polarity. The power coil can improve as a bifilar too, with the bipolar rotor.
Alternating polarity magnet placement on the rotor will not work with my drive circuit.
My drive circuit depends on the fact that all magnets pass the coils with the same pole all the time. One coil of each pair expects N and the other opposing coil S (drive coil pairs and sensor coil pair). For the generator coil pairs the magnets could be placed with alternating poles.
I find it difficult to come up with a pulse motor circuit to drive a rotor with alternating pole magnets. The essence of a pulse motor seems to be that the poles of the rotor magnets all face the same way.
You are right, the drive coils and the sensor coils should be bifilar too.
Greetings, Conrad
Conradelectro,
Then it would run off a single Reed switch in series with the power coils and the battery. That's the beauty of the bifilar, it's ambivilant. Of course it would kill it if you tried to run it with magnets in the power coils. The loads would work like Skycollection's rectifier LEDS on the magnet filled output coils.
Yes very nice platform, what's your maximum rotor speed and the maximum corresponding input ?
@synchro
I don't have a scope yet :( I use cheap USB sound sticks plus that soundcard oscilloscope software.
Luckily i've just landed some good work so hope to get a proper scope next month.
But i've ordered the parts i need to explore the tube magnet as a core idea.
All the best,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on March 19, 2013, 04:53:50 PM
Yes very nice platform, what's your maximum rotor speed and the maximum corresponding input ?
@synchro
I don't have a scope yet :( I use cheap USB sound sticks plus that soundcard oscilloscope software.
Luckily i've just landed some good work so hope to get a proper scope next month.
But i've ordered the parts i need to explore the tube magnet as a core idea.
All the best,
DC.
Thanks, a replication even with your modest digital testing equipment is more then I can supply.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 19, 2013, 04:49:08 PM
Then it would run off a single Reed switch in series with the power coils and the battery. That's the beauty of the bifilar, it's ambivilant. Of course it would kill it if you tried to run it with magnets in the power coils. The loads would work like Skycollection's rectifier LEDS on the magnet filled output coils.
I have to think about this and do some tests. I did not know that a Tesla-Bifilar is independent of the polarity of a passing magnet.
I always dislike reed switches, they do not work very long (1 or 10 Million switch actions at the most, depending on quality)? And I think that the switching frequency is limited to about 1 KHz.
There are reed switches which work with both poles and some which only react to one pole. I have "closers" which react to both magnetic poles. They would be right.
In case alternating poles are absolutely necessary one would have to use a second disc. One disk (with all magnets in the same direction) for driving and a second disk (with alternating magnet poles) for generating power with synchro1 coils.
Or one drives the generator disk with an ordinary DC motor (but it has a low efficiency of 60%).
Greetings, Conrad
My pleasure sync :)
I don't think a bifilar coil is independent, polewise, in that sense it's just like a normal coil, all the wire wound in the same direction, so you couldn't have a bifilar drive coil that would drive N and S magnets.
e2a :
watch the OUG videos on my channel :
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4CUJ-q-dXiRjiUaoaM_ReAtmGyM2Ic1q
atb,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on March 19, 2013, 04:53:50 PM
Yes very nice platform, what's your maximum rotor speed and the maximum corresponding input ?
All the best,
DC.
My design was an exercise in low power consumption, therefore the drive coils have a high DC resistance (very many turns with thin wire, coils from relays).
The highest turn rate with a 9 Volt battery is about 800 rpm (revolutions per minute). With a 2.2 Volt battery it just turnes slowly.
See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEEjlYvZ5OM
For a test of the "delayed Lenz effect" I would of course need coils with much less turns (and stronger wire) and it will need some Watts to turn a bigger rotor very fast (e.g. at 5000 rpm). This will also need a more careful mechanical layout.
And that is the reason why I will probably never build it. My skills in mechanics are rather low. I have some bearings from bigger old hard disk drives which could be used. Ballancing the rotor (to avoid vibrations) is difficult but very important at high rpm.
Greetings, Conrad
One more thing Conrad, i switched from an inductive drive coil to a DC motor (for my multi-magnet rotor) and got better results, but it is a good motor, here on ebay in the UK :
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/12v-DC-electric-motor-UK-SELLER-/110739940158?pt=UK_BOI_Electrical_Components_Supplies_ET&hash=item19c89d633e
An easy way to see AUL is to get a diametric magnet and spin it with one of your drive coils, mine gets up to 40,000 RPM so is really good for seeing the effect in a single coil, i stuck mine on a carbon rod axle and used miniature flanged bearings sunk into holes in the perspex supports :
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?ix12bdfu0ypv1e2
I'm working on a coil that makes the rotor go faster than when there is no coil/core assembly present.
atb,
DC.
Deepcut,
A single wrap directional coil has an ingrained pole, unlike the bifilar series wraped. The rotor magnet polarity determines the pole in the bifilar. Where did you buy those flange bearings?
Conrad, for acceleration-under-load (AUL) you need lots of turns (the way i do it), but the important thing is the time constant of the coil.
Watch the OUG videos i linked to on my channel, he explains it all.
You can easily build a good rotor, mine are just cheap bearings plus a threaded brass rod with nuts and washers, all off ebay and not hugely costly. My mechanical skilss probably aren't much better than yours.
Do watch the OUG videos and my videos that show AUL in different devices.
This is all i've been doing since 2010 and i love talking about it/answering any questions that i can and wil gladly help you get something off the ground (not that i have antigravity yet !).
Also, check my long post earlier where i posted my programs and spreadsheets that help with design.
atb,
DC.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 19, 2013, 05:25:15 PM
A single wrap directional coil has an ingrained pole, unlike the bifilar series wraped. The rotor magnet polarity determines the pole in the bifilar.
I can't see how that is so, unless you have the two halves of the coil going in opposite directions ?
The induced pole in a coil depends on its winding direction and the magnet passing it (i know i don't need to tell you this i am just saying it for clarity).
atb,
DC.
i got the bearings from here, not from ebay as i said earlier now i think of it :
http://www.smbbearings.com/Framesets/Flanged_metric_frame.htm
atb,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on March 19, 2013, 05:31:47 PM
I can't see how that is so, unless you have the two halves of the coil going in opposite directions ?
The induced pole in a coil depends on its winding direction and the magnet passing it (i know i don't need to tell you this i am just saying it for clarity).
atb,
DC.
The winding directions cancel one another out in the bifilar series wrap.
So you wind one wire in one direction and the other in the opposite direction ?
btw i found miniature flanged bearings on ebay UK, what country are you in ?
http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=miniature+flanged+bearings&rt=nc&LH_BIN=1
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on March 19, 2013, 05:37:46 PM
So you wind one wire in one direction and the other in the opposite direction ?
btw i found miniature flanged bearings on ebay UK, what country are you in ?
http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=miniature+flanged+bearings&rt=nc&LH_BIN=1 (http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=miniature+flanged+bearings&rt=nc&LH_BIN=1)
DC.
When you attach The opposite ends of the bifilar, the current runs in opposite directions in the coil, that's why it has zero inductance. Right now I'm in Costa Rica. Thanks for the hyperlink.
Damn !
I've been using nothing but bifilar-serial and i didn't even think of that property, that's really cool :)
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on March 19, 2013, 05:22:42 PM
An easy way to see AUL is to get a diametric magnet and spin it with one of your drive coils, mine gets up to 40,000 RPM so is really good for seeing the effect in a single coil, i stuck mine on a carbon rod axle and used miniature flanged bearings sunk into holes in the perspex supports :
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?ix12bdfu0ypv1e2 (http://www.mediafire.com/view/?ix12bdfu0ypv1e2)
I'm working on a coil that makes the rotor go faster than when there is no coil/core assembly present.
atb,
DC.
I saw your videos. Great idea. I will order some diametric ring magnets and diametric cylinder magnets. I got some small bearings but I had some success with "needle bearings" (the axle is sharpened like a pencil at both ends and the tip rests in a little crater, best in a hard material like glass).
Magnetic bearings (like skycollection does it) are also very good. Somewhere on YouTube I saw a motor like yours (diametric ring magnet on an axle) with a simple magnet bearing arrangement.
Did you drill a hole for the carbon axle or was it a ring type magnet?
Greetings, Conrad
It's a cylinder magnet, i got the plastic laser cut, there is a local company who are cheap and don't mind my small orders.
I bought the carbon rod online, it is good but after a while it wears down and the magnet slips if you don't superglue it.
Some pics of the diametric setup :
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?a9a5708ii8c13rf
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?f7jyrx8n8odnpqb
Some pics of a small multi-magnet rotor using threaded brass rod for axle and nuts and washers to secure bearings and rotor :
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?16o9q3z1zwi0433
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?aj22y7vrbxnkvlr
atb,
DC.
@synchro1 and DeepCut:
I am really amazed by the pole independence of a bifilar Tesla coil and I will try that with my "pulse motor drive circuit".
I also like DeepCut's setup ( http://www.mediafire.com/view/?ix12bdfu0ypv1e2# (http://www.mediafire.com/view/?ix12bdfu0ypv1e2#) ) and I will build that too, just because it is so nice.
I am always reluctant drilling a hole into a magnet? But it seems to be possible without a negative effect?
I am away till after Easter, so it will be some time.
Greetings, Conrad
Yes that's a great fact from synchro, i will make a small bifilar drive coil and test it.
Right now i am testing the difference between a single bifilar coil as output, and the same coil rewound as quadfilar with the two sections connected in parallel, as suggested by gotoluc.
I've done the first test and am now rewinding the coil for the second, with my amazingly high-tech winding machine :
[URL=http://s1274.photobucket.com/user/deepcut71/media/DSC02942_zps1f5160e7.jpg.html](https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1274.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy437%2Fdeepcut71%2Fth_DSC02942_zps1f5160e7.jpg&hash=1ad9e3a1d3d72d0612ca10a29b857d04057ccecb) (http://s1274.photobucket.com/user/deepcut71/media/DSC02942_zps1f5160e7.jpg.html)[/url]
Well it was a good discussion, i look forward to your build :)
atb,
DC.
Sorry, i forgot to say the magnet already had the hole.
I will be winding coils for a bit but i have the PC on if you have more questions.
I have asked millions of questions over the past few years so it feels good to be answering some :)
atb,
DC.
Quote from: conradelektro on March 19, 2013, 06:17:26 PM
@synchro1 and DeepCut:
I am really amazed by the pole independence of a bifilar Tesla coil and I will try that with my "pulse motor drive circuit".
I also like DeepCut's setup ( http://www.mediafire.com/view/?ix12bdfu0ypv1e2# (http://www.mediafire.com/view/?ix12bdfu0ypv1e2#) ) and I will build that too, just because it is so nice.
I am always reluctant drilling a hole into a magnet? But it seems to be possible without a negative effect?
I am away till after Easter, so it will be some time.
Greetings, Conrad
I agree that drilling holes in magnets is strictly Tabu!
Yes, no drilling of magnets !
I managed to bugger up my test coil, more wasted copper !
One day i will put all my useless coils into a bath of acetone to remove the insualation layer, then melt down the copper. Or maybe just give them away !
Anyway, i know of one other guy doing good things with parallel, multifilar coils so we know it works.
Trouble is, say we are going from bi to quadfilar, in order to maintain the same inductance we have to use twice the amount of wire, but the extra current means extra AUL so it's a price we pay for better performance and a higher current output.
atb,
DC.
Not to downplay Skycollection's Lenzless demonstrations too much. We can duplicate his Pancake sandwiches simply enough. His approach is awesome as it stands. Thanks to Skycollection for his recent series of enlightening videos! We're witnessing how simple it is to harvest free energy. Skycollection appears to generate at least the measely 8 watts it takes to run it. Every instinct tells me he's generating much more then 8 watts in illumination. Looks more like the equivalent of at least 40 watts to me.
Two capacitor banks of equal storage would answer the question. One bank charged for input, the other empty to store output. Simple to measure and compare the capacitor charges after a full run. It wouldn't surprise me to find 8 times the power in the output capacitor maybe much more. This simple discovery may replace nuclear fission and fossil fuels. I discovered an even simplier approach, however that still leaves Skycollection's innovation as the current state of the proven art. Bravo for George!
Another point is multiple coils split the input and Lenz delay advantage. 6 pancake coils in parallel generate the same no Lenz output back to back as they would evenly spaced around the rotor. Twenty four back to back would work as well as 6 do in 4 seperate coils. So, we should be able to quadruple the output by beefing the coils up 4 times in size! 4 coils of 24 pancakes!
The diametric magnet core can cut down on all this extra wire. Wait for Deepcut's forthcomming replication to see what I mean.
4 coils 24 pankakes should mean a bigger core, (longer)
and multiply the magnetic drag,even with no lenz
a clue may also be in the number of turns (length of wire) and/or ratio center coil area- magnet area (reminds me the Adams advices)
In Adams type, I got good results with square mags on rotor, and round cores at driver coils.
Gentlemen, this discussion you shared here inspired me a lot. Thanks so much.
My next try will be exploring rectangular bifilar pankakes, playing with golden mean dimensions in 3D.(for generator coils)
Will post any result, good or bad. (sorry not able to make vids, only pics.)
cheers
Alvaro
Hello All,
Please allow me to take a moment of your time to set the record straight...
There is no such thing as "THE DELAYED LENZ EFFECT."
The "effect" is actually called REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION or ReGenX GENERATOR INNOVATION (some also refer to it as the HEINS EFFECT with respect to the original discoverer) and it was developed by yours truly, Thane Heins from 1999 to 2008 and rose from my desire to create a new energy innovation that would end the "need" for oil wars. The ReGenX Innovation was developed on a steady diet of Blood, Sweat and Tears and often all three simultaneously.
The ReGenX innovation was introduced to the world at MIT and then Ottawa University (naively and honestly as the Perepitea Generator) via a newspaper article written by Tyler Hamilton and published by the Toronto Star who deliberately and cleverly included the "Perpetual Motion" notion to mislead and stir up readers emotions in order to sell more advertising - which they did very well because the article was one of the top articles that year (although totally based on a false premise).
At Ottawa University the Regenerative Acceleration innovation's development was assisted greatly by Luc Choquette (and his own blood, sweat tears and sore back), Owen Charles, Saverio Panetta, Bill and Ellen Costantino and many, many others - who were ALL God sent and indispensable, who helped move the innovation in their own way from one stage to another until we achieved the final goal and with both the ReGenX innovation and the BiTT and was promptly expelled from our satellite lab at OU (Ottawa University) after being slandered, locked out of our lab, physically assaulted, threatened and had 3 prototypes sabotaged.
There has been much false and predominantly ignorant criticism of the innovation over the years - which have all been proven false and baseless but some still exists today (below)...
Nevertheless the ReGenX Innovation is currently being embraced and commercialized by 8 different companies worldwide and updated patents have been filed - so it is ready to move to the next stage of its evolution - or revolution into the mainstream market and commercialized.
Those of you who have been able to successfully create a generator that has the ability to accelerate under load - you have ALL created Over-Unity devices - Congrats!, ignore what any ignorant naysayer may claim.
Thanks
Thane
Thane C. Heins
President & CEO
Potential +/- Difference Inc. R & D
"Change catalysts using our potential to make a positive difference"
Email: thaneh@potentialdifference.ca
Cell: 613.795.1602
YOUTUBE http://www.youtube.com/user/pdicanada1
Linkedin http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=107557432&trk=tab_pro
slideshare http://www.slideshare.net/ThaneCHeins
HERE IS YOUR ("INGNORANCE IS NOT BLISS") LESSON FOR THE DAY BOYS AND GIRLS...
Cheers
Thane
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: ReGenX and Impedance Matching...
From: Stefan Hartmann hartiberlin@gmail.com
Date: Mon, March 18, 2013 8:09 pm
To: thaneh@potentialdifference.ca,
Hi Thane,
to me "impedance matching" also means:
DEAR STEFAN,
WHAT IT "MEANS" TO YOU IS IRRELEVANT SINCE,
EVERYONE IS ENTITLED TO THEIR OWN OPINIONS - BUT NOT THEIR OWN FACTS. ~ Daniel Patrick Moynihan
Reducing the load on the input power by matching the right load at the output...
Exactly this you are doing...
NOT TRUE AT ALL (AND THIS IS A FORM OF MALICIOUS SCIENTIFIC SLANDER BASED IN IGNORANCE WHICH SHOULD NOT BE TOLERATED), AND WOULD BE A VIOLATION OF THE OVER UNITY FORUM TERMS OF USE IF SHARED: "You agree, through your use of this forum, that you will not post any material which is false, defamatory, inaccurate"...
SINCE A DEAD SHORT IS AN INFINITE LOAD AND YOU CAN'T GET A HIGHER LOAD THAN THAT. AND THE ReGenX GENERATOR CREATES THE MOST ACCELERATION WITH A DEAD SHORT (IE AN INFINITE NUMBER OF LIGHT BULBS (LOADS) CONNECTED IN PARALLEL) AND WORKS BEST WITH PURELY RESISTIVE LOADS.
THE "IMPEDANCE MATCHING" IDEA IS COMPLETLY FALSE, INACCURATE AND PURE BALONEY!
But you don´t yet get more power out than in.
YES WE DO (ANOTHER FALSE AND INACCURATE STATEMENT BASED IN IGNORANCE) AND I EXPLAIN WHY BELOW... TO THOSE WHO ARE EDUCATED ENOUGH TO COMPREHEND IT WILL BE CLEAR.
I ALWAYS FIND IT AMAZING THAT THE FOUNDER OF AN OU FORUM CAN'T EVEN SEE OU WHEN IT HAS BEEN STARING HIM IN THE FACE FOR OVER 5 YEARS.
If you are still using your yellow motor for testing and still no flywheel, you will not see, if you can raise the RPM on the purely passive flywheel by appling your Regen-X coil load...
Only this test would be valid and will show, if adding your Regen-X system will not drag the Flywheel RPM totally down over time.
NO IT WILL NOT (AND AGAIN MORE IGNORANCE)...
SINCE THERE IS NOT A SINGLE CORE MATERIAL ON THE PLANET THAT DOES NOT PRODUCE SOME SORT OF HYSTERESIS EFFECT (MAGNETIC DRAG), AND REMNANT FLUX IN THE CORE REQUIRING ADDITIONAL DRIVE SHAFT COERCIVE FORCE TO EXTRACT IT. (THE COMPANY THAT CREATES ONE WILL RULE THE WORLD BTW)
THE ReGenX GENERATOR OPERATES ON THE VERY SAME PRINCIPLE AS DO ALL GENERATORS I.E. COILS WITH CORES - SO IN THAT SENSE IT IS EXACTLY IDENTICAL TO ANY OTHER GENERATOR ON THE PLANET (THAT HAS CORES).
HYSTERESIS, REMNANT FLUX, AND DRIVE SHAFT COERCIVE FORCE REQUIREMENTS WILL ALL BE DEALT WITH IN MANUFACTURING IN A COUPLE OF MONTHS.
So putting a Regen-X system on any motor will just need additional input power, cause your coil rods are dragging the motor down.
WE DON'T USE "RODS" WE USE M3 AND ABOVE FERROMAGNETIC LAMINATIONS TO MINIMIZE CORE HYSTERESIS AS DO ALL GOOD GENERATORS AND MOTORS ON PLANET EARTH.
Why aren´t you just doing the run test on your E-Bike ?
WHO SAYS WE ARE NOT?
Just let the E-Bike run WITHOUT the Regen-X system and see how long the 36 Volts batteries will last and the attach again the Regen-X system and let the bike again run the 36 Volts Battery pack run down by recharging the 36 Volts battery pack from the output of your coils.
THE 24 COILS ON THE INFINITE RANGE eBIKE PROJECT WILL DELIVER A MINIMUM OF 384 WATTS OR 16 WATTS/COIL. THE BIKE MOTOR WILL CONSUME A MAXIMUM OF 360 WATTS.
ONCE COMPLETE THE INFINITE RANGE eBIKE WILL RUN "FOREVER" AS PLANNED JUST AS WE DID AT OU (OTTAWA U WITH THE BYONX eBIKE).
As you already have all the parts in place, why don´t you do these tests ?
Regards, Stefan.
MORE IGNORANCE AND MORE FAULTY ASSUMPTIONS - ALL THE PARTS ARE NOT IN PLACE...
ALL 24 COILS HAVE TO BE REWOUND AND 2 MORE ROTORS HAVE TO BE MADE AND INSTALLED WITH 2 NEW COIL JIGS ETC.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OVER-UNITY AND PERPETUAL MOTION
BELLOW IS THE CORRECT WAY TO EVALUATE ANY ELECTRIC GENERATOR:
AN ELECTRIC GENERATOR IS A DEVICE WHICH CONVERTS MECHANICAL POWER INTO ELECTRICAL POWER.
THE INPUT TO THE GENERATOR IS THE MECHANICAL POWER IN THE DRIVE SHAFT WHICH IS EQUAL TO THE TORQUE X THE SPEED.
THE OUTPUT IS THE ELECTRICAL POWER DELIVERED TO THE LOAD.
ALL GENERATORS ARE EVALUATED (EFFICIENCY WISE) BY WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THEY ARE PLACED ON-LOAD NOT BEFORE (DURING NO-LOAD).
FOR EXAMPLE:
THE HYDROELECTRIC GENERATOR ON THE RIVER IN OUR TOWN REQUIRES 500 KW OF MECHANICAL DRIVE SHAFT POWER JUST TO IDLE ON NO-LOAD!
A LARGE WIND TURBINE WOULD BE EVEN WORSE AND REQUIRE EVEN MORE NO-LOAD IDLING ENERGY AND OFTEN THE WIND TURBINE'S GENERATOR IS USED AS A MOTOR TO BRING THE BLADES UP TO SPEED. ALSO OFTEN DONE TO TRICK THE TOWN FOLK WHEN THE WIND IS LOW BUT THE PEOPLE WANT TO SEE THEIR TURBINE TURNING INSTEAD OF SITTING IDLE.
A DIESEL MOTOR WILL POWER A LARGE GENERATOR ON NO-LOAD WITH A LARGE FUEL CONSUMPTION - WITH ZERO POWER IN THE DRIVE SHAFT, ZERO GENERATOR OUTPUT AND ZERO EFFICIENCY.
THE IDLING NO-LOAD MECHANICAL ENERGY REQUIREMENTS ARE NEVER EVER PART OF THE EFFICIENCY CALCULATION. IF THEY WERE MOST GENERATORS WOULD BE LESS THAN 10% EFFICIENT AND THIS IS NOT THE CASE.
IT IS THE ON-LOAD MECHANICAL ENERGY INPUT INCREASE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE IMPORTANT NOT THE NO-LOAD IDLING PRIME MOVER POWER CONSUMPTION.
I.E. A GENERATOR THAT DELIVERS 0.8 WATTS TO THE LOAD WITH A 1 WATT INCREASE IN ON-LOAD MECHANICAL DRIVE SHAFT POWER OVER THE NO-LOAD STARTING POINT IS 80% EFFICIENT - EVEN THOUGH THE NO-LOAD MECHANICAL ENERGY INPUT MAY BE 500 KW AND THE TOTAL INPUT 500,001 WATTS WITH AN OUTPUT OF 0.8 WATTS!
SO IF YOU HAVE A GENERATOR THAT ACCELERATES ON-LOAD ANY LOAD (AND YOU ARE NOT SOMEHOW REDUCING NO-LOAD MECHANICAL LOSSES IN THE PROCESS THEN YOU HAVE OVER-UNITY) CONGRATULATIONS!
SATURATING THE CORE AND REDUCING ROTOR FLUX PENETRATION WOULD BE A FORM OF NO-LOAD LOSS REDUCTION BECAUSE THE HYSTERESIS EFFECTS WOULD BE REDUCED (BUT THE CORE WOULD QUICKLY OVERHEAT AND FAIL)
AS WOULD LEVITATING THE GENERATOR OFF THE BEARINGS OR SUPERCONDUCTING YOUR COILS ETC. WHEN PLACING IT ON-LOAD.
BTW THE NET MECHANICAL INPUT POWER TO ANY GENERATOR AT ANY STEADY STATE SPEED IS 0.00 WATTS BECAUSE THE NET TORQUE WILL ALWAYS BE ZERO AND MECHANICAL INPUT POWER = TORQUE X SPEED.
IF THE SYSTEM ACCELERATES ON-LOAD THEN THE MECHANICAL DRIVE SHAFT POWER INCREASES (OVER THE NO-LOAD STARTING POINT) + THE LOAD POWER ADDED TOGETHER ARE MORE THAN THE NO-LOAD STARTING POINT ... THE GENERATOR IS OVER-UNIY ALTHOUGH NOT PERPETUAL MOTION.
IF YOU CAN DELIVER SUSTAINED POWER TO A LOAD (OR LOADS) WITH A REDUCTION IN NO-LOAD IDLING INPUT POWER REQUIREMENT THEN EVEN BETTER.
ANY GENERATOR THAT CAN DELIVER 1 WATT OF ELECTRICAL POWER WITH ONLY A 1 WATT INCREASE IN MECHANICAL DRIVE SHAFT INPUT POWER INCREASE (OVER THE N0-LOAD STARTING POINT) IS 100% EFFICIENT.
IT GOES UP OR DOWN FROM THERE... NOT HAVING TO INCREASE THE MECHANICAL INPUT WHILE DELIVERING 0.0000000000000000000000000001^N=INFINITY WATTS IS OVER-UNITY.
THE ReGenX GENERATOR DELIVERS 1 WATT OF ELECTRICAL POWER TO ITS LOADS + AN INCREASE IN MECHANICAL OUTPUT WITHOUT AN INCREASE IN DRIVE SHAFT MECHANICAL INPUT POWER AND INCLUDES A REDUCTION IN PRIME MOVER INPUT.
PERPETUAL MOTION IN THIS CASE REQUIRES AN OVER-UNITY GENERATOR CONFIGURATION WHEREBY THE ELECTRICAL OUTPUT EXCEEDS THE ELECTRICAL INPUT POWER AND ALL THE RESISTIVE LOSSES IN THE SYSTEM WHICH IS A TALL ORDER BECAUSE THE RESISTIVE LOSSES INCREASE AS SYSTEM SPEED INCREASES
BUT IT CAN AND HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE AND WILL BE DONE AGAIN.
REGARDS Thane
ps
THE DAY I CREATED A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE AT OTTAWA UNIVERSITY (ATTACHED)
synchro i'm having serious doubts about this 'magnet as a core'.
Both of my tube magnets are 0.6 Tesla, even having them sitting four inches apart would make it impossible to spin up the rotor magnet.
You have tried this yourself, haven't you ?
atb,
DC.
A MESSAGE FROM THANE HEINS (I'll remove this one if the moderator doesn't censor me?)
Hello All,
Please allow me to take a moment of your time to set the record straight...
There is no such thing as "THE DELAYED LENZ EFFECT."
The "effect" is actually called REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION or ReGenX GENERATOR INNOVATION (some also refer to it as the HEINS EFFECT with respect to the original discoverer) and it was developed by yours truly, Thane Heins from 1999 to 2008 and rose from my desire to create a new energy innovation that would end the "need" for oil wars. The ReGenX Innovation was developed on a steady diet of Blood, Sweat and Tears and often all three simultaneously.
The ReGenX innovation was introduced to the world at MIT and then Ottawa University (naively and honestly as the Perepitea Generator) via a newspaper article written by Tyler Hamilton and published by the Toronto Star who deliberately and cleverly included the "Perpetual Motion" notion to mislead and stir up readers emotions in order to sell more advertising - which they did very well because the article was one of the top articles that year (although totally based on a false premise).
At Ottawa University the Regenerative Acceleration innovation's development was assisted greatly by Luc Choquette (and his own blood, sweat tears and sore back), Owen Charles, Saverio Panetta, Bill and Ellen Costantino and many, many others - who were ALL God sent and indispensable, who helped move the innovation in their own way from one stage to another until we achieved the final goal and with both the ReGenX innovation and the BiTT and was promptly expelled from our satellite lab at OU (Ottawa University) after being slandered, locked out of our lab, physically assaulted, threatened and had 3 prototypes sabotaged.
There has been much false and predominantly ignorant criticism of the innovation over the years - which have all been proven false and baseless but some still exists today (below)...
Nevertheless the ReGenX Innovation is currently being embraced and commercialized by 8 different companies worldwide and updated patents have been filed - so it is ready to move to the next stage of its evolution - or revolution into the mainstream market and commercialized.
Those of you who have been able to successfully create a generator that has the ability to accelerate under load - you have ALL created Over-Unity devices - Congrats!, ignore what any ignorant naysayer may claim.
Thanks
Thane
Thane C. Heins
President & CEO
Potential +/- Difference Inc. R & D
"Change catalysts using our potential to make a positive difference"
Email: thaneh@potentialdifference.ca
Cell: 613.795.1602
YOUTUBE http://www.youtube.com/user/pdicanada1 (http://www.youtube.com/user/pdicanada1)
Linkedin http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=107557432&trk=tab_pro (http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=107557432&trk=tab_pro)
slideshare http://www.slideshare.net/ThaneCHeins (http://www.slideshare.net/ThaneCHeins)
HERE IS YOUR ("INGNORANCE IS NOT BLISS") LESSON FOR THE DAY BOYS AND GIRLS...
Cheers
Thane
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: ReGenX and Impedance Matching...
From: Stefan Hartmann hartiberlin@gmail.com
Date: Mon, March 18, 2013 8:09 pm
To: thaneh@potentialdifference.ca,
Hi Thane,
to me "impedance matching" also means:
DEAR STEFAN,
WHAT IT "MEANS" TO YOU IS IRRELEVANT SINCE,
EVERYONE IS ENTITLED TO THEIR OWN OPINIONS - BUT NOT THEIR OWN FACTS. ~ Daniel Patrick Moynihan
Reducing the load on the input power by matching the right load at the output...
Exactly this you are doing...
NOT TRUE AT ALL (AND THIS IS A FORM OF MALICIOUS SCIENTIFIC SLANDER BASED IN IGNORANCE WHICH SHOULD NOT BE TOLERATED), AND WOULD BE A VIOLATION OF THE OVER UNITY FORUM TERMS OF USE IF SHARED: "You agree, through your use of this forum, that you will not post any material which is false, defamatory, inaccurate"...
SINCE A DEAD SHORT IS AN INFINITE LOAD AND YOU CAN'T GET A HIGHER LOAD THAN THAT. AND THE ReGenX GENERATOR CREATES THE MOST ACCELERATION WITH A DEAD SHORT (IE AN INFINITE NUMBER OF LIGHT BULBS (LOADS) CONNECTED IN PARALLEL) AND WORKS BEST WITH PURELY RESISTIVE LOADS.
THE "IMPEDANCE MATCHING" IDEA IS COMPLETLY FALSE, INACCURATE AND PURE BALONEY!
THERE IS NO IMPEDANCE MATCHING HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgHFhNMkDiw&list=PLkH1zLdXy1SypPD7inxAYi8MjkQk91syC&index=1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgHFhNMkDiw&list=PLkH1zLdXy1SypPD7inxAYi8MjkQk91syC&index=1)
OR HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCRx9MW-a7M&list=PLkH1zLdXy1SypPD7inxAYi8MjkQk91syC (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCRx9MW-a7M&list=PLkH1zLdXy1SypPD7inxAYi8MjkQk91syC)
OR IN ANY OTHER ReGenX TEST AND THE ONLY VATIALBE THAT IS CHANGED IS THE OPERATING FREQUENCY OF THE ReGenX COIL AND THE LOAD STAYS THE SAME (ALWAYS)!
But you don´t yet get more power out than in.
YES WE DO (ANOTHER FALSE AND INACCURATE STATEMENT BASED IN IGNORANCE) AND I EXPLAIN WHY BELOW... TO THOSE WHO ARE EDUCATED ENOUGH TO COMPREHEND IT WILL BE CLEAR.
I ALWAYS FIND IT AMAZING THAT THE FOUNDER OF AN OU FORUM CAN'T EVEN SEE OU WHEN IT HAS BEEN STARING HIM IN THE FACE FOR OVER 5 YEARS.
If you are still using your yellow motor for testing and still no flywheel, you will not see, if you can raise the RPM on the purely passive flywheel by appling your Regen-X coil load...
Only this test would be valid and will show, if adding your Regen-X system will not drag the Flywheel RPM totally down over time.
NO IT WILL NOT (AND AGAIN MORE IGNORANCE)...
SINCE THERE IS NOT A SINGLE CORE MATERIAL ON THE PLANET THAT DOES NOT PRODUCE SOME SORT OF HYSTERESIS EFFECT (MAGNETIC DRAG), AND REMNANT FLUX IN THE CORE REQUIRING ADDITIONAL DRIVE SHAFT COERCIVE FORCE TO EXTRACT IT. (THE COMPANY THAT CREATES ONE WILL RULE THE WORLD BTW)
THE ReGenX GENERATOR OPERATES ON THE VERY SAME PRINCIPLE AS DO ALL GENERATORS I.E. COILS WITH CORES - SO IN THAT SENSE IT IS EXACTLY IDENTICAL TO ANY OTHER GENERATOR ON THE PLANET (THAT HAS CORES).
HYSTERESIS, REMNANT FLUX, AND DRIVE SHAFT COERCIVE FORCE REQUIREMENTS WILL ALL BE DEALT WITH IN THE DESIGN AND MANUFACTURING PROCESS IN A COUPLE OF MONTHS.
So putting a Regen-X system on any motor will just need additional input power, cause your coil rods are dragging the motor down.
WE DON'T USE "RODS" WE USE M3 AND ABOVE FERROMAGNETIC LAMINATIONS TO MINIMIZE CORE HYSTERESIS AS DO ALL GOOD GENERATORS AND MOTORS ON PLANET EARTH.
Why aren´t you just doing the run test on your E-Bike ?
WHO SAYS WE ARE NOT?
Just let the E-Bike run WITHOUT the Regen-X system and see how long the 36 Volts batteries will last and the attach again the Regen-X system and let the bike again run the 36 Volts Battery pack run down by recharging the 36 Volts battery pack from the output of your coils.
THE 24 COILS ON THE INFINITE RANGE eBIKE PROJECT WILL DELIVER A MINIMUM OF 384 WATTS OR 16 WATTS/COIL. THE BIKE MOTOR WILL CONSUME A MAXIMUM OF 360 WATTS.
ONCE COMPLETE THE INFINITE RANGE eBIKE WILL RUN "FOREVER" AS PLANNED JUST AS WE DID AT OU (OTTAWA U WITH THE BYONX eBIKE).
As you already have all the parts in place, why don´t you do these tests ?
Regards, Stefan.
MORE IGNORANCE AND MORE FAULTY ASSUMPTIONS - ALL THE PARTS ARE NOT IN PLACE...
ALL 24 COILS HAVE TO BE REWOUND AND 2 MORE ROTORS HAVE TO BE MADE AND INSTALLED WITH 2 NEW COIL JIGS ETC.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OVER-UNITY AND PERPETUAL MOTION
BELLOW IS THE CORRECT WAY TO EVALUATE ANY ELECTRIC GENERATOR:
AN ELECTRIC GENERATOR IS A DEVICE WHICH CONVERTS MECHANICAL POWER (IN A DRIVE SHAFT) INTO ELECTRICAL POWER.
THE INPUT TO THE GENERATOR IS THE MECHANICAL POWER IN THE DRIVE SHAFT WHICH IS EQUAL TO THE TORQUE X THE SPEED.
THE OUTPUT IS THE ELECTRICAL POWER DELIVERED TO THE LOAD.
ALL GENERATORS ARE EVALUATED (EFFICIENCY WISE) BY WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THEY ARE PLACED ON-LOAD NOT BEFORE (DURING NO-LOAD).
FOR EXAMPLE:
THE HYDROELECTRIC GENERATOR ON THE RIVER IN OUR TOWN REQUIRES 500 KW OF MECHANICAL DRIVE SHAFT POWER JUST TO IDLE ON NO-LOAD!
A LARGE WIND TURBINE WOULD BE EVEN WORSE AND REQUIRE EVEN MORE NO-LOAD IDLING ENERGY AND OFTEN THE WIND TURBINE'S GENERATOR IS USED AS A MOTOR TO BRING THE BLADES UP TO SPEED. ALSO OFTEN DONE TO TRICK THE TOWN FOLK WHEN THE WIND IS LOW BUT THE PEOPLE WANT TO SEE THEIR TURBINE TURNING INSTEAD OF SITTING IDLE.
A DIESEL MOTOR WILL POWER A LARGE GENERATOR ON NO-LOAD WITH A LARGE FUEL CONSUMPTION - WITH ZERO POWER IN THE DRIVE SHAFT, ZERO GENERATOR OUTPUT AND ZERO EFFICIENCY.
THE IDLING NO-LOAD MECHANICAL ENERGY REQUIREMENTS ARE NEVER EVER PART OF THE EFFICIENCY CALCULATION. IF THEY WERE MOST GENERATORS WOULD BE LESS THAN 10% EFFICIENT AND THIS IS NOT THE CASE.
IT IS THE ON-LOAD MECHANICAL ENERGY INPUT INCREASE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE IMPORTANT NOT THE NO-LOAD IDLING PRIME MOVER POWER CONSUMPTION.
I.E. A GENERATOR THAT DELIVERS 0.8 WATTS TO THE LOAD WITH A 1 WATT INCREASE IN ON-LOAD MECHANICAL DRIVE SHAFT POWER OVER THE NO-LOAD STARTING POINT IS 80% EFFICIENT - EVEN THOUGH THE NO-LOAD MECHANICAL ENERGY INPUT MAY BE 500 KW AND THE TOTAL INPUT 500,001 WATTS WITH AN OUTPUT OF 0.8 WATTS!
SO IF YOU HAVE A GENERATOR THAT ACCELERATES ON-LOAD ANY LOAD (AND YOU ARE NOT SOMEHOW REDUCING NO-LOAD MECHANICAL LOSSES IN THE PROCESS THEN YOU HAVE OVER-UNITY) CONGRATULATIONS!
SATURATING THE CORE AND REDUCING ROTOR FLUX PENETRATION WOULD BE A FORM OF NO-LOAD LOSS REDUCTION BECAUSE THE HYSTERESIS EFFECTS WOULD BE REDUCED (BUT THE CORE WOULD QUICKLY OVERHEAT AND FAIL)
AS WOULD LEVITATING THE GENERATOR OFF THE BEARINGS OR SUPERCONDUCTING YOUR COILS ETC. WHEN PLACING IT ON-LOAD.
BTW THE NET MECHANICAL INPUT POWER TO ANY GENERATOR AT ANY STEADY STATE SPEED IS 0.00 WATTS BECAUSE THE NET TORQUE WILL ALWAYS BE ZERO AND MECHANICAL INPUT POWER = TORQUE X SPEED.
IF THE SYSTEM ACCELERATES ON-LOAD THEN THE MECHANICAL DRIVE SHAFT POWER INCREASES (OVER THE NO-LOAD STARTING POINT) + THE LOAD POWER ADDED TOGETHER ARE MORE THAN THE NO-LOAD STARTING POINT ... THE GENERATOR IS OVER-UNIY ALTHOUGH NOT PERPETUAL MOTION.
IF YOU CAN DELIVER SUSTAINED POWER TO A LOAD (OR LOADS) WITH A REDUCTION IN NO-LOAD IDLING INPUT POWER REQUIREMENT THEN EVEN BETTER.
ANY GENERATOR THAT CAN DELIVER 1 WATT OF ELECTRICAL POWER WITH ONLY A 1 WATT INCREASE IN MECHANICAL DRIVE SHAFT INPUT POWER INCREASE (OVER THE N0-LOAD STARTING POINT) IS 100% EFFICIENT.
IT GOES UP OR DOWN FROM THERE... NOT HAVING TO INCREASE THE MECHANICAL INPUT WHILE DELIVERING 0.0000000000000000000000000001^N=INFINITY WATTS IS OVER-UNITY.
THE ReGenX GENERATOR DELIVERS 1 WATT OF ELECTRICAL POWER TO ITS LOADS + AN INCREASE IN MECHANICAL OUTPUT WITHOUT AN INCREASE IN DRIVE SHAFT MECHANICAL INPUT POWER AND INCLUDES A REDUCTION IN PRIME MOVER INPUT.
PERPETUAL MOTION IN THIS CASE REQUIRES AN OVER-UNITY GENERATOR CONFIGURATION WHEREBY THE ELECTRICAL OUTPUT EXCEEDS THE ELECTRICAL INPUT POWER AND ALL THE RESISTIVE LOSSES IN THE SYSTEM WHICH IS A TALL ORDER BECAUSE THE RESISTIVE LOSSES INCREASE AS SYSTEM SPEED INCREASES
BUT IT CAN AND HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE AND WILL BE DONE AGAIN.
REGARDS Thane
ps
THE DAY I CREATED A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE AT OTTAWA UNIVERSITY (ATTACHED)
Very well said Thane.
Does this mean that i am going to rule the world ?
All the best,
DC.
Among a ton of words Mr. Thane C. Heins writes:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE 24 COILS ON THE INFINITE RANGE eBIKE PROJECT WILL DELIVER A MINIMUM OF 384 WATTS OR 16 WATTS/COIL. THE BIKE MOTOR WILL CONSUME A MAXIMUM OF 360 WATTS.
ONCE COMPLETE THE INFINITE RANGE eBIKE WILL RUN "FOREVER" AS PLANNED JUST AS WE DID AT OU (OTTAWA U WITH THE BYONX eBIKE).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not a native English speaker but as far as I understand, the alleged OU may be WILL HAPPEN, i.e. may be the case in the future.
Someone will have proven OU once it HAS HAPPENED.
So, lets wait and watch.
The only OU devices I have ever heard of WILL be OU after some improvements. And REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION seems to be in a similar category of OU devices.
It is good to experiment with this effect, but it is pretty unproductive to call it OU without factual proof. Proof by definition (as Mr. Heins attempts) is not very helpful. Words rarely deliver energy, words just deliver a small amount of warm air (in case they are spoken and not written down).
So, let's experiment. Bragging, claiming of rights, name giving and saving of the world should be delayed till proof materialises.
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: DeepCut on March 20, 2013, 08:13:34 AM
synchro i'm having serious doubts about this 'magnet as a core'.
Both of my tube magnets are 0.6 Tesla, even having them sitting four inches apart would make it impossible to spin up the rotor magnet.
You have tried this yourself, haven't you ?
atb,
DC.
I get tired of repeating myself. You need to run the rotor up first past threshold speed, then position the magnet core coil. You've made it much more difficult for me to keep explaining this to you then it would be to try it. I'm tired of your insults. This is my final response to you.
Quote from: conradelektro on March 20, 2013, 08:43:03 AM
Among a ton of words Mr. Thane C. Heins writes:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE 24 COILS ON THE INFINITE RANGE eBIKE PROJECT WILL DELIVER A MINIMUM OF 384 WATTS OR 16 WATTS/COIL. THE BIKE MOTOR WILL CONSUME A MAXIMUM OF 360 WATTS.
ONCE COMPLETE THE INFINITE RANGE eBIKE WILL RUN "FOREVER" AS PLANNED JUST AS WE DID AT OU (OTTAWA U WITH THE BYONX eBIKE).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not a native English speaker but as far as I understand, the alleged OU may be WILL HAPPEN, i.e. may be the case in the future.
Someone will have proven OU once it HAS HAPPENED.
So, lets wait and watch.
The only OU devices I have ever heard of WILL be OU after some improvements. And REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION seems to be in a similar category of OU devices.
It is good to experiment with this effect, but it is pretty unproductive to call it OU without factual proof. Proof by definition (as Mr. Heins attempts) is not very helpful. Words rarely deliver energy, words just deliver a small amount of warm air (in case they are spoken and not written down).
So, let's experiment. Bragging, claiming of rights, name giving and saving of the world should be delayed till proof materialises.
Greetings, Conrad
Well, lets not start a Thane-war, but he has done a lot more than brag, Conrad. I really don't think you're in any position to talk him down.
atb,
DC.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 20, 2013, 08:43:03 AM
I get tired of repeating myself. You need to run the rotor up first past threshold speed, then position the magnet core coil. You've made it much more difficult for me to keep explaining this to you then it would be to try it. I'm tired of your insults. This is my final response to you.
Insults ?
Where was my insult ?
I'm sorry if i don't remember one of the points you made but posting here isn't the only thing i do in my life.
Here's an insult,
Go jump in a lake :)
DC.
Hej Garry, please cool down and relax. MAybe correct your above post till you can edit it.
Thanks, Gyula
Thank you Gyula.
I am beginning to understand why MileHigh is the way he is.
All the best,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on March 20, 2013, 08:37:30 AM
Very well said Thane.
Does this mean that i am going to rule the world ?
All the best,
DC.
YES ABSOLUTELY,
WELL IF YOU CAN ACTUALLY TEACH PEOPLE HOW TO "GO F THEMSELVES" ANYWAY - BUT FORGET ABOUT THE OIL COMPANIES TRYING TO KILL YOU... JUST THINK ABOUT ALL THOSE ANGRY OUT OF WORK PROSTITUTES! :-[
CHEERS
T
PS TO REPEAT (FOR THE "HARD OF LEARNING" :o ):
OVERUNITY IS
NOT THE SAME AS PERPETUAL MOTION
ANYONE WHO CAN CAUSE AN ELECTRIC GENERATOR TO
ACCELERATE ITSELF WHILE DELIVERING POWER TO A LOAD
WITHOUT REQUIRING AN
INCREASE IN PRIME MOVER INPUT AND WHO ISN'T SOMEHOW
REDUCING LOSSES HAS
CREATED AN OVERUNITY DEVICE! ;)
BE PROUD!
@Heinstien,
Have you ever achieved "Regenerative Acceleration" with a diametric tube magnet core Tesla bifilar solenoid output coil?
This thread needs a moderator. Vulgarity is forbidden on this forum. I will volunteer to help enforce standards of common decency.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 20, 2013, 10:49:44 AM
@Heinstien,
Have you ever achieved "Regenerative Acceleration" with a diametric tube magnet core Tesla bifilar solenoid output coil?
This thread needs a moderator. Vulgarity is forbidden on this forum. I will volunteer to help enforce standards of common decency.
I take back and apologise for the insult, but you really should be less touchy.
I had simply forgotten one of the things you told me about your setup, i have had to tell people things more than once before and i don't get touchy about it.
Let's continue in peace.
All the best,
DC.
Quote from Thane Heins:
"SINCE THERE IS NOT A SINGLE CORE MATERIAL ON THE PLANET THAT DOES NOT PRODUCE SOME SORT OF HYSTERESIS EFFECT (MAGNETIC DRAG), AND REMNANT FLUX IN THE CORE REQUIRING ADDITIONAL DRIVE SHAFT COERCIVE FORCE TO EXTRACT IT. (THE COMPANY THAT CREATES ONE WILL RULE THE WORLD BTW)
THE ReGenX GENERATOR OPERATES ON THE VERY SAME PRINCIPLE AS DO ALL GENERATORS I.E. COILS WITH CORES - SO IN THAT SENSE IT IS EXACTLY IDENTICAL TO ANY OTHER GENERATOR ON THE PLANET (THAT HAS CORES).
HYSTERESIS, REMNANT FLUX, AND DRIVE SHAFT COERCIVE FORCE REQUIREMENTS WILL ALL BE DEALT WITH IN THE DESIGN AND MANUFACTURING PROCESS IN A COUPLE OF MONTHS.
So putting a Regen-X system on any motor will just need additional input power, cause your coil rods are dragging the motor down.
WE DON'T USE "RODS" WE USE M3 AND ABOVE FERROMAGNETIC LAMINATIONS TO MINIMIZE CORE HYSTERESIS AS DO ALL GOOD GENERATORS AND MOTORS ON PLANET EARTH".
REPLY:
The diametric magnet core has both a positive and a negative pole of equal strength facing the NS magnet rotor. Unlike any ferrite core, the diametric core cancels out any hystersis from magnetic drag once the rotor's moving!
Quote from Thane Heins:
"SINCE THERE IS NOT A SINGLE CORE MATERIAL ON THE PLANET THAT DOES NOT PRODUCE SOME SORT OF HYSTERESIS EFFECT".
REPLY:
The dametric magnet core neutralizes the "Drag Hysteresis" effect completely.
The magnet core output coils could be charged to suppress the PM core fields to facilitate starting!
I will attempt to confirm what synchro is saying when the parts arrive.
All the best,
DC.
Hi DeepCut,
QuoteI've never used processing, but that's what my arduino's language is based on i think ?
It's pretty much the same, just added graphical abilities and more system functions.
QuoteHow are things with you, what are you dreaming/thinking/building ?
Busy but still building, I have an image of recent builds but don't want to clutter this thread.
Looking forward to your build.
Hi Alvaro_CS,
Is there a difference between pancake wound coils and rectangular pound cake style coils?
Hi DreamThinkBuild
I think there should be no difference as for the current path is reffered, but I have a lot of steel laminations from an old trafo I can use as core before trying the diam. magnet, so I can experiment with relationships between area facing rotor, coil area and also volumes (masses related to flux densities & rpm, etc.)
In an intuitive way, I think that this physical aspects are related to harmony laws. The golden mean is just a tool (guide) to order things when I build.
Many times one has a wide range of aleatory choices and I always give preference to this proportions.
may be I´m nuts
cheers
Quote from: ALVARO_CS on March 20, 2013, 01:18:48 PM
Hi DreamThinkBuild
I think there should be no difference as for the current path is reffered, but I have a lot of steel laminations from an old trafo I can use as core before trying the diam. magnet, so I can experiment with relationships between area facing rotor, coil area and also volumes (masses related to flux densities & rpm, etc.)
In an intuitive way, I think that this physical aspects are related to harmony laws. The golden mean is just a tool (guide) to order things when I build.
Many times one has a wide range of aleatory choices and I always give preference to this proportions.
may be I´m nuts
cheers
Random choices can lead to amazing outcomes :)
If the golden mean is good enough for artists and architects then it's good enough for us.
atb,
DC.
Hi Thane,
in your PDF file you wrote:
The DC power supply input to the BIONYX motor was
set at 20 Volts and 3.91 Amps or 78.2 Watts.
Bike Input Power = 78.2 Watts
ReGenX Output Power = 84 Watts**
** The bike motor input was 78.2 Watts and the
ReGenX power delivered to the purely resistive light
bulb loads was 84 Watts. This output power number
was actually higher than that because I had to use a
step down transformer for the generator coils which
consumed about 15% of the generator output power -
so the actual output was about 100 Watts or so.
=====================================
So why didn´t you just film this and have it as a proof for us all to see ?
Didn´t you have a camera with you or couldn´t you just use your cell phone to
record this most important OU event ?
Hope you can soon show it again.
Regards, Stefan.
Thane's latest "Infinite Range Ebike" project video:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/indexen.htm#eBIKE (http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/indexen.htm#eBIKE)
Quote from: THANE HEINS on March 20, 2013, 08:10:38 AM
THE 24 COILS ON THE INFINITE RANGE eBIKE PROJECT WILL DELIVER A MINIMUM OF 384 WATTS OR 16 WATTS/COIL. THE BIKE MOTOR WILL CONSUME A MAXIMUM OF 360 WATTS.
ts
ONCE COMPLETE THE INFINITE RANGE eBIKE WILL RUN "FOREVER" AS PLANNED JUST AS WE DID AT OU (OTTAWA U WITH THE BYONX eBIKE).
I don't understnd the logic in the above statement. Input power to the motor is 360 watts. Total output is 384 watts @ 16 watts/coil. Which means from the out put of 384 Watts if you feed 360 watts back to the motor, you will be left with just 24 watts of useful power output to run your bike. Will your bike run with just 24 Watts?
Is it a toy bike?
As for I know a 100CC bike produces a power output of 7 to 8 BHP which is around 5 to 6 Kilo Watts to pull two persons sitting on it.
With 24 watts output you can make a toy bike to pull a rat sitting on it. Am I right?
Quote from: Newton II on March 20, 2013, 11:49:29 PM
I don't understnd the logic in the above statement. Input power to the motor is 360 watts. Total output is 384 watts @ 16 watts/coil. Which means from the out put of 384 Watts if you feed 360 watts back to the motor, you will be left with just 24 watts of useful power output to run your bike. Will your bike run with just 24 Watts?
Is it a toy bike?
As for I know a 100CC bike produces a power output of 7 to 8 BHP which is around 5 to 6 Kilo Watts to pull two persons sitting on it.
With 24 watts output you can make a toy bike to pull a rat sitting on it. Am I right?
Yes, you're absolutely right. Apart from the rat bit.
I think the plan is to miniaturise anyone who wants to ride on the bike.
Seriously though, i think you've misread the statement.
If you read the part of the statement that you quoted, it says the 'bike motor', not 'the motor'.
atb,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on March 21, 2013, 07:28:10 AM
If you read the part of the statement that you quoted, it says the 'bike motor', not 'the motor'.
DC.
Thanks DC for correcting me. Does it mean that the 24 coils produce 384 watts without taking any power input? In that case the inventor deserves Nobel Prize?
If not what is the input power required to produce 384 watts?
Newton II,
Thane's "Regenerative Motor Alternator" generates power while under load. The battery's charging while the bike is powered by the 360 watts. This means that you return from the trip with 24 more watts then you left with, after powering the bike for eight hours with the entire 360 watts! That's merely 1/2 a horsepower, but plenty to sail along at average road speed on a flat course. The system only self charges while under load!
They'll be no Nobel Prize for Thane Heins, primarily because the speed up effect of high impedance output coils on magnet rotors was a well established effect, observed by numerous experimenters, long before Thane ever got involved with it. Everyone went up the same tree with it that Thane's perched in with his complaint of 3 laboratory ransackings. All Thane's regenerative patents are practically worthless because the effect is too ordinary and well documented going all the way back to Nicola Tesla; Like trying to patent a new food dehydrator! Thane won't address my magnet core discovery, because it's too simple, and sends all his proprietary work to a trash dumpster. The magnet core allows for overunity with a mere fraction of Thane's bulky copper wire coil wraps. I've been sedate about the discovery to not rock Thane's boat, but I'm forcing it out now!
Quote from: Newton II on March 21, 2013, 08:58:50 AM
Thanks DC for correcting me. Does it mean that the 24 coils produce 384 watts without taking any power input? In that case the inventor deserves Nobel Prize?
If not what is the input power required to produce 384 watts?
You could spend time asking lots of questions and i could spend time answering them
OR
You could watch the videos and read the documents, i've started a detailed thread about it over here :
http://www.overunity.com/13398/pdi-regenerative-acceleration-and-bitt-principles/msg355247/#msg355247
Thane will pop in to answer questions as and when he can, too.
It's a very interesting effect, i have been studying it for a while now and it just gets more and more interesting.
Some people cry "impedance matching" or "reactive power", but it's neither.
It violates the work-energy principle completely.
I hope you enjoy learning about it as much as i did and am :)
All the best,
DC.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 21, 2013, 09:03:37 AM
snip...
All Thane's regenerative patents are practically worthless because the effect is too ordinary and well documented going all the way back to Nicola Tesla; Like trying to patent a new food dehydrator! Thane won't address my magnet core discovery, because it's too simple, and sends all his proprietary work to a trash dumpster. The magnet core allows for overunity with a mere fraction of Thane's bulky copper wire coil wraps. I've been sedate about the discovery to not rock Thane's boat, but I'm forcing it out now!
Thanes boat was leaky and sinking from the start, so rocking it won't make any difference, but have I missed something ?
Have you already posted some details of your own setup here on o/uCom ?
Do you have any links to information regarding your setup ? Any chance of you providing a bit more info ?
Always curious..
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on March 22, 2013, 01:07:58 AM
Perhaps I've missed something. Have you posted any details of your setup here on o/uCom ?
Perhaps you have links to information regarding your setup ? Any chance of you providing a bit more info ?
Always curious..
Cheers
@Hoptoad,
I uploaded stills of the PVC coupling a few comments back on this thread. The most important feature is the tiny precision ceramic bearing. This bearing permits me to accelerate the 3/8" tube magnet over 25k r.p.m. just with a 12 volt reed switch in series with a 12 volt battery and a series wired bifilar thread spool power coil pushed through a small hole in the top of the CD in the picture. It would be meaningless for me to video tape it, because there's nothing more to see when it's running. This protects against high speed magnet fragmentation.
The spinner bursts into a sudden acceleration that doubles it's speed to 50k r.p.m. in a matter of seconds, and amp draw drops to zero.This is way over the switching speed of the Reed switch! What's going on? I have a few theories: One is there's a high voltage back spike opening the switch. The power coil is so super saturated with flux at top end, it can no longer accept any input current.
The magnet core Lenz propulsion Tesla bifilar output coil seats in the base, so it's entirely enclosed when it's running. Now, wired to a rectifier, and looped back to the source battery, the charging is phenomenal!. The power coil dosen't consume any amperage at top end, so the Lenz free output coil has no current to fight looped back to the power source. This is an important point.
Skycollection's six pancake coils may work as well packed into the base of the PVC coupling. I plan to try and compare them to the magnet core type when I return home from Costa Rica. This very simple unit is lazy 8 OU. I've been raving about it for over five years now. It dosen't even have a circuit, it's so incredibly simple! Both the power coil and the output coil benifit from the Lenz retardation due to the super fantastic speeds the ceramic bearings permit.
Take a look at Thane Heins's bulky lumbering test bench contraption with the large electric motor etc. It's a mistake to slow the rotor down by applying tourque to the drive shaft. Strictly a motor alternator, this design can power a seperate DC motor from the battery.
The ceramic bearing's visable in the center of the bottem picture. The output coil's not in this picture, but I can post one if you want. It's equally unimpressive. It just pokes up through another pair of CD's on the bottem, and is barely visable when running.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 22, 2013, 01:39:39 AM
snip...
The magnet core Lenz propulsion Tesla bifilar output coil seats in the base, so it's entirely enclosed when it's running.
snip..
The output coil's not in this picture, but I can post one if you want.
Thanks for the info and quick response. Indeed, it is a very simple circuit to build and try. And I will build and try it myself. I'll have to order a diametric magnet, I've already looked on the net and they're not expensive and seem easy enough to source.
The only thing I'm not sure about is your description of the output coil. Is it coreless or does it have a metal / ferro or magnet core ??
A fuller description of the output coil would be great.
Cheers and KneeDeep
Quote from: hoptoad on March 22, 2013, 03:49:02 AM
Thanks for the info and quick response. Indeed, it is a very simple circuit to build and try. And I will build and try it myself. I'll have to order a diametric magnet, I've already looked on the net and they're not expensive and seem easy enough to source.
The only thing I'm not sure about is your description of the output coil. Is it coreless or does it have a metal / ferro or magnet core ??
A fuller description of the output coil would be great.
Cheers and KneeDeep
Please work back through the last few pages of this thread. I discussed this at great length with Deepcut.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 22, 2013, 03:58:25 AM
Please work back through the last few pages of this thread. I discussed this at great length with Deepcut.
Revision done. Thanks for the info.
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on March 22, 2013, 04:07:51 AM
Revision done. Thanks for the info.
Cheers
The bearings are very expensive. Here's the website for them. This build looks simple, but attaching the bearings requires patience and craftmanship. I'll help guide you through it. The bearings are absloutly essential to getting the OU results! There's nothing to the output coil. Just a Radio Shack magnet wire spool, wraped full bifilar with green wire, and two 1/2" diametric neo tubes fit snug end to end in the hollow 1/2" diameter plastic spindle core. The power coil is thread spool air core, red wire bifilar. I finished up with a 1/8" carbon fiber rod axel in the end because some light sanding's required to fit the bearings right. The OD of the bearings, of course is 1/4", the same as the ID of the magnet tube hole. Glue is a bad way to fasten them. The Neo tube magnet spinner will rotate seemingly forever with a tiny induced motion, once set in position on those perfect bearings. It spins much faster then Skycollection's levitating bearing design. A bearingless Neo Sphere would accelerate to mach 3 or 4 and disintigrate like Pirate Twinbeard's without the bearing friction to retard the speed up.
http://www.bocabearings.com/ (http://www.bocabearings.com/)
Quote from: synchro1 on March 22, 2013, 04:21:44 AM
The bearings are very expensive. Here's the website for them. This build looks simple, but attaching the bearings requires patience and craftmanship. I'll help guide you through it. The bearings are absloutly essential to getting the OU results! There's nothing to the output coil. Just a Radio Shack magnet wire spool, wraped full bifilar with green wire, and two 1/2" dametric neo tubes fit snug in the hollow 1/2" core.
http://www.bocabearings.com/ (http://www.bocabearings.com/)
Cheers, its nice to try something different. I have seen similar builds to yours, but not with the diamagnetic rotor and diamagnetic inserts inside the output coil. Sourcing a few things will take me a little time (I'm slow - LOL) , but I'll make the effort and investigate the configuration you've explained.
One thing I'd like to mention. When direct switching with reed switches, use analogue meters to take run time measurements, if possible, not digital meters. Analogue meters aren't affected by RF interference.
Before, and after run measurements, with DSO's are fine, but the actual sparks produced in the reed switch during run time produce high frequency radio waves that play havoc with most DSM's and DSO's sampling / accuracy.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 22, 2013, 04:21:44 AM
The bearings are very expensive. Here's the website for them.
snip...
http://www.bocabearings.com/ (http://www.bocabearings.com/)
Whew, they are expensive! I'll have to get my wife to shop the net for me. She can hunt down a bargain like a hound after a fox!
Thanks again for the info. The most appealing thing about your setup is that it complies with the K.I.S.S. principle.
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on March 22, 2013, 04:50:42 AM
Whew, they are expensive! I'll have to get my wife to shop the net for me. She can hunt down a bargain like a hound after a fox!
Thanks again for the info. The most appealing thing about your setup is that it complies with the K.I.S.S. principle.
Cheers
If you go to kjmagnetics.com and type diametric in the search box, unfortunately the results page is also full of axially magnetised magnets but just search within the results page (CTRL+F) to find diametric ones like this :
http://www.kjmagnetics.com/proddetail.asp?prod=RX04X0 (http://www.kjmagnetics.com/proddetail.asp?prod=RX04X0)
atb,
DC.
Let's discuss drive circuits. Somehow the rotor has to be driven, then one can try various Tesla style pancake coils or "coils with a diametrically magnetised core à la synchro1" for energy harvesting (hopefully without the Lenz effect):
1) The most simple way is to drive a rotor (having the N S N S magnets for energy generation) with a separate motor, e.g. a DC motor. Jean Louis Naudin uses a brushless motor with a special drive circuit http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE07.htm .
2) An other simple way is to use a reed switch to turn on and off one or several drive coils. It has been suggested by synchro1 to use a "bifilar series solenoid style drive coil". I do not like reed switches because they are not good for high frequency switching and do not last long.
3) I tend towards a drive circuit (driving one or several drive coils) based on a transistor and a sensor coil. Both drive coil and sensor coil could be "bifilar series solenoid style". See my Reply #717 at http://www.overunity.com/11350/confirming-the-delayed-lenz-effect/705/#.UU2YpFfovbE. It is not clear whether that circuit will work with N S N S magnets on the rotor.
4) One could use a hall sensor and a transistor to drive the rotor with a drive coil. Again it is not clear how to do that with N S N S magnets on a rotor.
May be experimenters could publish their drive circuits and arrangements.
@DeepCut: how do you drive the rotor (one magnet spinner) in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj9GJ-BlfiM ? May be you have no objection to publish the circuit (schematics and component specifications).
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: conradelektro on March 23, 2013, 08:12:09 AM
...
@DeepCut: how do you drive the rotor (one magnet spinner) in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj9GJ-BlfiM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj9GJ-BlfiM) ? May be you have no objection to publish the circuit (schematics and component specifications).
Greetings, Conrad
I use your option 3 in that setup.
It's the basic inductor circuit used by Adams then Bedini, the sensor or trigger wire is on the same coil-former as the driving/pulsing wire.
Mine isn't particularly efficient, using 7-8 watts to drive that very light, single-magnet rotor, but the rotor can get up to 40,000 RPM depending on the choice of resistor and has generated in excess of 1 kilovolt at 3 or 4 mA in an inductor made of two pounds of wire.
For heavier rotors i use a high quality DC motor from an Audi A8 pump massage system.
All the best,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on March 23, 2013, 08:24:21 AM
I use your option 3 in that setup.
It's the basic inductor circuit used by Adams then Bedini, the sensor or trigger wire is on the same coil-former as the driving/pulsing wire.
Mine isn't particularly efficient, using 7-8 watts to drive that very light, single-magnet rotor, but the rotor can get up to 40,000 RPM depending on the choice of resistor and has generated in excess of 1 kilovolt at 3 or 4 mA in an inductor made of two pounds of wire.
..........
All the best, DC.
In option 3 I forgot to mention the Adams or Bedini circuit, which was of course the starting point for the circuit I showed.
I like a separate trigger coil (in contrast to winding the trigger coil onto a drive coil) because the separate trigger coil can be placed at a sweet spot. One can place it at a certain distance from the passing magnet(s) and also slightly offset from the theoretically demanded position to influence the moment it triggers the transistor (driving the drive coil or coils).
I have seen ball magnets driven by the Bedini circuit (or a close variant of it), but I wonder why it works. Only one magnet pole should trigger the drive coil in the correct way. What happens when the other magnet pole passes the trigger/drive coil is a riddle to me?
I attach a drawing depicting the "drive problem" when using a Bedini style drive circuit and N S N S facing magnets on a rotor.
But as I said, it seems to work with a single ball magnet and a single diametrically magnetised ring or tube magnet. But I doubt a Bedini style circuit will work with a rotor having magnets along its circumference with alternating poles N S N S.
I will make some tests, but it has to wait a few weeks.
Greetings, Conrad
Yes, i'm familiar with the problem.
When i use an inductive drive coil on a N/S rotor it works but only at just over half the speed of the same rotor with the magnets turned N/N.
I'm also surprised there is any rotation, perhaps the flywheel effect is to account for it, the mass/velocity of the rotor overcomes the opposing pole ?
All the best,
DC.
Hi synchro1, DeepCut and everyone,
Looks like much activity ::) has been going on here.
I was away for a few days driving from Florida back to Canada.
I just now ordered 2 Diametric cylinder Neo magnets: http://www.ebay.com/itm/120743166252?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/120743166252?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649) to confirm synchro1's findings. However, now that I'm in Canada the delivery will take some time since the magnets come from the US. If I was still there, I would of received them in 2 to 3 days.
Looking forward to testing synchro1's findings
Thank you for sharing
Luc
Hi Luc, must be nice to be home again :)
My acrylic tube has arrived so i will be testing a magnet as a core as well.
Sync says that the generator magnet must be spun up to full speed in order to negate it's attraction to the core magnet, i do this using a typical Adams/Bedini drive coil.
With a very light shaft (carbon fibre) and miniature, flanged bearings, my magnet spins at up to 40,000RPM with an input of around 7-8 watts.
Looking forward to sharing results/observations,
DC.
Photo of the two magnets :
http://s1274.photobucket.com/user/deepcut71/media/DSC02949_zps3fd92aeb.jpg.html (http://s1274.photobucket.com/user/deepcut71/media/DSC02949_zps3fd92aeb.jpg.html)
e2a : the bright light on the lower magnet is the laser tach reflective paper.
Cheers,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on March 23, 2013, 02:20:34 PM
Hi Luc, must be nice to be home again :)
My acrylic tube has arrived so i will be testing a magnet as a core as well.
Sync says that the generator magnet must be spun up to full speed in order to negate it's attraction to the core magnet, i do this using a typical Adams/Bedini drive coil.
With a very light shaft (carbon fibre) and miniature, flanged bearings, my magnet spins at up to 40,000RPM with an input of around 7-8 watts.
Looking forward to sharing results/observations,
DC.
Thanks for the reply and update DC
It's nice to be back but it's still winter here. Looking forward to the warmer weather to come so I can build my houseboat (home).
At up to 40k rpm you should have no problem finding the ideal rpm! (if needed) but If I remember Sync said you have to get the position or distance correct for it to work right. I'm sure he will be around to help if needed.
Looking forward to your results
Thanks for sharing
Luc
@Luc
A discussion we have going on BiTT/ReGenX, just in case you missed it :
http://www.overunity.com/13398/pdi-regenerative-acceleration-and-bitt-principles/#.UU8d_zcpXNE
atb,
DC.
Thanks DC
I'm just going to watch the show 8) for now!
Luc
My diametric magnet core ran the full length of the solinoid coil from end to end. I had up to 8 magnets end to end in my Cook Battery. The coil should not be longer then the magnet core. Working with only one 1" magnet, the coil should not exceed 1" in length.
I wonder if skycollection preparing a better video, Yet his last were good.
Quote from: PiCéd on March 24, 2013, 04:28:01 PM
I wonder if skycollection preparing a better video, Yet his last were good.
skycollection got most of the information he needed from other people.
now he acts like it is his secret and prints 'copyright' everywhere.
you won't get any help from him.
atb,
DC.
Skycollection:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9ZwqRpO-1U (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9ZwqRpO-1U)
November 6, 2010 quote from Synchro; Pancake Power and Pickup:
"This pancaker really packs a wallop for economy of size. The output's very strong too, about 9 volts coming from this puppy".
This 2" neo sphere, runs from 7:19 to 7:21; 12 solid minutes of self loop coasting. It will run forever the same way. These are the same Tesla wrap type coils as Skycollection's with a twist. I narrate this video, me, "Synchro" from "Jersey Shore".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FB3INab_0WI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FB3INab_0WI)
I light a 120v ac LED to 80 lumans directly off the charge current in another video. This is the amount I'm OU, the bemf from the power coil! A pair of Lenzless pancake lids like Skycollection's, on each end would raise the COP even more!
The 1/2" neo sphere in this video, is levitating inside a PVC coupling at super velocity, self looped and charging it's own run battery:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asTs_iuUbuM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asTs_iuUbuM)
Running Skycollection' output back in to the power coils would speed the rotor up. Imagine a 2" neo sphere that was ceramic coated, machined and balanced perfectly sphereical in a vacuum chamber. The neo sphere would act as a flywheel battery. Mach speeds could be reached. Then the power coils could be reversed, and KW's of power could be harvested from the stored inertia.
Not turning all the power coils off, but just a few, enough to coast the rotor in Mach range would deliver Kilowatts of output!! The spiral coil would levitate the rotor sphere at some point, and eliminate all friction. Pancake coil earmuffs would power Star Ships, Submarines, Aquafarm Cities etc. Feedback power amplification Time to pop the corks! Thanks everybody!
Quote from: synchro1 on March 24, 2013, 11:25:32 PM
Running Skycollection' output back in to the power coils would speed the rotor up. Imagine a 2" neo sphere that was ceramic coated, machined and balanced perfectly sphereical in a vacuum chamber. The neo sphere would act as a flywheel battery. Mach speeds could be reached. Then the power coils could be reversed, and KW's of power could be harvested from the stored inertia.
Not turning all the power coils off, but just a few, enough to coast the rotor in Mach range would deliver Kilowatts of output!! The spiral coil would levitate the rotor sphere at some point, and eliminate all friction. Pancake coil earmuffs would power Star Ships, Submarines, Aquafarm Cities etc. Time to pop the corks! Thanks everybody!
Hi synchro1,
Your setup was shot nov. 2010, did you let it run nonstop in loop mode? Is it running until now?
Regards
Cc
@crazycut06,
I didn't realize I could light the 120 volt ac LED directly off the output wires. I would have kept the 1/2 inch ball in the PVC coupling running because the sphere was levitating. steady and silent. 80 Lumans has a candle like warmpth.
The feedback power amplification texhnique was used by Pirate Twinbeard. That's how he reached those mach 3 speeds. The dual nature of the pancakes, one as power, the other as inductor allows us to add one to the other The power would be multiplyied thousands of times at mach 3. Any tiny discrepecy in COP is overshadowed when we close the Feedback Power Loop from the side pancakes.
I can't get synchro's setup to work.
I'm thinking perhaps it's because the magnets i am using are more powerful than synchro's.
My magnets are 0.6 Tesla.
I spun up the rotor magnet to 32,000 RPM (i think my bearing plate is a bit tight so not getting 40KRPM) before approaching it with the coil with the magnet as a core.
The attraction between two 0.6 Tesla magnets is very strong, perhaps this is the reason it's not working for me.
Perhaps Luc or Hoptoad will have better luck with weaker magnets.
All the best,
DC.
I described "two" diametric magnets coupled end to end, not one. They pull the field away from the ends when they're cojoined.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 24, 2013, 04:05:37 PM
My diametric magnet core ran the full length of the solinoid coil from end to end. I had up to 8 magnets end to end in my Cook Battery. The coil should not be longer then the magnet core. Working with only one 1" magnet, the coil should not exceed 1" in length.
Thank you sync for confirming that
Luc
Hi everyone,
these videos maybe of interest: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKGeWbaD3Lk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKGeWbaD3Lk)
ADDED: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tA4yXevToQc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tA4yXevToQc)
ADDED: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSDSY_DSdNQ
Luc
Skycollection:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8i0II360zos (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8i0II360zos)
The Lynx Joule Motor is an extrodinary output feedback invention. I'll embed the video link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gWZchP8-Hk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gWZchP8-Hk)
A NS magnet rotor between too loop coils. Identical to my twin spiral knot coils and neo sphere. Pirate Twinbeard, a solinoid output coil over a starship power coil.
Lynxstream feeds the power coil bemf to his secondary. The outpot from my spiral pickup coil is looped back to source. The output could be stored in a charge battery, or fed back to the power coil to accelerate and store it in the rotor acting as a flywheel battery, right? Does anyone have any idea how this might be done? What kind of a circuit would be needed? Would a second circuit be needed to synchronize the pulses, or could it tie into the first one? Does any one know of anyone else who's into this area of research?
The input is pulsed dc and output ac. It has to go through a rectifer and join with the dc input pulse. The problem is that the circuit would have to deal with a steadily increasing charge from the output coil. We could start to turn up a large bank of lightbulbs, off the increased, output to protect the transistor, I suppose? Simply running the rectified output through a single reed switch in series with the battery would work. Rectifier, Hall effect transistor mosfet or relay and a diode from the hot side of the power source and a potentiometer would probably work to start. This would work on any two coil power pickup system.
This feedback topic may require a new thread.
Hello,
His engine does not accelerate when he aproach pancake. Maybe with more magnets in N-S-N-S...
skycollections latest:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RXviyoEqd_s#!
Looks like "Potenial difference Inc". has a new guy on the block! I'm utterly flabergasted by that last video of Jorge's. Ole! Imagine what those coils would generate in adjacency to my 2" neo free wheeling spinner!
I wrote and advised Skycollection to turn his pick coils on their side so he can spin the neo sphere on it's axis. There's not much left for anyone to add. Happy Galactic New Year, there really is a Santa Claus!
Quote from: synchro1 on March 26, 2013, 11:41:46 AM
I'm utterly flabergasted by that last video of Jorge's. Ole! There's nothing left for anyone to add. Happy Galactic New Year, there really is a Santa Claus!
Seriously synchro!!!... you find that video impressive :-\
Q1: Do you think he came up with it?
Q2: Do you think the Neo ball magnet induces current in the coils below it?
A1: No, he did not come up with this idea.
A2: No, the coils below the neo magnet are induced by the 800ma current sent to the top coil to turn the ball magnet. Just see what happens when he turns off the power supply at the end of the video. All the coils instantly stop producing output.
I would be embarrassed to post such a video.
You want impressive, why did you not comment on the video I posted above with the neo ball magnet that keeps spinning when the power is shut off and even if he carries it 8 feet away from the coil: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tA4yXevToQc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tA4yXevToQc)
I don't know what to think now ???
I hope you will help DeepCut get the effect you are so sure of!
Luc
@Gotoluc,
I don't doubt Skycollection pirated all his best ideas! How come the LED'S don't light up at the beginning of the video untill after he starts the ball spinning, during the time the powers on while he fiititzels with the spinner ?
He's calling his "Stack of Pancakes" "Starship" now. You don't know if they're series or parallel and alternately or same face?
Quote from: synchro1 on March 26, 2013, 12:43:47 PM
@Gotoluc,
How come the LED'S don't light up at the beginning of the video untill after he starts the ball spinning?
Because the hall effect does not switch on the current from the power supply until it senses a pole shift from a turning magnet
Luc
@ Luc
The Rodin coil spinner impressed me with the extent of the field.
The guy with the copper ball, surely he is spinning the ball parallel to the field therefore no eddy currents ?
His second part with the 2L bottle was just air and water interacting as they normally do.
I'm not sure what point he was trying to make in the next video ?
I won't be spending money on another magnet to investigate synchros claims, i'm focusing on my attempt at a self-runner.
All the best,
DC.
Deepcut,
You won't be disappointed in your results. The copper ball reminds me; You have to turn the magnet core a little to get the 90 degree alignment.
Quote from: gotoluc on March 26, 2013, 12:49:21 PM
Because the hall effect does not switch on the current from the power supply until it senses a pole shift from a turning magnet
Luc
Placing those cans on their side, and running the input leads back away from the pick up coils should eliminate any induction from the circuit, right?
Quote from: DeepCut on March 26, 2013, 12:49:22 PM
The guy with the copper ball, surely he is spinning the ball parallel to the field therefore no eddy currents ?
Yes, possibly that could of happened but he would have to line it up to get it right, no?
Quote from: DeepCut on March 26, 2013, 12:49:22 PM
His second part with the 2L bottle was just air and water interacting as they normally do.
Ya, I don't know about that one.
Quote from: DeepCut on March 26, 2013, 12:49:22 PM
I'm not sure what point he was trying to make in the next video ?
It looks to me to be close to a self runner when he turns the copper ball one direction compared to the other direction. Do you not see that?
Quote from: DeepCut on March 26, 2013, 12:49:22 PM
I won't be spending money on another magnet to investigate synchros claims, i'm focusing on my attempt at a self-runner.
All the best to you on that and please keep us posted of any result to help others better understand what works or not.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 26, 2013, 01:09:54 PM
...
It looks to me to be close to a self runner when he turns the copper ball one direction compared to the other direction. Do you not see that?
...
I see it decelerate, as you'd expect.
atb,
DC.
but yes it's interesting that it performs better in one direction, i'm sure there's a good explanation for that.
This is a favourite of mine :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E97CYWlALEs
atb,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on March 26, 2013, 01:16:31 PM
I see it decelerate, as you'd expect.
atb,
DC.
Well, from viewing the video in Canada ;) I see a big difference in deceleration time when he spins it CW vs ACW
Just thought that was interesting!... it's fine, we don't have to all agree
Luc
Quote from: synchro1 on March 26, 2013, 12:59:36 PM
Placing those cans on their side, and running the input leads back away from the pick up coils should eliminate any induction from the circuit, right?
Placing the inductors on their side would definitely change things.
Luc
@ Luc
we do agree :)
it has negligible eddy currents in one direction and normal eddy currents in the other.
i'm googling away, trying to find an explanation.
atb,
DC.
Skycollection should try stacking the pancakes over his bearing spinner one at a time, and look for any change in input.
LOL !
I'm getting loads of PM's now because of my post on skycollection's vid.
Maybe we should do a document so that all the info for a simple, first AUL device is in one place.
Many minds may bring new ideas.
atb,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on March 26, 2013, 01:39:46 PM
@ Luc
we do agree :)
it has negligible eddy currents in one direction and normal eddy currents in the other.
i'm googling away, trying to find an explanation.
atb,
DC.
I'm wondering if it would do the opposite if he was in the opposite polar hemisphere?
Doesn't a drain water vortex change direction depending in which polar hemisphere you are in? ... if so, why would water be affected by a magnetic pole position? ... eddy's are also in water.
Interesting stuff
Luc
This video of skycollection's reveals the construction secret he now maintains is proprietary: The coils face the same way and are wired in parallel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jf0DTLVclZI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jf0DTLVclZI)
@Luc
The water down the drain thing is a myth, the spin direction depends on initial conditions and even a minute difference in force affects the outcome.
atb,
DC.
The last test of J.L.N:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE19en.htm
In fact, the distance into the coil and the magnet is important to have the delayed Lenz.
The copper ball and neo ball expermient showing negligible eddy currents in one direction should be done on a more stringent testbed.
Hand-spinning the magnet, we're not even sure which way it's rotating in reference to its own axis.
Intriguing though, maybe there's some unusual property of spherical copper ?
I'll try a similar experiment with my single-magnet diametric setup and a large, coppper coil.
Unfortunately i don't have a copper ball or even a large mass of copper.
I must message him to find out if the ball is solid or hollow.
atb,
DC.
Quote from: PiCéd on March 26, 2013, 02:03:59 PM
The last test of J.L.N:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE19en.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE19en.htm)
In fact, the distance into the coil and the magnet is important to have the delayed Lenz.
No, JLN was only showing that, in a normal generator, increasing the distance resulted in acceleration and decreased current input when on-load.
All you have to do to get delayed Lenz is wind a high-inductance coil, a coil of many turns. It doesn't even have to be bifilar.
Check this good tutorial from OverUnityGuide :
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4CUJ-q-dXiRjiUaoaM_ReAtmGyM2Ic1q
All the best,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on March 26, 2013, 02:00:18 PM
@Luc
The water down the drain thing is a myth, the spin direction depends on initial conditions and even a minute difference in force affects the outcome.
atb,
DC.
I agree, The drain vortex direction may have been exaggerated but they have measured a difference in a controlled lab environment.
However, when it comes to Meteorology Wikipedia says this:
"High pressure systems rotate in a direction such that the Coriolis force will be directed radially inwards, and nearly balanced by the outwardly radial pressure gradient. This direction is clockwise in the northern hemisphere and counter-clockwise in the southern hemisphere. Low pressure systems rotate in the opposite direction, so that the Coriolis force is directed radially outward and nearly balances an inwardly radial pressure gradient. In each case a slight imbalance between the Coriolis force and the pressure gradient accounts for the radially inward acceleration of the system's circular motion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_motion)."
Luc
Quote from: DeepCut on March 26, 2013, 01:51:13 PM
LOL !
I'm getting loads of PM's now because of my post on skycollection's vid.
Maybe we should do a document so that all the info for a simple, first AUL device is in one place.
Many minds may bring new ideas.
atb,
DC.
Sounds like a goo idea!... any volunteers?
Luc
Jorge replied to my youtube inquiry, and that he got "bad results" stacking the pancakes over the levitating bearing spinner. That leaves the magnet core for spare chute. Plus, I agree with the Coriolus theory!
I'll do it, i work from home so i have very long lunch hours ;+}
How's this for a rough framework, in order of complexity ?
0. Show that a standard coil exhibits drag.
1. Increasing the time constant by increasing the inductance with a high number of turns.
2. Using a bifilar/trifilar/quadfilar winding to increase the parasitic capacitance.
3. Connecting individual bifilar-wound, serially-connected coil-sections in parallel to increase current and hence the effect.
4. Wind a coil that has virtually no effect on rotor speed or input current (this is as far as i've got, with a coil that reduced frequency by ~4ms and increased input current by ~5mA).
5. Wind a coil that overspeeds the rotor by a small amount (i should have that done this weekend if my coil-former parts arrive in time).
6. Wind a coil that overspeeds the rotor and cuts down on input current by a sizeable percentage.
7. Wind enough coils to drop input current to zero.
8. Connect those coils (in parallel ?), step-down the output and selfrun the device (yes please !).
Thoughts/comments ?
atb,
DC.
My last comment to Skycollection:
Dear Jorge, the levitating bearing spinner must be below the "Lenz delay" threshold rpm compared to the VCR multi magnet north south frequency speed.
40mm solid 'native' copper spheres for £8 on UK ebay :
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/160981417997
atb,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on March 26, 2013, 03:29:01 PM
40mm solid 'native' copper spheres for £8 on UK ebay :
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/160981417997 (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/160981417997)
atb,
DC.
Viewing it from Canada it says 2.9 cms in diameter ;D
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 26, 2013, 04:06:40 PM
Viewing it from Canada it says 2.9 cms in diameter ;D
Luc
Oops, my fault !
I linked the wrong ones, here's the right one :
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/NATURAL-pure-COPPER-BALL-SPHERE-40mm-300g-Healing-Arthritis-Gout-/290852694804?pt=UK_Collectables_RocksFossils_Minerals_EH&hash=item43b82beb14
atb,
DC.
Skycollection sent me this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNTYq6ciGH8&list=FLWqI0GXGprm81g3gkVa5v_w (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNTYq6ciGH8&list=FLWqI0GXGprm81g3gkVa5v_w)
Synchro1
I planned to wind such coils tomorrow, but you are advanced, so I`ll wait for your news here.
Waiting with expectation
thanks for sharing
Alvaro
Alvaro_CS,
Counter wound, serial connected. I'd be willing to bet money that any tesla wraped bifilar air core spindle pickup coil would react the same way past threshold r.p.m., same gauge and wire length. The Tesla solinoid coil already has zero self capacitance. Skycollection apparantly tries to double the effect, but if you think about it you can see that the counter wound spirals merely neutralizes the effect back to zero by running current backwards against itsef another time.
Some observations about that Skycollection video:amazing induction
I think that fed with 9.96 W pulsed or linear a lot more leds may be used at full light .
(considering many led lamps are rated 220V 2W or less each)
I may be wrong
cheers
sky isn't performing 'amazing induction', it's simply 'induction'.
Alvaro, if you want to see this effect for yourself there is a very easy way to begin.
1. Get a pound of copper wire, say 0.3mm in diameter.
2. Unwind half of the wire onto a second spool and cut.
3. Now wind both halves simultaneously onto a third spool, this is your bifilar winding.
Your two wires, let's call them A and B, both have a start and an end, so you have four wire ends.
4. Burn then scrape the insulation from all four ends so that they will conduct.
5. Join wire A start to wire B end.
The pair of ends left are your output wires for your load.
6. Put a core in the middle of your coil (iron nails, iron bolt, mild steel nails ...).
7. Attach a crocodile clip to one of your load wire ends and place the coil 30-40mm away from the rotor.
8. Spin up the rotor.
9. When the rotor reaches its maximum speed, connect your load wire ends together, creating a short circuit.
You will then see the rotor accelerate AND the input current go down.
This is easier to do than it is to describe how ! Much easier than winding lots of pancake coils.
All the best,
DC.
@Deepcut
Sorry if my last post offended anyone, this was not my intention, neither I post here to argue nor criticize Skycollection, but rather to learn from all you, including Jorge, as I admire much his skills.
The video was entitled: AMAZING INDUCTION,and in his speech (spanish is my native language) he shows how much he is surprised with the high induction produced by these coils.
Watching carefully the vid. I realised that the voltage and amperage in the set of coils, was produced directly from the power suply, in other words, the lamps are fed from the power suply, and not from the magnet which acts merely as a trigger.
As I said, this is only my observation, and I know I may be wrong, if you see it, be kind to explain why please.
As for the Tesla bifilar, I`ve made many of them, solenoid type, flat panckakes, air core, over ferrite rods and steel laminations (in Adams mot.) over ferrite toroids (for joules thief),etc.
Also made a lot of starship coils (Clanzner) at 6, 9 and 12 points, even one similar to the compressed one.
In my thoughts, I see that the critical point here, (in this thread issue) is the speed threshold necessary to produce the effect,
and of course a way to minimize or even avoid the Lenz law effect.
If these type of stacked pankakes do the job, congratulations, we are in a very promising path !!!
And thanks for your post
All the best
Alvaro
@Alvaro
You haven't offended anyone !
I apologise, it was my mistake. I no longer watch skycollection's videos so i didn't realise where 'amazing induction' came from.
I thought you thought some amazing secret must be behind it so i wrote that long post.
Yes the speed threshold is important, the lowest seems to be anywhere from 200Hz to 400Hz, depending on setup.
I admire skycollection's builds, very beautiful, and people like pretty lights :)
I just get angry when i see someone claim work as their own.
But you're right, we should just get on with the work :)
All the best,
DC.
Hi DC
no need to apologize please, I learn from your posts a million more that from Skycollections vids.
QuoteI just get angry when i see someone claim work as their own.
me too !!! I saw at the beginning the appearance in the net of the Rodin Coil and the starship coil, so I know very well where these come from.
regards
Alvaro
J.L.N has forgoten to translate in english here:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE20en.htm
"l'effet ne se produit pas avec une bobine à air,"
In fact if there is no ferromagnetic core, there is no acceleration.
Quote from: PiCéd on March 27, 2013, 08:48:46 AM
J.L.N has forgoten to translate in english here:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE20en.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE20en.htm)
"l'effet ne se produit pas avec une bobine à air,"
In fact if there is no ferromagnetic core, there is no acceleration.
Thanks PiCed :)
I have read of some people getting the effect with no core but i have yet to see it.
atb,
nibs.
Both Pirate Twinbeard and myself harvested "Lenz Propulsion" spinning neo spheres inside the air cores of Tesla wrapped bifilar output coils. I just posted a video of a 1/2" sphere that was charging it's own power battery this way. Once again we're spinning neo sphere rotors "INSIDE THE AIR CORE'S OF TRUE BIFILAR PICKUP COILS", and accelerating the rotor spheres using "Lenz Delay" with no ferrite core anywhere near the output coils.
Yes we have. This is the basic premise of the "flowerpower device" I created: Bifilar starship coil as prime mover, Bedini style. I tend to like the smaller rotors (1/8" to 3/8")... while they are hard get started, they achieve incredible RPMs. In any case, I documented the effect on some of the earlier videos on my youtube channel. The inductor (pickup coil) I used to accelerate the frequency of operation was indeed an aircore inductor... the first was around 150ohms of #26AWG, and the second around 230ohms of #24AWG. The key is taking advantage of the parasitic capacitive property of the coil to delay the creation of the "cogging" field in the pickup coil. This creates a phase shifting of the temporal relationship between the rotor pole passing the inductor and the cogging field by temporarily storing the induced energy from the rotor electrostatically on the surface of the wire, instead of allowing current to flow to load immediately. This delay is long enough for the next pole to rotate into position, and be accelerated by the decaying field as the current finally flows out into the load.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 27, 2013, 09:28:14 AM
Both Pirate Twinbeard and myself harvested "Lenz Propulsion" spinning neo spheres inside the air cores of Tesla wrapped bifilar output coils. I just posted a video of a 1/2" sphere that was charging it's own power battery this way. Once again we're spinning neo sphere rotors "INSIDE THE AIR CORE'S OF TRUE BIFILAR PICKUP COILS", and accelerating the rotor spheres using "Lenz Delay" with no ferrite core anywhere near the output coils.
Excellent !
Hats off to you both :)
Here's a short video of my baby rotor, now passing 40,000 RPM :)
All set to make a coil that overspeeds the rotor, just waiting for my plastic to arrive.
All the best,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on March 27, 2013, 10:28:24 AM
Excellent !
Hats off to you both :)
Here's a short video of my baby rotor, now passing 40,000 RPM :)
All set to make a coil that overspeeds the rotor, just waiting for my plastic to arrive.
All the best,
DC.
Hey DC,
You forgot to paste the link of your video :)
Sound scary thou, thinkin the neo might explode with that 40k rpm, cool! ;)
Regards
Cc
Doh!
Sorry about that :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKTRu9Q659U
Cheers crazy,
DC.
Alphcentauro, 300,000 r.p.m 400vpp output at 5000 Hz He's levitating a tiny diametric neo cylinder inside the Tesla bifilar pickup coil:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1oFzXOZnE8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1oFzXOZnE8)
I remember seeing that a few years ago, when i'd just started learning about motors/generators, and i thought that somehow he had ice particles everywhere !
Absolutely amazing speed.
Smaller is better !
It would be interesting to know the output amperage, probably in the microamp range.
Getting useable current is the step that is the hardest.
atb,
DC.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtCN1GWqtqg
Here you go synchro... this is the small rotor finely tuned, with freq measurements.
WOW !
Go Pirates, Go Pirates ... No, not that fast, we can't focus on you at that speed !!!
Nice one,
DC.
@Twinbeard,
That video out performed anything Speilberg ever produced. It looks like you're runing output from your 34 and 22 gauge around through the output coil housing your spinner. I understand that you believe this causes field interferance and a phase shift that creates Lenz delay propulsion. I'm trying to replicate that feedback Lenz delay amplification effect in my Spifilar Knots. Accelerating the rotor to 3,000,000 rpm on a self looped field tourqing power, independent of input and generating 1000 volts with respectable amperage is like splitting the atom!
My Spiral setup has a Quadfilar and bifilar in Tandem. If I designate one half of the Quadfilar for output and run it's current straight into the bifilar pickup, it may induce Lenz Delay propulsion on my 2" neo sphere the way Twinbeard does. I worked hard to try and conduct this experiment, but I was so feverish I got nowhere. Earmuff Pancake pickup coils can perhaps assist in generating output. This would be KW range.
If I connect those coils leads and achieve neo sphere acceleration like Twinbeard does, Warp factor quantum leap. The future hinges on this result. I'm paralyzed with awe.
Thanx Synchro,
Its worth noting that the Fluke DMM was operating in frequencies beyond its capacity. I later upgraded the instrumentation to a Tek current probe and 100x standard scope probe. This yielded readings at max in motor mode of around 1700VAC, with current readings at approximately 15ma... still no joke when considering that there is a battery being charged as well. These readings with the current probe were taken between the rotary device and the output trafo as well, as opposed to on the output of the trafo itself, as was done with the Fluke.
Output is higher, 2300VAC and 20ma or so in solid state mode with the current coil configuration. With matched 350ohm #34AWG coils above and below the starship pair, I got around 4000VAC at 35ma or so in solid state mode before a lead from one of the pickup coils got near the aluminum base of the device and a purple plasma arced from the lead to the case and fried the whole setup, requiring replacement of everything but the coils, essentially.
The important thing about the coil config to get lenz accel is the parasitic capacitance, imho. It comes down to timing. You have to delay the current enough to let the exciting pole pass, but not so long as to allow a full rotation. Its like tuning an LC, but both are in the same physical component. Bifilar pancake makes a pretty good capacitor, from what I have read.
Also, Input is around 400ma @12VDC to drive the prime mover, and around 550ma in solid state mode full output.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 27, 2013, 11:56:58 AM
@Twinbeard,
That video out performed anything Speilberg ever produced. It looks like you're runing output from your 34 and 22 gauge around through the output coil housing your spinner. I understand that you believe this causes field interferance and a phase shift that creates Lenz delay propulsion. I'm trying to replicate that feedback Lenz delay amplification effect in my Spifilar Knots. Accelerating the rotor to 3,000,000 rpm on a self looped field tourqing power, independent of input and generating 1000 volts with respectable amperage is like splitting the atom!
My Spiral setup has a Quadfilar and bifilar in Tandem. If I designate one half of the Quadfilar for output and run it's current straight into the bifilar pickup, it may induce Lenz Delay propulsion on my 2" neo sphere the way Twinbeard does. I worked hard to try and conduct this experiment, but I was so feverish I got nowhere. Earmuff Pancake pickup coils can perhaps assist in generating output. This would be KW range.
If I connect those coils leads and achieve neo sphere acceleration like Twinbeard does, Warp factor quantum leap. The future hinges on this result. I'm paralyzed with awe.
Hi twinbeard,
Your flower surely has power, nice setup... :D
Regards
Cc
@ twinbeard
that's great output nearing 50 watts in your solid state.
totally gree about parasitic capacitance, kind of funny it's been 'designed out' all these years.
with reference to the details of the effect and not allowing one full rotation, i made a spreadsheet with the mechanical maths that calculated how far the magnet would travel in 1 time constant. above a minimum speed the rotor would rotate many metres, many times its circumference, and the effect is still there.
atb,
DC.
Hi everyone
been following the interesting build of a generator by user llewgnal (http://www.youtube.com/user/llewgnal?feature=watch)
Have a look at his video but start it at 25 minutes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UE5LuUyheH8&feature=em-uploademail (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UE5LuUyheH8&feature=em-uploademail)
Looks like he's ready to test it. He has 8 Neo ball magnets sandwiched between 2 coils that are spinned by 12 rotor magnets attached to a 6000 rpm motor. So the 8 Neo ball magnets could spin up to 40,000 rpm.
Looks like he will be on Smart Scarecrow at 6pm PST to test it.
Luc
@Luc
Thanks for the heads up, what a wonderfully-crafted machine.
atb,
DC.
Ahh... I see. So the delay would be significant then, to allow multiple poles to pass before creating the field. Interesting. I was hoping that someone would come along and quantify the effect, and had many discussions with Thane on that topic. At the time, I was looking at it as a function of coil impedance and frequency. Would you mind to link me to the spreadsheet?
Quote from: DeepCut on March 27, 2013, 11:18:52 PM
@ twinbeard
that's great output nearing 50 watts in your solid state.
totally gree about parasitic capacitance, kind of funny it's been 'designed out' all these years.
with reference to the details of the effect and not allowing one full rotation, i made a spreadsheet with the mechanical maths that calculated how far the magnet would travel in 1 time constant. above a minimum speed the rotor would rotate many metres, many times its circumference, and the effect is still there.
atb,
DC.
Yup :
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?bjlt2njkf3n69tr
atb,
DC.
That DC motor must consume some watts. My self looped 2" 100% COP Spifilar coils Neo Sphere would run it for free. I can turn the speed up and still break even. The magnetic gears boost the auxilliary spheres past Lenz Delay Propulsion Threshold speed. Together the LDP on power and pickup would yeild another lazy 8 OU device.
@Twinbeard,
Your solid state concept appears to be the highest state of the art in power plant design. Matching coils on opposite sides of your Starship coil, inducing oscillation output. Hard to beat that!
Quite a few times you've claimed OU now, want to show us ?
That's why we're all here after all ...
I posted two videos already.
The video didn't show OU.
Serious claims need to be backed up by serious evidence, which you haven't done.
Do some proper in/out measurements.
If you can't get hold of a scope, get the machine to run itself.
It would be great if you've actually done it, i'd pay for the champagne.
@Deepcut,
Any amount of horse sense can tell you there's a sweet spot based on JLN'S experiment. Positioning is essential and fished for with a multimeter. Once the neo sphere's inside Lenz Propulsion zone, it's OU.
Feedback induced oscillation in a twin coil system defines the Cook battery. Twinbeard is on the cutting edge with his.
I found the fishing much better when using a scope probe... I think it is the little hook on the end that makes the difference:)
Quote from: synchro1 on March 28, 2013, 09:55:55 AM
@Deepcut,
Any amount of horse sense can tell you there's a sweet spot based on JLN'S experiment. Positioning is essential and fished for with a multimeter. Once the neo sphere's inside Lenz Propulsion zone, it's OU.
Feedback induced oscillation in a twin coil system defines the Cook battery. Twinbeard is on the cutting edge with his.
Twinbeard isn't making OU claims, you are.
The fact is, you can't or won't prove it.
It's disappointing that you're not even willing to try, there are plenty of posts around here on proper methods.
I will help you locate them if you like ?
Hello,
does anyone know if placing a capacitor in parallel in the primary will have a much better reduction of the intensity? for exemple.
thanks of advance for the answer.
The magnet bearing needs a a prime mover. DC consumes 8 watts to spin a diametric tube. What amount of piddling difference could it make if the OU claim were some percent off that it would take a high precision scientific measuring instrument to calibrate? Suppose I changed my description to next to nothing? Pushing those satillite magnts past threshold r.p.m. should speed the Prime Mover up, and Voila, be enough to make up for that very very tiny bit of difference! Not admiting to any false claims
The 2" neo sphere is the largest commercialy available. The power is inearly indescribable. I had a tiny sphere launch out of my hand and shatter against it from accross the room! I tested plenty of satillite action with it. It's got vigor! Self looped between input and output Spifilars it pays it's own upkeep. The power can increase to push a gang of satillites, but it stays even with itself and continues to run at 100% or near enough. That = factor's constant, because as you speed it up, it's self charge increases equally. Prime mover acceleration back from the satillite output coils and spinners AUL, would make the secondary output all gravy. Negative coefficient for COP factor.
A spoke pattern of Lidmotor Maggie's would do the same job. I don't even think you need a step down magnet. Lidmotor measures a gain. Does "Lenz Delay" play a part in this Maggie demo:
. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afEWXadfpqY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afEWXadfpqY)
Lidmotor's runing a dc pulse into a Tesla wrap bifilar microwave coil that is then acting double duty as a pickup coil for his spinning neo tube. His input drops dramaticly when he tries to power the magnet, only to find out the magnet's powering the coil. Does this result from field induced "Lenz Delay"?
OK, I see it this way... we all get hung up on the concept and idea of "OU" without ever really defining what that is. Without knowing what a thing really is, all we are doing is stumbling in the dark when trying to find it. Many consider a perpetuum mobile as OU. Others consider a device which runs itself and external loads as OU. Some consider it to be when measured output exceeds measured input, with (rightfully) lots of room for arguing over methods of measurement and instrumentation.
I propose that none of these are the thing we are looking for. The thing we are looking for, when properly accessed, comes in such limitless bounds that the primary concern then becomes regulating the flow of energy to prevent an overload condition that destroys the apparatus which creates the condition that allows the energy to flow in the first place. What is most required to find it is understanding, often only garnered through experimental work, as the techniques and effects are not generally considered "engineerable" as, in the engineering courses, the mathematics to describe them is missing. This critical element has been simplified and replaced with 'best practices' that avoid things like parasitic capacitance or generation and propagation of impulse waves. Thus, we on our benches must each rediscover and define the principles, interesting experimental results, and anomalous properties which allow insight into the true nature of the source of limitless energy we seek.
After almost 3 years observing this device and other similar yet less optimized devices in operation, I have noticed a correlation between output power and solar weather. So, in answer to your recent question Deepcut... I have not stopped building; I have only taken a pause for observation, further research, and improved understanding before heading to the bench again. You will notice that many of my recent youtube posts have been solar weather related...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5O1TBB5Se4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wlpPFfskjQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sr8IAPWbdqA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11Bnqhr7iBY
Enjoy
Twin
Do you follow this guy on youtube?
Suspicious0bservers
@Twinbeard,
Thanks, those videos are so refreshing, and your broad point of view generous.
"generation and propagation of impulse waves". this is very interesting!
I have not as of yet, but I find it interesting. Thank you.
Quote from: Here2njoy on March 28, 2013, 12:53:09 PM
Twin
Do you follow this guy on youtube?
Suspicious0bservers
@Twinbeard and DeepCut,
Look at this one I'm having fun with charge rocking. Believe me I can do this all day, harvesting "Lenz Delay Propulsion": Enough to keep it even minus losses. The neo sphere's running LENZ FREE at Lenz Delay threshold r.p.m. , while delivering the same baseline voltage of 11:37 volts to it's own power battery. I submit these video results as bona fide confirmation of "Lenz Delay Effect". This unit is OU the amount of power it takes to illuminate a 120 volt LED to 80 lumens from the primary power coil bemf Bedini charge. This is no gimmick!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEtnFn6TAzs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEtnFn6TAzs)
The last run is over a period of hours, from 11:34 volts to 11:35 volts.
Yes...you're wrong, the power supplay is for the trhee starships only, and all the inductors (tesla pancakes) are "PICKUP COILS" they are not connected to the power supplay....! i have an inductor inside of each strarship coil and others individualy inductors, IS THE MAGNETIC INDUCTION that makes the work...!
saludos jorge
@Skycollection,
@Bienvenidos Companero,
Muchas gracias para todos. Todos vosotros gustamos mucho sus produciones estupendos!
Perhaps field intererference is inducing reverse Lenz effect? Place a good amp meter accross the input lead, and check for any rise in amp draw when you add the individual pancake pickup coil and LED! The rise in input should match the output. A lesser amount will allow is to calculate the exact percentage of "Lenz efficiency" for the coil.
New Ottowa museum exhibit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkK2RsApWZE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkK2RsApWZE)
This video shows satillite adding and zero rise in input:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuVtKYfSDI8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuVtKYfSDI8)
Quote from: PiCéd on March 28, 2013, 10:31:36 AM
Hello,
does anyone know if placing a capacitor in parallel in the primary will have a much better reduction of the intensity? for exemple.
thanks of advance for the answer.
Check this video out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyvBVuY4qFQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyvBVuY4qFQ)
Yes TB wise words and excellent videos,. as always.
For the sake of peace, synchro felt i had insulted him a while back because i doubted the veracity of his claims, but i was prepared to attempt using a magnet as core, but i don't have rodin or starship coils wound.
I got very angry that someone felt insulted merely because i doubted their claims (this happens all the time to scientists, it's how they prove their worth) and i was unreasonably rude.
I modified my rude post and apologised.
I have spent a few years now on many forums and i am just sick of people making OU claims and saying things likie "it would take a high precision scientific measuring instrument to calibrate?".
I totally respect the time, thought, expense and effort you put into your builds synchro, i didn't realise you were zebok until quite a few posts ago, i was always positively commenting on your videos.
I'm ashamed of my own over-reactions, as i think you should be synch. I'm glad we are at least talking again.
My comments are not a personal attack. If our devices are to survive 'field-testing' they must first pass domestic testing.
I will now refrain from advising you to do proper tests.
But, as a good friend once said to me "the worst person you can fool is yourself" and i don't want any of us to be deluded, whether by ourselves or others.
The trouble with forums is that, as TB said, we kind of shoot in the dark and none of us have common test beds, none of us follow this stuff as a focused group, as if we were a team in a lab. I guess that's what i want but it's probably best served by doing it with people in real life.
All the best synchro,
DC.
@DeepCut,
Seriously, based on my meager results, how far off do you imagine my break even estimate is in percentage points? What's so extrodinary about a high speed rotor managing to act that way? This is what the results point to. Any small amount of Lenz drag would slow the rotor down enough to register on the multimeter as an abrupt and steep decline in source voltage..
Quote from: synchro1 on March 28, 2013, 04:55:44 PM
@DeepCut,
Seriously, based on my meager results, how far off do you imagine my break even estimate is in percentage points?
I don't even know and to imagine would be inaccurate, i'd like to be there and have my hands on it, it looks amazing. I really think we should work together to find at least a common testing methodology that we can each run on different testbeds.
Many of us don't have scopes (i use the soundcard scope software and cheap USB soundchips) but there are mechanical solutions to this that aren't too hard to setup, like DadHav's Prony Brake (taken from Linedmann's Electric Secrets video).
DadHav has put his video online and is going to (or may already have) put his spreadsheet online, which makes it very easy for us all :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9vhGwwawQ8
All the best,
DC.
Starting at 4:03 seconds into the video, The time reads 4:57, the run battery voltage reads 11:35 volts. The ball runs till 5:05 and the voltage reads 11:35 and holding! That's over 8 minutes! The rise and fall frequency is a rocking charge on a fixed baseline like I demonstrated manually in the project 4 video. The ebb and flow of a slinky or Yo Yo. That pulse must describe a perfect sign wave. A closed loop breath cycle of charge and power. Self loop disconnected, the neo sphere runs the source battery down like a direct short. More Lenz delay confirmation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTjqcX6sigQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTjqcX6sigQ)
The see-sawing effect is a consequence of the rule that power can't run against it self through the same wire at the same time, but it can reverse direction, which we hear it doing in the single Hertz range. This is the serenade of unity harmonic, the result of Lenz free operation. This setup is OU in bemf from the primary coil. I track that charge on the green multimeter. You can see it rise while the source voltage remains steady. A scope shot of the audio would be interesting.
Batteries are a notoriously inaccurate way of estimating generator efficiency.
I'm sure we've all been to battery university :
http://batteryuniversity.com/
Batteries can rise and fall, slowly and quickly, individual cell conditions give rise to uncertainty ... it's all bad news but it's the kind of pitfall we need to look out for.
Having said that, what is the longest it has kept the battery charge steady at ?
According to the technical stuff that's available to us all on the web, we need to let the battery rest for 24 hours after charging to get an accurate estimate of it's charge.
Even then, the real specialists say you would have to measure the specific gravity of each cell with special hardware.
This is the sort of stuff i came up against when i had only made a simple Bedini motor.
I didn't want to hear it, but it's the truth.
We have to be stringent with ourselves, otherwise we have a questionable device.
So the only real test is how long it can keep the battery at a seemingly steady charge.
If it really is giving us something extra, it should be able to run forever, obviously not a test we can do !
If it can run for a month with no degradation, then you either have OU or a battery that is more efficient than any in existence.
You've been exploring this for a good while now (is it five years?), what's the longest run you've done ?
All the best,
DC.
Rocking a capacitor bank like one Lasersabre uses to replace his car battery with ought to prove something?
electrets can be better than batteries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electret (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electret)
Synchro, what do you do when you 'rock' a capacitor bank ?
I'm sure i'm subbed to laser on YT, gotta check.
All the best,
DC.
That opens the area of Crystal Matrix rechargable types too like we've seen inventers building!
Quote from: synchro1 on March 28, 2013, 08:11:28 PM
That opens the area of Crystal Matrix rechargable types too like we've seen inventers building!
I think i've missed a lot !
I wasn't active at all last year, maybe i have some catching up to do ;+}
All the best,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on March 28, 2013, 08:09:28 PM
Synchro, what do you do when you 'rock' a capacitor bank ?
I'm sure i'm subbed to laser on YT, gotta check.
All the best,
DC.
see saw power back and forth with the motor alternator, while maintaining a sready baseline voltage.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 28, 2013, 08:14:05 PM
see saw power back and forth with the motor alternator, while maintaining a sready baseline voltage.
Yup, i DEFINITELY got some catching up to do ;+}
All the best,
DC.
Just a comment about Synchro's 2" Sphere clip and the see-saw effect you hear in the first two minutes. There is a good chance that that's because the battery is close to being discharged. So the battery "chokes" every few seconds and the voltage drops. That causes the sphere to slow down, and that results in a significantly reduced load on the battery. The load is reduced much more than the drop in voltage would suggest. The battery recovers during this "extra" slow down and comes back with renewed vigor and powers the sphere at high speed again. Then the process starts all over again. A simple test is to be sure you have a battery that is in good condition and charge it and run the test again and see what happens.
This is a generic phenomenon that can happen with batteries and I have seen it hundreds of times. If the load on the battery drops suddenly when the battery chokes and the output voltage drops, that "lull" or "brownout" gives the battery some time to recover and come back again. So if you let it run a long time, the "brownouts" in the battery output become longer and longer until the battery finally gives up. Then if you disconnect the battery and wait a day, the battery will seem fresh for perhaps ten minutes next time you run the test and then start to crap out again.
I agree with DeepCut, Synchro1 if you want your OU claim to be taken seriously then you'll need to show proper in out measurements or
self run with capacitors gaining charge. Battery voltages mean very little or less than nothing. Normal batteries gain voltage while under
significant load during some periods of discharge, the battery is still outputting energy when the voltage is rising. Don't just believe me people
try it for yourself. Take a Lead acid battery in good condition and fully charged, then load it with a reasonable load and watch the battery voltage
initially drop then rise above the lowest voltage it dropped to, so the battery voltage rises while the battery is under load. I can't say all batteries
will do it, for best effect the load can't be too much or too little, it should be reasonable for the load eg. a car battery like in the video 2 to 5 amps
or so give or take a bit. At first the battery chemistry can't keep up with the load and in trying to equalize the chemistry with the load there can be
an overshoot effect. This is just one battery effect all kinds of funny things can happen. Batteries can increase in voltage while supplying a load = Fact.
It's difficult to show on video because it takes a while to happen, try it and see. That's why in out measurements done accurately or self running without batteries
and a rising capacitor charge is a good idea. If running from caps and the charge is becoming less no self runner.
Here's a joke video I made about it,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFNLxCvOim8
And the reveal, the voltage drops to 12.30v initially under load then rises to 12.36v while still under the same load, which is normal battery behavior.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTv0n1bS35E
Anyway Synchro1 where is the claimed extra energy coming from ? If there is extra energy entering the system you should be able to identify
where it is coming in and how much.
Maybe you have OU maybe you don't, but myself and many others are tired of hearing the claims with no will to share the hard evidence.
Cheers
@Farmhand,
It's not my intention to claim overunity, but to demonstrate the deleyed Lenz effect. I get acceleration and decreased input under load. You know what happens to the battery when I disconnect the load? What do you think of the See-Saw charging effect? i'ts a millivolt per second exchange. When that harmonic cycle commences, there's no longer any power depletion from the battery. I don't care what you have to say about batterys, this Motor Alternator, Battery oscillation , power recharge cycle, has to balance. The audio track's the data not the multi meter. Piston like, alternating power surges, self modulating, too and fro, factor out any additional input. That demonstrates that the system has achieved unity. I know that batterys have a mind of there own. The super fast neo sphere has slipped the surly bond of Lenz drag, and the Battery and Alternator go into a charge recharge resonance that is the earmark of "Unity", and proximate confirmation of Lenz delay.
There's no extra energy coming into the system. We played a trick on entropy, and recovered primary flyback as OU factor.
In fact, we should see the speed of the motor when no ferrite core is next to it and then compare the speed with a ferrite core and coil on it, if the engine accelerates more with the ferrite and coil than without it may be possible to have O.U.
Well, it is something like this.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 29, 2013, 06:56:45 AM
@Farmhand,
It's not my intention to claim overunity ...
And yet :
"That DC motor must consume some watts. My self looped 2" 100% COP Spifilar coils Neo Sphere would run it for free. I can turn the speed up and still break even. The magnetic gears boost the auxilliary spheres past Lenz Delay Propulsion Threshold speed. Together the LDP on power and pickup
would yeild another lazy 8 OU device."
And here :
"@Deepcut,
Any amount of horse sense can tell you there's a sweet spot based on JLN'S experiment. Positioning is essential and fished for with a multimeter.
Once the neo sphere's inside Lenz Propulsion zone, it's OU."
Make your mind up.
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on March 29, 2013, 02:49:35 PM
And yet :
"That DC motor must consume some watts. My self looped 2" 100% COP Spifilar coils Neo Sphere would run it for free. I can turn the speed up and still break even. The magnetic gears boost the auxilliary spheres past Lenz Delay Propulsion Threshold speed. Together the LDP on power and pickup would yeild another lazy 8 OU device."
And here :
"@Deepcut,
Any amount of horse sense can tell you there's a sweet spot based on JLN'S experiment. Positioning is essential and fished for with a multimeter. Once the neo sphere's inside Lenz Propulsion zone, it's OU."
Make your mind up.
DC.
I grew infected with a case of Ottowa efluenza! Everything is Overunity! Invention is a science and an art. I work from intuition and express myself by way of metaphor. You will find out that it's no big deal to run power backwards if you carry through with your magnet core output test. Twinbeard's JAMING the pickup up coil with current of different voltages to induce LENZ DELAY. Those coupled diametric magnet cores induce delay as well by JAMING the induced pole shift a bit differently.
Output gathered by a transformer pickup coil of 22 gauge over 150 Ohms of 34 gauge magnet wire, like Twinbeards, can be fed directly into a second 22 gauge output coil wherein is placed a rotating neo sphere, to JAM the pole shift and induce 'Lenz Delay". Twinbeard says it creates a 'PRETTY ODD FIELD' in his video! So do those core magnets. I looped the output to source through a FWBR, and checked for voltage rise in the power battery to fish for position. This is an important test you're about to run. Prepare youself for future shock!
This approach has the promise of really increasing COP. Unity can be viewed as overunity, if primary flyback is added.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 29, 2013, 06:56:45 AM
@Farmhand,
It's not my intention to claim overunity, but to demonstrate the deleyed Lenz effect. I get acceleration and decreased input under load. You know what happens to the battery when I disconnect the load? What do you think of the See-Saw charging effect? i'ts a millivolt per second exchange. When that harmonic cycle commences, there's no longer any power depletion from the battery. I don't care what you have to say about batterys, this Motor Alternator, Battery oscillation , power recharge cycle, has to balance. The audio track's the data not the multi meter. Piston like, alternating power surges, self modulating, too and fro, factor out any additional input. That demonstrates that the system has achieved unity. I know that batterys have a mind of there own. The super fast neo sphere has slipped the surly bond of Lenz drag, and the Battery and Alternator go into a charge recharge resonance that is the earmark of "Unity", and proximate confirmation of Lenz delay.
There's no extra energy coming into the system. We played a trick on entropy, and recovered primary flyback as OU factor.
Synchro, weather or not you care about what I had to say about batteries is irrelevant. It is said and shown.
A see sawing of the battery voltage means very little, when the charge in a battery can be reduced without reducing the voltage at it's terminals.
To me it appears as though you are just posting your opinion about what you see. Others see the same thing and have a different opinion.
My opinion is the only way to say for sure is to test it properly and accurately. Your entitled to your opinion as am I.
It doesn't matter either if people don't believe me, they can do the experiments and make their own opinion.
When all inputs and outputs are considered everything is unity. It must be.
Cheers
Another provocative video from Skycollection:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmZ6kGDT_Ow (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmZ6kGDT_Ow)
Skycollection indicates he took amp meter readings, and he infers, in his Youtube comments, that the seond induction coil is generating an additional 4 watts of power, without increasing input. I advised him to turn the entire apparatus on it's side to spin the sphere on it's axis insread of "skidding" Like he's been doing.
Quote from: synchro1 on March 30, 2013, 05:41:58 PM
Another provocative video from Skycollection:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmZ6kGDT_Ow (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmZ6kGDT_Ow)
Skycollection indicates he took amp meter readings, and he infers, in his Youtube comments, that the seond induction coil is generating an additional 4 watts of power, without increasing input. I advised him to turn the entire apparatus on it's side to spin the sphere on it's axis insread of "skidding" Like he's been doing.
Well, this is what he wrote:
" i did a test in other inductors and the results was: input 12 volts x 0.42 = 5.04 watts and the output was 58 volts x 0.07 = 4.06 watts. this measurements not correspond to this experiment. And you have to multiply by two, since I have two output inductors, 4.06 x 2 = 8.12 watts, this would be the total output watts. "
So his measurements he refers to have no connection to the above video as I understand from his last sentence.
What he calls conventional coil i.e. a normal solenoid shaped output coil with which the LEDs did not get on or only barely, had inherently a much weaker magnetic coupling to the base coil which was a pancake coil because most of the number of turns in the cylinder windings were gradually away from the pancake windings while the pancake shaped output coil had a much higher magnetic coupling to the also pancake shaped base coil, so the LEDs were bright. (He says low inductance coil for the cylinder shaped output coil but a low magnetic induction due to the bad coupling should be interpreted by that.)
IT is ok that he also used two output LED arrays in this present experiment but as usual we did not see a correct input and output power measurement.
Another problem is that LEDs has a threshold voltage i.e. a forward voltage under which they do not consume any current. This means that assuming a normal sine wave output as the result of the induction in the output coil, the LEDs do not load the output whenever the instanteneous AC waveform is below the threshold LED voltage, ok? And this is valid for both halfwaves of a full AC wave because he uses a full wave rectifier bridge directly at the coils output to make unipolar series of halfwaves from the induced AC voltage.
A real load like a power resistor should be used as a load instead of the LEDs and measure the output current though it and also the voltage across it. Likewise, a continuous input current and voltage measurements should be performed.
Gyula
Hi Gyulasun, That sounds like a good evaluation, I'm not really qualified to say much in the very technical arena, but your post makes sense.
All the OU claims without any descent measurements are running the free energy movement into the mud. there are so many errant claims from within the community itself
that tricksters jump on the bandwagon and add intentional fakes to the mix for ad sense money and they do it because the video's get lots of hits from people linking them in
places like this.
The fake claims continue because it appears to be seen as OK, the "boy who cried wolf syndrome" comes to mind, the way the villagers in that fable should have acted is to take
the responsibility for the "wolf watch" away from the liar after the second false claim, you see the villagers are really the ones at fault for the loss of the sheep because rather
than replace the liar they just ignored him, then the problem was just as much theirs as his. If the boy had cried " I think I see a wolf but I'm not sure because I don't know what a wolf looks like", then things might turn out different. Would the villagers be smart to still leave him on wolf watch if he couldn't tell what was a wolf ?
All energy is originally free, no one pays to run the Sun or paid to put oil in the ground or pays for the rain that deposit the high water that runs hydro electric plants.
The equipment to utilize free energy cost money just like any other equipment and if others harness the energy they can charge whatever they like for it.
Show me a truly closed system and Ill say I see a system that must be unity by definition. Otherwise it is an open system.
I don't think I have seen one single closed system yet on all the forum boards. The way I see it no closed system no breaking of the 2nd Law of thermodynamics. I think it's the second law, I'm not big on laws I read a couple of them once and they seemed pretty logical to me at the time.
Disregarding the Laws of Thermodynamics is easy, we don't need to know them to measure an over 100% efficient device.
In my opinion two false claims of OU that are serious should get one banned.
Whats wrong with saying (look this is interesting, my experiment is showing unusual behavior), then show the behavior and receive comments and offers of replications.
Why does the claim of OU come before the investigation ?
I've got over 100 video's on you tube only three had (bogus) matched third party content (allows them to place ad's on your video's) which was not worth arguing over so I made them link only. One video I wanted to keep public so I contested the stupid false claim and won of course, thier claim was false but they try to scare people with talk of legal action. They are scum internet bullies, but it's their house, so I play by their rules.
Some of my video's have thousands of views but I will never allow ad's on them while I have a choice because I don't do it for money or view counts.
If I wanted I could make lots of money with a few key words and some tricky video's, but I'm not a deceiver, I seek truth.
Look what is so easy to do, If I promoted this video and didn't declare it a joke it could have 100 000 hit's.
There is no obvious input no capacitors and no battery just coils and load. Faking and misleading is easy, finding real solutions is difficult.
Free Energy coils in Action video clip.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9AjFM5VB2c
Cheers
Quote from Skycollection's Youtube comments:
" i did a test in other inductors and the results was: input 12 volts x 0.42 = 5.04 watts and the output was 58 volts x 0.07 = 4.06 watts. this measurements not correspond to this experiment. And you have to multiply by two, since I have two output inductors, 4.06 x 2 = 8.12 watts, this would be the total output watts. "
Jorge doubles the output data he extrapolates from an earlier experiment. 4.06 watts per output coil. He goes on to say that the input on the other experiment was 5.04 watts. I can assure everyone, 5 watts is plenty of power to spin that tiny 1/2" magnet sphere in the current video. I wrote and asked him to measure any rise in input when he adds the output coil.
The speed of the ball sounds like it's accelerating when both the solinoid and the pancake bifilar pickup coils are placed over the hot pancake.
Hi synchro1,
What you quoted from Skycollection youtube comments, I had quoted exactly the same text in my Reply #902 two posts above.
I do not see any sense to mention his measurements in connection with his present video in question, however close his present setup is to his earlier experiment.
What you mention on the speed of the ball sounding like it is accelerating: exactly this is where the input power draw should be checked. Not only the rise in input (if there is rise) but the total input is to be checked, together with the total output power measurements on both output coils.
And as I wrote, LED lamps as loads are misleading, power resistors should be used which continuously draw power from the outputs, not during the peaks of the waveform like LEDs do.
Gyula
"Zero Lenz Dynamo" from Zerofossilfuel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-dhIK2ozz0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-dhIK2ozz0)
My "Spiral Knot Tesla bifilar" is a "Lenz advantage" configuration output coil.
Guyla makes excellent points. When you change the LEDs for a resistive load, then ideally you will have a True-RMS multimeter to measure the voltage. Actually you must have a True-RMS multimeter. You simply measure the load resistance with your multimeter before you attach it to the pick-up coil so you have a more accurate value for the resistance. Then you measure the True-RMS voltage across the resistor and do the calculation for the power. So essentially it's just one measurement while you run your tests. At the same time you measure your input power and compare the two.
An exercise would be to check what happens if you change the load resistance. For small, medium and large resistance values, what trends do you see in the measured power output? Can you explain why this is happening?
Another exercise would be to put one scope channel on the pick-up coil voltage. That's your timing reference. Then put the other scope channel on the signal that fires the main transistor that energizes the drive coil. If you have a moveable Hall sensor to control the triggering then you can observe how moving the Hall sensor changes the timing of the triggering. So by moving the Hall sensor around you can change the phase and duration of the transistor firing pulse and see it in real time on your scope display. At the same time you are assuming that the ball (or rotor) is speeding up and slowing down and you can use your scope to measure the frequency. You can try to find the sweet-spot place to put the Hall sensor for the sweet-spot timing, for the phase and the pulse duration for firing the transistor, to give you either the maximum RPM, or the most efficient RPM.
Another trend line has to do with the input power vs. RPM. The higher the speed the more you pay in terms of air friction. So the "watts per RPM" must go up as you increase in RPM. Can you measure it?
I have read Skycollection's comments over the past two weeks and he states several times that he is only doing demonstrations and not serious measurements. If you have a scope and a True-RMS multimeter and a pulse motor, you can indeed make some serious measurements to define the performance characteristics of your motor.
Skycollection new zero lenz coil:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8iRrmxJcYg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8iRrmxJcYg)
Quote from: synchro1 on April 01, 2013, 12:57:57 AM
Skycollection new zero lenz coil:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8iRrmxJcYg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8iRrmxJcYg)
I don't understand why he always say his coils have zero lenz, as you can clearly hear deceleration when he approach the gen coil to the rotor...
Another "Zero Lenz" Dynamo video from Zerofossilfuel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wi0dqWuC2MI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wi0dqWuC2MI)
I already succeeded in building a "Spiral Knot" "Lenz Free Dynamo" that some people feel needs more testing, but what good are they? I discovered that multiple "Lenz Free" output coils merely SHARE the output along with their "Lenz free" null effect.
One "Lenz Free" output coil gathers and returns 100% of the available output generated by the 1/2" neo sphere. How could additional output coils help? I don't see any way to ever exceed unity with this effect alone by adding additional coils.
That leaves coils like Pirate Twinbeard demonstrates, that are more then just "Lenz Free", but additionally "Lenz Propulsive". I believe The "Diametric Magnet Core" Tesla bifilar spool is in that catagory. Deppcut's currently testing this invention.
some considerations about the stacked bifilar panckakes.
may be this is only a wrong point of view,so any correction is welcomed.
I do not know how this could influence in the Lorenz law behavior
good theoreticians here may be can (or want to) say.
Just my two cents
cheers
Alvaro
Quote from: ALVARO_CS on April 02, 2013, 06:12:04 AM
some considerations about the stacked bifilar panckakes.
may be this is only a wrong point of view,so any correction is welcomed.
I do not know how this could influence in the Lorenz law behavior
good theoreticians here may be can (or want to) say.
Just my two cents
cheers
Alvaro
http://www.newphysics.se/archives/old-archive/electromagnetism/hooper/HOOPREV.TXT (http://www.newphysics.se/archives/old-archive/electromagnetism/hooper/HOOPREV.TXT)
http://oriharu.net/ehooper2.htm (http://oriharu.net/ehooper2.htm)
??? ??? ?
......
http://www.overunity.com/2814/marcos-dancing-magnets-doing-the-7-8hz-dance/#.UVq3tKsRC-M (http://www.overunity.com/2814/marcos-dancing-magnets-doing-the-7-8hz-dance/#.UVq3tKsRC-M)
http://www.rqm.ch/Central%20Oscillator%20and%20SpaceQuantaMedium.pdf
I say ZERO LENZ SKYDYNAMOTOR, because the friction bitwin the magnet rotor and the pancake coil is 0...and you will see that in my next video, and because the pancake coil is a zero...!
saludos, jorge
Jorge,
Please place an amp meter accross the input lead then engage the pancake output coil and check for a rise in input power.
Thanks Wings
reading the patent I realized, that I was wrong about the current flow direction,
as in the Tesla panckake the flow of current goes the same direction in paralel.
The drawing I posted therefore does not applies.
cheers
Alvaro
Quote from: ALVARO_CS on April 02, 2013, 01:09:35 PM
Thanks Wings
reading the patent I realized, that I was wrong about the current flow direction,
as in the Tesla panckake the flow of current goes the same direction in paralel.
The drawing I posted therefore does not applies.
cheers
Alvaro
Net self inductance of the Tesla pancake is null. This applies to the linear spool Tesla bifilar configuration also. How can any other coil variety compete with zero value? Zerofossilfuel discovered that his "Wardencliff" coil equaled the pancake when he equaled the Ohm's. The same would most likely result in a balance if a twin Ohm Tesla bifilar were compared to the "Skycollector". The best Jorge can do is factor out again to null self inudctance, and 0=0!
When Skycollection alternates the coil directions, all the current paths cancel out, just like the single pancake. A plain Tesla bifilar with equal Ohms, same amount of wire, should equal it's self inductance and performance.
hi Synchro 1
I have a doubt about this linear spool bifilar, may be you can clarify
has it got the same properties if winded as a common solenoid, that is winding the two strands back and forth along the spool,
or winding it half spool one strand CW and the other half CCW ? (connecting as the panckake)
Look at this, and read the fine print. The coil looses it's resistance to change in current direction, as a consequence of the spontaneous high voltage charge that builds between the cross current windings.
If you make a coil that consists of 100 clockwise tuns plus 100 counter-clockwise turns, then you get self-cancellation. The result is that the inductance is zero, and the coil looks like a length of wire. It won't work as a pick-up coil, it will generate zero volts. So it's not useful.
If you see people using coils like this in video clips driving LEDs, all that means is that the self cancellation is not perfect, and the coil still possesses a small amount of inductance and it can act like a very weak pick-up coil. You must keep in mind that whenever you see a pick-up coil driving a load like a resistor or a light bulb or an LED, that the coil is creating drag on the rotor, even if it is not readily apparent when you watch the clip. It should show up on a tachometer.
I am going to guess that Tesla made the bifilar coil as a self-resonator to store energy temporarily because it is a high-frequency tank circuit. It looks like a coil in parallel with a capacitor. It may have its uses in certain applications.
As an idea for the testing for the delayed Lenz effect, there is another simple setup that could be interesting. Assume that you have a rotor with four magnets spaced 90 degrees apart. You put a sensing coil that's 90 degrees offset from the pick-up coil. Make the sensing coil approximately the same shape as the pick-up coil. Connect your top scope channel to the sensing coil. That is your timing reference and your scope triggers on that signal. Look at the voltage waveform and see the positive hump, the zero-cross, and the negative hump. You know that the zero-cross is top-dead-center. So you can look at the waveform on your scope and visualize the magnet approach associated with the first hump, and the magnet retreat associated with the second hump.
Let's assume that the motor's speed stabilizes. You can switch your scope to a variable time base and line up exactly eight major horizontal divisions on your scope display to go from one zero-cross to the next zero-cross. Since eight major divisions represents 90 degrees of rotation for the rotor, each major division represents 11.25 degrees of rotation for the rotor. If you line up the two zero-crosses to span nine major divisions, then each major division on your scope display will correspond to exactly 10 degrees.
Connect your bottom scope channel to the pick-up coil output, where you have a load resistor connected.
So here is what you get: The top channel of the scope gives you a timing/angle reference for where the magnet is as it passes by the pick-up coil. The bottom scope channel is showing you the current waveform in the pick-up coil. If you are looking for a "delayed Lenz effect," if I understand this correctly, that means you are expecting to see the current flow though the pick up coil to be delayed. Can you see the speculated RC time-constant that delays the onset of current flow like some people allege? So this would be a good test to run.
How to measure the current flow through the shorted pick-up coil is another interesting problem.
MileHigh
Quote from: synchro1 on April 02, 2013, 04:17:35 PM
Look at this, and read the fine print. The coil looses it's resistance to change in current direction, as a consequence of the spontaneous high voltage charge that builds between the cross current windings.
Indeed, read the fine print very carefully, regarding which energy he is referring to.
"In that the
stored energy is a function of ....." Quote Nicola Tesla
Cheers
Quote from: skycollection on April 02, 2013, 12:53:36 PM
I say ZERO LENZ SKYDYNAMOTOR, because the friction bitwin the magnet rotor and the pancake coil is 0...and you will see that in my next video, and because the pancake coil is a zero...!
saludos, jorge
Hi skycollection,
In your test, let the rotor pickup its maximum rpm speed, check it before engaging the load, then after the load is engaged check the rpm again, small rpm drop is a little bit tricky if you don't check with an rpm meter.
Regards
Cc
Here's an inspired design for size and positionig of "Spiral output coils" off a "Spiral spinner". Supernova remnant pulsar:
"The radio emission we observe comes from electrons "spiralling" along the magnetic field lines". The counter spin is visable!
And here is an experiment of J.L. Naudin confirming phase shift in a laminated transformer core.
http://youtu.be/NQ5xnyj7xe4 (http://youtu.be/NQ5xnyj7xe4)
You can see him probing the induced magnetic field around the core with a Hall sensor. The shift happens at some distance from the oscillating coil.[/size]
This confirms the method used by Tesla to achieve a second phase in one of his 4-pole AC motor, having only one AC input signal.
It is achieved by moving 2 stator coils further back on their cores, away from the rotor.
So, to build a delayed Lenz generator coil we need only a long core protruding from the front of the coil.
... just as Anguswangus did with his PMH gen coils.
KEY077,
Anguswangus did more then extrend his coil cores, he generated an induced horseshoe background magnetic field with a counterwound sister coil in close adjacency. I believe this magnetic field interferance allows him to shorten his core length.
Hi everyone,
I will give an update on my tests a la Synchro, using 2 diametric 1/2" x 1" Neo magnets.
One magnet is attached to the prime mover which can turn it from 10k rpm to 35k rpm and the other magnet is used as core of a bi-filar series connected coil.
I played with this arrangement for over 3 hours and have not found anything unusual.
So Synchro, if you feel both DeepCut and I are doing something wrong! then you need to do a well documented video to demonstrate this speed up effect you're talking about.
Luc
@Gotoluc,
I described a pair of diametric magnets coupled end to end, for the coil core! The spinner should be a larger diametric tube. That's a minimum total of 3 tube magnets. My cores were 1/2 inch in diameter (2 end to end), with a 3/4 inch spinner.
The coupled diametric's focus the combined feild away from the ends, and towards the center of the output coil where it acts as a speed bump for the pole shift. It's very important to pay attention to my instructions! Deepcut just got through making the same mistake!
It takes two coupled magnets to block the shift. The field knits into a knot in the center.
I just want to correct myself for this statement:
QuoteIf you see people using coils like this in video clips driving LEDs, all that means is that the self cancellation is not perfect, and the coil still possesses a small amount of inductance and it can act like a very weak pick-up coil.
Suppose you have a 100-turn clockwise pancake coil. On top of that you have a 98-turn counter-clockwise pancake coil that is slightly smaller. So there are two "free" turns on the clockwise pancake coil with no "matching" counter-clockwise turns to cancel them out.
There is a very good chance a coil with this configuration will drive an LED load just as brightly as a regular pancake coil. That's because all of the magnetic flux of the spinning rotor magnet still passes through the coil, even though it is effectively only two turns. So experimenters should take note of this.
It's not the number of turns that determines how much power you can pick up from the passing rotor magnet, it's how much of the flux you "catch" going through the "loop" that counts. The extra turns in the pick-up coil can give you more voltage but the trade-off is less current for the same output power.
What this also means is that a coil with a smaller diameter will normally catch less flux and therefore have a lower power output. Just a review of the basics.
MileHigh
Some interesting findings done by Tesla:
"I had discovered, however, that rotation is produced by means of a single coil and core; my explanation of the phenomenon, and leading thought in trying the experiment, being that there must be a true time lag in the magnetization of the core. I remember the pleasure I had when, in the writings of Professor Ayrton, which came later to my hand, I found the idea of the time lag advocated. Whether there is a true time lag, whether the retardation is due to eddy currents circulating in minute paths, must remain an open question, but the fact is that a coil wound upon an iron core and traversed by an alternating current creates a moving field of force, capable of setting an armature in rotation. It is of some interest, in conjunction with the historical Arago experiment, to mention that in lag or phase motors I have produced rotation in the opposite direction to the moving field, which means that in that experiment the magnet may not rotate, or may even rotate in the opposite direction to the moving disc. Here, then, is a motor (diagrammatically illustrated in Fig. 17), comprising a coil and iron core, and a freely movable copper disc in proximity to the latter. To demonstrate a novel and interesting feature, I have, for a reason which I will explain, selected this type of motor. When the ends of the coil are connected to the terminals of an alternator the disc is set in rotation. But it is not this experiment, now well known, which I desire to perform. What I wish to show you is that this motor rotates with one single connection between it and the generator; that is to say, one terminal of the motor is connected to one terminal of the generator—in this case the secondary of a high-tension induction coil—the other terminals of motor and generator being insulated in space."
See Fig.17: http://www.tfcbooks.com/images/lectures/1892-02-03/017.gif (http://www.tfcbooks.com/images/lectures/1892-02-03/017.gif)
I recommend to read the previous and next paragraphs...Three paragrahs ahead Tesla states the well know quotation: " Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by a power obtainable at any point of the universe"
Source: Experiments with Alternate Currents of High Potential and High Frequency; Lecture delivered before the I.E.E., London, February, 1892
http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1892-02-03.htm (http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1892-02-03.htm)
What is happening here??
Today Skycollection published a new youtube video confirming the delayed lenz effect with a pancake coil which did not alter the rotor speed when shorted, and, if connected to a capacitor and a battery could recharge the battery. I could see that video 7 hours ago.
Now I tried to watched again and I have noted that Skycollection has deleted all his videos uploded in the last month including everything about the Zero Lenz Dynamo.
What is happening?
Hi everyone,
looks like Zero Fossil Fuel (http://www.youtube.com/user/ZeroFossilFuel?feature=watch) is not happy with Skycollection and he doesn't even know how Gorge treated me!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afibimYBG6c (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afibimYBG6c)
Hi all,
After noting that Skycollection had deleted all his youtube videos I searched into Youtube and I could find one of his videos saved and posted by another user
You can watch in this video that only some kind of coils are able to eliminate the Lenz effect:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIYH9HCtN6w (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIYH9HCtN6w)
What features did you think that this coil could have?
Concerning Skycollection and his refusal to share his discovery:
1.) My impression is that he is a deluded old man who certainly can build nice machines but he does not understand electricity. He never does conclusive input and output measurements. Nevertheless his coil (with a may be zero Lenz effect) is interesting but there are not many possible variations and all can be tested without his help. In addition others have gotten these ideas long before Skycollection.
2.) Many people are upset, because he does not want to share his self proclaimed discoveries or inventions. What gets me is, that according to my opinion, the majority of these upset people are at the same time convinced that capitalism is a good thing and that communism (the idea of sharing everything) is a very bad thing.
Skycollection and his behaviour are very consistent with capitalism. Everybody tries to outsmart everybody else (this is called competition) and tries to get as much money as he can (it is called good business). Well, if one believes in that mindset, one has to do exactly as Skycollection does. He thinks he is on to something, so he tries to make money from it in contrast to handing it out for free to everybody (who in turn would try to make money disregarding Skycollection). According to capitalistic doctrine he tries to protect his "invention" (in whatever stupid way).
I am not a capitalist and I believe in sharing. And I get upset when people who believe in capitalism talk about sharing. And of course it is always the others who should share and never the capitalists who demands sharing.
So, good people, make up your minds: is it "sharing" or "competition for gain" what you want?
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: hanon on April 08, 2013, 10:55:40 AM
Hi all,
You can watch in this video that only some kind of coils are able to eliminate the Lenz effect:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIYH9HCtN6w (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIYH9HCtN6w)
What features did you think that this coil could have?
@hanon:
I will test various combinations of bifilar pancake coils.
a) several bifilar pancake coils stacked and connected in parallel or in series
b) several bifilar pancake coils stacked, but every other is wound in the opposite direction and connected in parallel or in series
c) like a) or like b) but the coils become progressively smaller or bigger
To say it in a simpler way:
I will wind many bifilar pancake coils and will try them in many variations.
At the moment I am building a spinner with a diametrically magnetised ring magnet which should spin at about 15.000 rpm with a modest power demand (hopefully less than 1 Watt).
Attached is the circuit I am testing (not finished yet, attention, might not work) and the set up (still without the two Hall sensors).
One could have used a full bridge motor driver like the L6201 or the L293, but they require some more components around them to function. Therefore I try my hand at a simpler full bridge driver controlled by two Hall sensors. It is something like a brushless commutator.
The Bedini type one transistor drivers are not optimal for N S N S rotors.
Greetings, Conrad
@Conradelectro,
"The Bedini type one transistor drivers are not optimal for N S N S rotors"
.
Have you ever tried one? I have great results from Bedini's bifilar SSG with N S N S diametric tubes and spheres. Really makes the r.p.m.'s soar!
Quote from: synchro1 on April 08, 2013, 05:10:13 PM
"The Bedini type one transistor drivers are not optimal for N S N S rotors"
Have you ever tried one? I have great results from Bedini's bifilar SSG with N S N S diametric tubes and spheres. Really makes the r.p.m.'s soar!
@synchro1: I played a lot with "Bedini type" and "one transistor type" drivers for N N N N or S S S S rotors.
Specially a "bifilar coil Bedini type" circuit uses a lot of power (for the rather small torque it produces). I could build a low power driver for a N N N N or S S S S type rotor which uses a trigger coil, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEEjlYvZ5OM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEEjlYvZ5OM).
Since I do not believe that a N S N S rotor will lower the power requirement of a "Bedini type driver (bifilar coil)" I try to find a better driver (like the commutating driver I showed in my post above).
I have also seen on YouTube that many drivers (mostly Bedini type drivers) used for spinning diametric ring or tube magnets seem to use many Watts (4 to 8 Watts, or even more). This also makes me look for alternatives.
The most straight forward improvement for a N S N S rotor seems to be a circuit that commutates the drive coil (which sends the current through the coil in an alternating fashion, i.e. a full transistor H-bridge).
Have you carefully measured the power draw of your circuit (which spins your tube magnet and produces such great results)?
The first requirement for a self-runner (if that is possible) is a low power consumption, because one will not have to recover that much energy with a special coil (if it exists). And it is much easier to see a braking or speed up effect in a rotor which is driven with low power. With 4 to 8 Watts one can spin almost everything at high speed, it is an overkill.
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: conradelektro on April 09, 2013, 07:35:09 AM
@synchro1: I played a lot with "Bedini type" and "one transistor type" drivers for N N N N or S S S S rotors.
Specially a "bifilar coil Bedini type" circuit uses a lot of power (for the rather small torque it produces). I could build a low power driver for a N N N N or S S S S type rotor which uses a trigger coil, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEEjlYvZ5OM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEEjlYvZ5OM).
Since I do not believe that a N S N S rotor will lower the power requirement of a "Bedini type driver (bifilar coil)" I try to find a better driver (like the commutating driver I showed in my post above).
I have also seen on YouTube that many drivers (mostly Bedini type drivers) used for spinning diametric ring or tube magnets seem to use many Watts (4 to 8 Watts, or even more). This also makes me look for alternatives.
The most straight forward improvement for a N S N S rotor seems to be a circuit that commutates the drive coil (which sends the current through the coil in an alternating fashion, i.e. a full transistor H-bridge).
Have you carefully measured the power draw of your circuit (which spins your tube magnet and produces such great results)?
The first requirement for a self-runner (if that is possible) is a low power consumption, because one will not have to recover that much energy with a special coil (if it exists). And it is much easier to see a braking or speed up effect in a rotor which is driven with low power. With 4 to 8 Watts one can spin almost everything at high speed, it is an overkill.
Greetings, Conrad
I run 12v solinoid inductor between the potentiometer and circuit. This reduces input down to the millivolt range by modifing the pulse width.
Quote from: hanon on April 05, 2013, 03:18:05 PM
Some interesting findings done by Tesla:
"I had discovered, however, that rotation is produced by means of a single coil and core; my explanation of the phenomenon, and leading thought in trying the experiment, being that there must be a true time lag in the magnetization of the core. I remember the pleasure I had when, in the writings of Professor Ayrton, which came later to my hand, I found the idea of the time lag advocated. Whether there is a true time lag, whether the retardation is due to eddy currents circulating in minute paths, must remain an open question, but the fact is that a coil wound upon an iron core and traversed by an alternating current creates a moving field of force, capable of setting an armature in rotation. It is of some interest, in conjunction with the historical Arago experiment, to mention that in lag or phase motors I have produced rotation in the opposite direction to the moving field, which means that in that experiment the magnet may not rotate, or may even rotate in the opposite direction to the moving disc. Here, then, is a motor (diagrammatically illustrated in Fig. 17), comprising a coil and iron core, and a freely movable copper disc in proximity to the latter. To demonstrate a novel and interesting feature, I have, for a reason which I will explain, selected this type of motor. When the ends of the coil are connected to the terminals of an alternator the disc is set in rotation. But it is not this experiment, now well known, which I desire to perform. What I wish to show you is that this motor rotates with one single connection between it and the generator; that is to say, one terminal of the motor is connected to one terminal of the generator—in this case the secondary of a high-tension induction coil—the other terminals of motor and generator being insulated in space."
See Fig.17: http://www.tfcbooks.com/images/lectures/1892-02-03/017.gif (http://www.tfcbooks.com/images/lectures/1892-02-03/017.gif)
I recommend to read the previous and next paragraphs...Three paragrahs ahead Tesla states the well know quotation: " Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by a power obtainable at any point of the universe"
Source: Experiments with Alternate Currents of High Potential and High Frequency; Lecture delivered before the I.E.E., London, February, 1892
http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1892-02-03.htm (http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1892-02-03.htm)
IF YOU ARE INTERESTED ON TESLA MOTOR READ THIS DOCUMENT
http://www.archive.org/stream/inventionsresear00martiala#page/67/mode/1up (http://www.archive.org/stream/inventionsresear00martiala#page/67/mode/1up)
@wings:
Can you deduct anything from Tesla's writings (e.g. from the ones you cited) that helps me to drive the ring magnet as depicted in my Reply #933 (just a few posts above) in a very efficient way?
Greetings, Conrad
Zerofossilfuel reports positive results from a "Pancake Quadfilar":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8oPAH8N4kaY&feature=em-subs_digest (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8oPAH8N4kaY&feature=em-subs_digest)
My "Spiral Quadfilar" shares comparisons.
totoalas lenze (less???) motor http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyVa57cVZRE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyVa57cVZRE)
8) Shorting the third coil with cap increased the output voltage from 3 to 9 v ac and at the same time increase the speed at a constant voltage output
This voltage can
Quote from: conradelektro on April 09, 2013, 10:44:11 AM
@wings:
Can you deduct anything from Tesla's writings (e.g. from the ones you cited) that helps me to drive the ring magnet as depicted in my Reply #933 (just a few posts above) in a very efficient way?
Greetings, Conrad
Tesla .... too much to read and understand a genius!!!
"magnetic aftereffects" The two main sources of magnetic lag are discussed: lag due to eddy currents, and the so-called
magnetic "after-effect" (Nachwirkung), which is material dependent.
Apart from the contribution to the lag due to eddy currents discussed in
Section 4.1, additional delayed effects have a metallurgical origin (impurities such as C and N in Fe,
dislocations, etc.) and are mainly due to a time-dependent microstructural redistribution associated
with strain induced by magnetostrictive effects. (see http://arxiv.org/pdf/1103.1069.pdf (http://arxiv.org/pdf/1103.1069.pdf))
..... other interesting material "wiegand wire"?
all is related to d⨕/dt and magnetic retard
some suggestion on general experimental motor construction here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=-ZhwhPCFOA0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=-ZhwhPCFOA0)
Quote from: wings on April 10, 2013, 01:51:51 AM
Tesla .... too much to read and understand a genius!!!
"magnetic aftereffects" The two main sources of magnetic lag are discussed: lag due to eddy currents, and the so-called
magnetic "after-effect" (Nachwirkung), which is material dependent.
Apart from the contribution to the lag due to eddy currents discussed in
Section 4.1, additional delayed effects have a metallurgical origin (impurities such as C and N in Fe,
dislocations, etc.) and are mainly due to a time-dependent microstructural redistribution associated
with strain induced by magnetostrictive effects. (see http://arxiv.org/pdf/1103.1069.pdf (http://arxiv.org/pdf/1103.1069.pdf))
..... other interesting material "wiegand wire"?
all is related to d⨕/dt and magnetic retard
some suggestion on general experimental motor construction here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=-ZhwhPCFOA0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=-ZhwhPCFOA0)
Adams motor time lag effect
http://www.totallyamped.net/adams/
page 11
Or "why acceleration occurs when a passive generating output coil in an open magnetic system is short circuited or placed under a higher than nominal load".
Quote from: wings on April 10, 2013, 03:47:36 AM
Adams motor time lag effect
http://www.totallyamped.net/adams/ (http://www.totallyamped.net/adams/)
page 11
Or "why acceleration occurs when a passive generating output coil in an open magnetic system is short circuited or placed under a higher than nominal load".
It is interesting how people rediscover the same effect over and over again and always it gets a new name and a bunch of new "inventors".
Nevertheless, it is an interesting effect. With the right generator coil (some combination of pancake coils) and the right turn rate of the rotor one can may be reach something close to a 100% efficiency with a dynamo.
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: conradelektro on April 10, 2013, 06:32:21 AM
It is interesting how people rediscover the same effect over and over again and always it gets a new name and a bunch of new "inventors".
Nevertheless, it is an interesting effect. With the right generator coil (some combination of pancake coils) and the right turn rate of the rotor one can may be reach something close to a 100% efficiency with a dynamo.
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: conradelektro on April 10, 2013, 06:32:21 AM
It is interesting how people rediscover the same effect over and over again and always it gets a new name and a bunch of new "inventors".
Nevertheless, it is an interesting effect. With the right generator coil (some combination of pancake coils) and the right turn rate of the rotor one can may be reach something close to a 100% efficiency with a dynamo.
Greetings, Conrad
hidden diode ??? ?
Quote from: conradelektro on April 08, 2013, 03:32:37 PM
....
Attached is the circuit I am testing (not finished yet, attention, might not work) and the set up (still without the two Hall sensors).
...
Hi Conrad,
Would like to suggest connecting one-one resistor between each Hall device output and the positive rail, like a pull-up resistor, value may be anything in the some kOhm range like 4.7 kOhm to 10 kOhm. These identical resistors would be needed for discharging the p-channel MOSFETs paralleled gate-source capacitance, because there is nothing shown in the schematic to do that. The Hall devices have an nmos open drain output with a clamping 30V Zener diode in reverse direction to defend the device, so the output pin cannot discharge the inherent gate-source capacitors of the switching MOSFETs. the switch-off time may become very uncertain or even impossible.
One more thing: to make your pulse motor more efficient, you may wish to consider using the magnetic poles at both ends of your relay coil, it would cost input-power-wise the same but the output torque would increase. To do this, try to look for low profile relay coils, maybe around max. 1 cm in length only and use two of them: one coil as is shown now at the 9 o'clock position and the other one at the opposite side of the magnet at the 3 o'clock position. And you would need a C core to connect the outer ends of the relay coils to have a horse shoe like core with the two coils strongly attached magnetically to it at the endings.
I know that 12V DC relay coils normally have some hundred Ohms coil resistance and this may prove to be high to cause power loss if you consider collecting the energy of the collapsing field at switch-offs. There are relays operating with 5V DC and these can have coil resistances in the 40 - 70 Ohm range, making less loss, and using two such in series connection to switch them on or off at the same time as if they were a single coil you could use the same switching circuit. OF course each of the poles of these coils at the prongs of the C core should be chosen correctly to function as needed for the diametric magnet poles in every moment.
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on April 10, 2013, 06:13:38 PM
Hi Conrad,
Would like to suggest connecting one-one resistor between each Hall device output and the positive rail, like a pull-up resistor, value may be anything in the some kOhm range like 4.7 kOhm to 10 kOhm.
One more thing: to make your pulse motor more efficient, you may wish to consider using the magnetic poles at both ends of your relay coil, it would cost input-power-wise the same but the output torque would increase.
There are relays operating with 5V DC and these can have coil resistances in the 40 - 70 Ohm range, making less loss, and using two such in series connection to switch them on or off at the same time as if they were a single coil you could use the same switching circuit.
rgds, Gyula
@Gyula:
Thank you for the good advice, that helps a lot.
I would like to ask you, whether you know some good P-channel Mosfets which could be useful for this circuit. The P-channel AUIRF9Z34N seems to be an overkill (can switch a heavy current). I think one could use smaller ones , e.g. for switching only up to 1 Ampere. (N-channel Mosfets would need additional transistors, because the Hall sensor switches from High to Low when activated.)
I have 90 Ohm DC resistance coils from some other relais and will try them as well.
The "horse shoe like core with two coils" is also a very good idea. I have to think about this, because the space around the spinning ring magnet is limited in my set up . Once the magnet is spinning (heopefully very fast) I want to place various generator coils near it to test for DLE (reduced drag and speed increase). Horse shoe + two drive coils + two Hall sensors, where does the generator coil go?
In version two of this spinner I will leave more space around the ring magnet (also below the axle). At the moment I am testing various placements of the Hall sensors. (They should never switch on at the same time. Duration of "on time" is critical for power consumption.)
I have got 10 very good bearings (with ceramic balls) and a collection of diametrically magnetised ring magnets, so I can build several versions. I am thinking about an even smaller rotor (10 mm diameter ring magnet) because theoretically it could spin faster than a bigger one.
Greetings, Conrad
New coil has no effect on rotor speed when shorted.
It also accelerates when used as an air core.
All of the details are in the infobox of the video :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9X7tqNCZqM
Cheers,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on April 11, 2013, 10:44:15 AM
New coil has no effect on rotor speed when shorted.
It also accelerates when used as an air core.
All of the details are in the infobox of the video :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9X7tqNCZqM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9X7tqNCZqM)
Cheers,
DC.
Nice speed! I get the impression that the effect (no drag, speed up) can be produced with any coil as long as the magnet spins fast enough?
(My set up is not finished, many other chores hold me up.)
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: conradelektro on April 11, 2013, 12:44:39 PM
Nice speed! I get the impression that the effect (no drag, speed up) can be produced with any coil as long as the magnet spins fast enough?
(My set up is not finished, many other chores hold me up.)
Greetings, Conrad
I think not any coil, but any coil of many turns.
Capacitance seems to be the key, as we drive an inductor at higher frequencies it behaves more like a capacitor.
The last time i wound a coil of this size it didn't perform so well due to it's inductance, which is also governed by it's physical dimensions not just the number of turns, but it put out 1,100 VAC. It gave me a terrible electric shock when i mishandled it, right across my chest and made me yelp !
I want to see how it does when i step down the voltage, if that works then the next step is multiple coils.
Unfortunately it costs me around £40 to make the coil!
All the best,
DC.
Quote from: DeepCut on April 11, 2013, 10:44:15 AM
New coil has no effect on rotor speed when shorted.
It also accelerates when used as an air core.
All of the details are in the infobox of the video :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9X7tqNCZqM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9X7tqNCZqM)
Cheers,
DC.
Hi DC,
great job on the new coil!
Could you do some power measurements using a 1, 10 and or 100 ohm resistor instead of just a short. It would be nice to see the max power output you can get from your new coil (with and without core) while keeping the input current rise to a minimum.
Thanks for your great research and sharing your results.
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on April 11, 2013, 01:47:53 PM
Hi DC,
great job on the new coil!
Could you do some power measurements using a 1, 10 and or 100 ohm resistor instead of just a short. It would be nice to see the max power output you can get from your new coil (with and without core) while keeping the input current rise to a minimum.
Thanks for your great research and sharing your results.
Luc
Thanks Luc :)
I will have to wait until my gf goes to bed (10pm UK time) because it's a loud, high-pitched whine.
Jean-Louis was surprised by the aircore result, he was sure the effect was due to viscous remanent magnetisation.
He says he will do some aircore testing soon, i can't wait to see tests done with his superior hardware :)
Thanks for your encouragement and suggestions,
DC.
First spin:
I could do a first test of my set up. Only one Hall sensor and a 2N6111 transistor.
See the attached drive circuit. Just a test of how fast the ring magnet spins:
15 V supply Voltage --> 17 mA average power draw, ~ 0.25 Watt, about 60 Hz (3600 rpm)
18 V supply Voltage --> 22 mA average power draw, ~ 0.4 Watt, about 80 Hz (4800 rpm)
Now I will proceed to a transistor H-bridge and two Hall sensors (thanks to Gyula it might even work).
I might need a coil with less windings (higher power draw) to reach a really high speed.
Greetings, Conrad
OK i couldn't wait so i moved the setup into the kitchen for load-testing.
I put the output through the FWBR.
Measuring the FWBR output using a DMM with no load i get 120 VDC.
Using an analogue ammeter, i tested a 10 Ohm load.
This gave me just over 9mA.
Measuring the voltage gave me zero volts !
Testing the 100 ohm resistor gave me just over 9mA.
Measuring the voltage gave me zero volts !
So i took the ammeter out of the loop to test the voltage straight off the FWBR and got 120 VDC again.
I have triple checked the resistors, the 10 ohm is 9.6 and the 100 ohm is 99.8.
I tried some real loads, three different incandescent light bulbs.
One is 240V, one is 12V and the other 6V.
Again, zero voltage is being measured.
I checked the multimeter against some new batteries and it is spot on.
I'm not well-versed at all in power measurement but i know how to rectify, put a load across the rectifier, measure amps in series and voltage in parallel.
Any help greatly appreciated,
DC.
Quote from: conradelektro on April 11, 2013, 12:44:39 PM
Nice speed! I get the impression that the effect (no drag, speed up) can be produced with any coil as long as the magnet spins fast enough?
(My set up is not finished, many other chores hold me up.)
Greetings, Conrad
Hi Conrad, A coil of many turns is not required, I got acceleration under load and short circuit using
a small coil of 270 turns with 7 mH and only 0.8 Ohms resistance.
I simply used the correct amount of capacitance so that the unloaded coil presented a fairly large Lenz drag
to the motor, then when the load is added or the output shorted the Lenz drag is reduced and so the motor speeds up the rotor.
There may be some resonant kick back to the rotor, but mainly it speeds up because the actual load is reduced by adding the
electrical load or short circuit.
Look at the scope shots. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFWin-crxQY
By winding many turns the resonant frequency of the coil is reduced into the range of operation of the motor generator, without adding a capacitor, same effect
but my way has less resistance.
If the effect is so unique and unusual, then how come i can do it with the small coil I used and how come i can do the transformer thing as well.
It is a frequency induced restriction of the maximum current and a reduction in Lenz drag when a load is added.
The "prime mover" I used was a universal motor powered by DC from a boost converter, the motor was designed for 240 volts but I used only 20 to 35 volts. ;)
We can see the effect is obvious with resonant systems. The electrical load reduces the total system loading by altering the parameters of the
circuit. The load on the supply is reduced, that is why the rotor speeds up when it is a generator and why the input reduces with a transformer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRzQ_CO9vnw
Here's more with a regular transformer.
Input reduction under load effects ect.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zxde9qga79c
Same transformer lighting a globe efficiently with full rated voltage. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pzqxQwxVGA
This is a normal effect, i see no reason why it shouldn't happen if the conditions are made to allow it to happen.
Normal generators/transformers are designed to be efficient and power loads when they are added with full voltage and power,
so they don't show the effects of a poorly designed and used generator or transformer.
All reactive power is just applied power not yet used, it doesn't come from anywhere but the supply.
Cheers
Progress:
By moving the coil further away from the ring magnet I could increase the speed.
12 V --> 18 mA , ~ 0.22 Watt, 84 Hz (~ 5000 rpm)
15 V --> 21 mA, ~ 0.32 Watt, 110 Hz (~ 6600 rpm)
18 V --> 23 mA, , ~ 0.42 Watt, 121 Hz (~ 7200 rpm)
An other hole is needed in the base plate in order to move the coil even further away. Has to wait till tomorrow.
Good night, Conrad
@Farmhand: Thank you for the explanation. I will take that into consideration.
What is your opinion about pancake coils or a stack of pancake coils as a pick up or generator coil? Would that may be exhibit some interesting strangeness?
I just like to build little motors that spin rapidly (must be the child in me). My knowledge of electronics is very little, therefore I am not really expecting to discover OU. It is just a hobby.
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: conradelektro on April 11, 2013, 04:05:29 PM
@Farmhand: Thank you for the explanation. I will take that into consideration.
What is your opinion about pancake coils or a stack of pancake coils as a pick up or generator coil? Would that may be exhibit some interesting strangeness?
I just like to build little motors that spin rapidly (must be the child in me). My knowledge of electronics is very little, therefore I am not really expecting to discover OU. It is just a hobby.
Greetings, Conrad
Nice build Conrad :)
Even if i multiply your RPM by 10 to be around my 40KRPM, you would still be using a lot less power than my setup.
All the best,
DC.
Hi Conrad,
Here are some p-channel MOSFET types, I used Farnell but if you have a local cheaper source for those types, you could order from it of course. By the way, I think at least a 3-5 Amper drain current rated type is to be preffered versus the only 1A or so types because in case you lower the coils DC resistance, you do not have to change the MOSFETs. I think that even the 40-80 Ohm relay coils still cause losses but at least they are ready made and you do not have to wind them for the tests. Another factor is the drain-source voltage rating due to the voltage spikes at the coils switch-off times, even the 100V ratings may be a bad choice, at least the 200V rating is preferred, albeit the two MOSFETs are in series from the coil point of view, so their voltage ratings also add up.
http://uk.farnell.com/international-rectifier/irf9630pbf/transistor-mosfet-polarity-p/dp/1653665 (http://uk.farnell.com/international-rectifier/irf9630pbf/transistor-mosfet-polarity-p/dp/1653665) (200V/6.5A 0.8 Ohm)
http://uk.farnell.com/infineon/spd04p10pl-g/mosfet-p-ch-100v-4-2a-to252-3/dp/2212868 (http://uk.farnell.com/infineon/spd04p10pl-g/mosfet-p-ch-100v-4-2a-to252-3/dp/2212868) (100V/4.2A 0.55 Ohm)
http://uk.farnell.com/diodes-inc/zxmp10a18ktc/mosfet-p-ch-100v-3-8a-dpak/dp/1843773RL (http://uk.farnell.com/diodes-inc/zxmp10a18ktc/mosfet-p-ch-100v-3-8a-dpak/dp/1843773RL) (100V/3.8A 0.15 Ohm)
"Horse shoe + two drive coils + two Hall sensors, where does the generator coil go?"
Well, the simplest (perhaps) would be to use a longer shaft (or two shafts in line tied together, this would involve one more ball bearing at least) on which two ring magnets could be fixed: one is for the motor, the other is for the generator. More about this tomorrow.
Hi Deepcut,
The explanation is coil inductive reactance, that is which limits your output power. To understand this better, you have an 1.2 Henry coil (when aircored) with a 166 Ohm DC wire resistance. This gives a 2Pi*f*L inductive reactance, f is the frequency depending on the RPM. Say, with 600 Hz, this gives 6.28*600*1.2=4520 Ohm. With a core, this is rougly 4 times as many, cca 18 kOhm.
So your coil behaves as a generator with an unloaded output voltage, 120V when rectified and unfiltered, and which has at least a 4.5 kOhm inner impedance. If you connect a 10 Ohm, 100 Ohm resistor across this coil, then you have a voltage divider whereby the AC equivalent of the DC 120V feeds at least a 4.5 kOhm coil impedance and the load resistor in series, what remains across the load is very low, allmost all the induced power is wasted in the coil.
You may use a step down transformer directly at the coil output but off the shelf mains transformers made for 50 Hz mains frequency may introduce losses at the 400-600 Hz frequency range.
Another possibility is to tune out the inductive reactance with an identical capacitive reactance and there remains the coil winding resistance which will give the generator output resistance, 166 Ohm but this would be valid at and near to a single RPM frequency.
Gyula
Thanks Gyula, that makes it all clear.
And thanks FarmHand, food for thought.
All the best,
DC.
The first(?) video of skycollection is intersting here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5pMMOSXKS8&list=UUWqI0GXGprm81g3gkVa5v_w&index=16
But if we replace the lonely magnet by a coil who can spin and we try to short circuit this coil, is the Lenz effect don't appear, decelerate the permanent magnets or the permanent magnets accelerate ?
Quote from: conradelektro on April 11, 2013, 04:05:29 PM
@Farmhand: Thank you for the explanation. I will take that into consideration.
What is your opinion about pancake coils or a stack of pancake coils as a pick up or generator coil? Would that may be exhibit some interesting strangeness?
I just like to build little motors that spin rapidly (must be the child in me). My knowledge of electronics is very little, therefore I am not really expecting to discover OU. It is just a hobby.
Greetings, Conrad
Pancake coils are strange things anything is possible I guess.
I like to experiment with motors as well, I wish i could spend more time doing it.
Thane did say that in my experiment I was saturating the core, which is probably correct, it did get warm.
Not sure that it really make all that much difference.
Anyway if I was to do more experiments I would use coils with more turns and more core mass, better core.
Maybe bifilar coils could be interesting. It sure is fun to do, no doubt about it. :)
Cheers
Naudin :)
http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE23en.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE23en.htm)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Puk2PS2av6c
Yes, nice bit of code he's given us all there :)
Quote from: Farmhand on April 12, 2013, 05:34:46 AM
Pancake coils are strange things anything is possible I guess.
I like to experiment with motors as well, I wish i could spend more time doing it.
Thane did say that in my experiment I was saturating the core, which is probably correct, it did get warm.
Not sure that it really make all that much difference.
Anyway if I was to do more experiments I would use coils with more turns and more core mass, better core.
Maybe bifilar coils could be interesting. It sure is fun to do, no doubt about it. :)
Cheers
Two single wire wrapped pancake coils placed beck to back and series connected act as a bifilar pancake, because the two coils in close adjacency, cancel the coils self capacitance in one another, the same as the wires would do if they ran between each other.
One Tesla bifilar spool coil, wrapped around a spahgetti noodle, would work the same way for lbs of copper wire as an even stack of single serial wired pancakes.
Quote from: PiCéd on April 11, 2013, 05:51:50 PM
The first(?) video of skycollection is intersting here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5pMMOSXKS8&list=UUWqI0GXGprm81g3gkVa5v_w&index=16
But if we replace the lonely magnet by a coil who can spin and we try to short circuit this coil, is the Lenz effect don't appear, decelerate the permanent magnets or the permanent magnets accelerate ?
Igor Moroz with flat coils
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1zxs5hQSSA
Good video... But what I meant was a coil is free to rotate on itself, here we have a coil between two magnet motors.
In all of cases it could be a way.
I'm going to take some time off so i won't be moderating any more.
Thane has my login details and will fill-in for me when he's around.
I'm not sure that we really need a moderator on this thread anyway.
Best of luck and see you in a few months,
DC.
Quote from: PiCéd on April 12, 2013, 01:04:23 PM
Good video... But what I meant was a coil is free to rotate on itself, here we have a coil between two magnet motors.
In all of cases it could be a way.
@PiCéd: A coil which rotates needs two brushes to make the connections. Mechanically this would be a challenging task.
A new spin and power consumption measurement with the set up and drive circuit disclosed in my
Reply #952:
0.2 Watt (13.5 V and 15 mA on average) cause the rotor to spin with about 6000 rpm (100 Hz).
I made better supports for the two Hall sensors, but the transistor H-bridge will have to wait for P-Channel MOSFETs which should arrive next week.
My aim is to build a set up with a fast spinning "diametrically magnetised ring magnet" driven by an efficient drive circuit. Then I want to try various pan cake coils as generators.
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: DeepCut on April 12, 2013, 02:12:20 PM
I'm going to take some time off so i won't be moderating any more.
Thane has my login details and will fill-in for me when he's around.
I'm not sure that we really need a moderator on this thread anyway.
Best of luck and see you in a few months,
DC.
Thanks DC for your help and sharing you experiments.
Wishing you all the best in your time off
Luc
Quote@PiCéd: A coil which rotates needs two brushes to make the connections. Mechanically this would be a challenging task.
A new spin and power consumption measurement with the set up and drive circuit disclosed in my Reply #952:
0.2 Watt (13.5 V and 15 mA on average) cause the rotor to spin with about 6000 rpm (100 Hz).
I made better supports for the two Hall sensors, but the transistor H-bridge will have to wait for P-Channel MOSFETs which should arrive next week.
For the brushes I know that is the only way for this configuration.
For acceleration, a test into a short circuit and a non short circuit is not sufficient, a test with and without the coil with core is much better, with of course approximately the same input energy.
Quote from: conradelektro on April 12, 2013, 02:15:12 PM
0.2 Watt (13.5 V and 15 mA on average) cause the rotor to spin with about 6000 rpm (100 Hz).
Hi Conrad,
Nice progress in rpm with less input power to your pnp bipolar transistor test setup wrt your reply #952 and #955. It occurs to me a test from RomeroUK or Doug Konzen to place a permanent magnet behind the coil core and see with the distance how rpm and current draw change. EDIT: I think this does not work with alternating magnet poles, sorry.
Re on the horse shoe core suggestion: now that you have found a higher distance of the coil from the ring magnet can give better result the size of a possible C or U shape ferromagnetic core may increase even higher than earlier I imagined from your setup sizes. Higher sizes C or U cores from ferrite (size of 13-15cm in length between the U prongs or maybe higher) cost a lot unfortunately. So I cannot suggest any good solution at the moment, perhaps at ebay there are some offers on flat ferrite cores with rectangular cross section like the one used for ferrite antenna in portable radios in the past, from such shapes somehow an rectangular U shape could be built perhaps.
One more thing: perhaps it would give you a more precise Hall sensor positioning possibility if you built a small (OD=3 or 4cm) 'control' disk with small cylinder magnets embedded, this disk would rotate together with the ring magnet of course on the same shaft. In one of Bedini videos you can see such control disk on which the small magnets control a reed switch but your Halls can also be controlled like that of course. see here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TICXxP1jI4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TICXxP1jI4) By using 3 or 4mm OD cylinder magnets on the small disk the control could be more precise than you have now.
As long as your input current is in the some ten mA range (say not higher than 20-30mA) the I*I*R
DC coil loss may not be high, especially if you manage to use coil(s) with well under 100 Ohm winding resistance. (20mA on 100 Ohm gives 40mW loss). And it is a good idea to use separate generator coils which may have thicker wires and less number of windings wrt the relay motor coils. Naudin or Ossie have used air core coils manufactured for audio cross over filters, these are pricey, unfortunately, if you cannot wind them.
rgds, Gyula
The two battery system for switching polarity in the horseshoe core coil of Igor's motor is fiendishly simple. A DPDT reed switch could run the entire motor placed near the rotor magnets. The core volume increases lag time. The Tesla bifilar reduces resistance to change in current direction in the coil to zero.
A large industrial DPDT reed switch could be wired in series with powerfull batteries, and turn a large size inertial rotor. The Horseshoe core could be a back yard throwing type.
@Gyula:
Thank you for the many suggestions, I collect them and will try to incorporate the suggestions in Version 2. The current version and your comments willy teach me how to do it right eventually.
At the moment I am playing with my set up and the attached circuit (because the P-Channel MOSFETs which I ordered have not arrived yet).
From the Bedini Motor circuits I took the idea to use a small Neon bulb in order to cut off the "spikes at the coils switch off times" (which you also mentioned in connection with choosing a MOSFET). It seems to be a good idea, because I measured spikes up to 140 Volt (with a scope).
Then I tried to cut off the spikes with a LED or a diode over the coil (alternatively to the Neon, see the circuit diagram). The spikes are nicely suppressed but the rotor slows down by 30%.
The Neon is visible on the photo (on the breed board).
Concerning the planned transistor H-bridge for commutation, see my Reply #933 on April 08 (note, the pull up resistors are missing): I might need some logic circuitry to avoid the simultaneous switching of the two Hall sensors (because that would cause a short circuit in the transistor H-bridge). Tests with the two Hall sensors are under way. It looks like I can place them just right to avoid simultaneous on conditions (but it is potentially a bad situation).
The integrated motor driver H-bridges all have internal circuitry to avoid accidental shorts in the bridge.
Greetings, Conrad
Hi Conrad,
The use of a Neon bulb across the collector-emitter came from the fact that the suggested switching transistor VCE rating is only 60-70V (for 2N3055 or similar types) and a simple means had to be found to defend the transistor. In case of a HV transistor type the Neon bulb would not be needed at all, however a HV transistor costs more and is not readily available everywhere. Your 2N6111 transistor is a 40V device, it is fortunate it has not got ruined from the higher voltage spikes.
The explanation why you did not find RPM reduction whenever the Neon was ON is that it does not influence the transistor ON time in any way, it is always an open circuit whenever the voltage difference (either AC or DC) is below its trigger voltage (70 to 120V, depending on Neon types). And in the schematics you or many experimenters use for such pulse motors the peak pulse voltage can only go up into that voltage range when the switch-off time is quick enough to interrupt the current flowing in the coil during the transistor ON time (you surely know induced voltage at switch-off is L*(dI/dt) where L is the coil inductance, I is the electric current change and t is the switch-off time.)
Regarding your LED in parallel with the coil, it is the reverse voltage breakdown rating for the LED which clamps i.e. limits the battery voltage when the transistor is ON. LEDs normally have 5V to 7V reverse voltage rating, so higher than 5 or max 7V across a LED in reverse direction cause a reverse current draw like in a Zener diode (and it may ruin the LED) so the (say) 11V supply voltage cannot reach the coil, this is why your rotor slows down. (If you connect LEDs in series, then their breakdown voltages add up of course, just like their forward voltages do.)
IF you use a normal Si diode (say 1N4007) instead of the LED in parallel with the coil, then albeit there would be no problem with the reverse breakdown voltage/current, the diode would change (delay) the switch-off time by letting the spike voltage drive current further on in the coil, hence magnetic field would be present for a longer time. To compensate for this, you would need to reposition a little bit the Hall sensor wrt to the best position for the no diode case.
Regarding your worry about the simultanous ON condition for the H bridge, yes this is a real possibility and if happens then any of the two MOSFEts under each other can conduct and short the supply voltage, i.e. both MOSFETs may get ruined. If your power supply has no built-in adjustable current limiting feature, then it is a good idea to use a resistor in series with the supply output to limit the current below the max drain current rating of any one MOSFET during the adjustments and later to short or omit the resistor. (Simply use Ohm's law to know the resistor value, considering data sheet continuous current value for the MOSFET and the max supply voltage you may use for sensor adjustments.)
I agree that the planned circuit for your H bridge is a potencially hazardous situation for the MOSFETs, although with great care (and maybe with the series resistor) the MOSFET damage could be avoided.
rgds, Gyula
@Gyula:
Using the current limitation feature of the laboratory power supply is a very good idea, I will do that when testing the Hall sensors with the transistor H-bridge. My power supply shuts off at 3 A any way, but I will trim it down to 500 mA which the selected P-channel MOSFETS should support easily.
I could do some more tests with a diode across the coil (see the attached scope shots):
It seems that the spikes (no diode across the coil) have a beneficial effect on the turning ring magnet. The spikes seem to pull briefly the S-pole of the ring magnet towards the coil core and such seem to accelerate the ring magnet. Once the spikes are eliminated by the diode this "help" goes away and the spin rate drops by 30%.
Moving the Hall sensor can not compensate for the "loss of the spikes". With spikes the turn rate is about 110 Hz, with the diode across the coil the turn rate drops to about 70 Hz (13.5 Volt supply Voltage, 15 mA average power draw).
Remarks:
- When the transistor switches on (triggered by the Hall sensor) the coil pushes away the N-pole of the ring magnet.
- It looks like there never was a reverse breakdown of the diode in my initial tests (the LED also did not break down, they are sturdier than one thinks, like the 2N6111 which survives 140 Volt spikes).
- Any way, the reverse breakdown Voltage of LEDs and Diodes was news for me (I never really understood the implications of this value), I learned something.
- I always wondered why the Bedini circuit (and similar ones for monopole rotors) work so well with spinning ring or ball magnets (which are in effect N S N S rotors). May be the spikes are the explanation. The spikes seem to help the other pole to pass the drive coil. But I might be wrong.
Greetings, Conrad
@Quote from Conradelektro:
" I always wondered why the Bedini circuit (and similar ones for monopole rotors) work so well with spinning ring or ball magnets (which are in effect N S N S rotors). May be the spikes are the explanation. The spikes seem to help the other pole to pass the drive coil. But I might be wrong".
A simple reed switch dosen't need any help letting the other pole pass the coil. I think the bifilar Bedini trigger coil generates a base transister charge from both N and S poles.
Bedini's N S circuits are designed for single wire coils. I don't think his bifilar needs any extra help to run a N S array. I don't think Bedini discovered that, I believe it had to be shown to him. The bifilar is ambivilant about a pole face. The approaching "Magnet Pole" causes an opposite pole to appear in the bifilar. This pole is reinforced by the power pulse. This makes The two pulse SSG a hi torque power hog, compared to the monopole reed switch that pays double the money! The (JonnyDavro, Gadgetmall) 12 volt relay inductor causes the kind of pulse width modification that retards that uneeded second pulse and allows us to maximize economy. Like an Ozzie motor pulse trimmer. Input can be turned down to under a hundred millivolts to power a hi speed spinner. I have to short around the inductor to start my neo sphere, it inhibits the performance so much. Once it gets going you can pick up with it and speed up for practically nothing.
"Skipping" from from spikes may help explain the sudden bursts of speed. Also, very high speed causes the bifilar to generate coil capacitance, which induces resistance to change in current direction in the coil. This results in bifilar air core "Lenz Delay".
The real benifit of Bedini's circuit is the primary flyback. After ""Lenz Drag" is circumvented, our bemf harvest yields a tiny yet proud gain.
Two Hall effect transisters is a bad idea!
Conrad:
My compliments on your setup and your nice clean scope captures and showing your schematic. Also, showing were you put both contacts of your scope probe is very important and everybody should do that.
QuoteIt seems that the spikes (no diode across the coil) have a beneficial effect on the turning ring magnet. The spikes seem to pull briefly the S-pole of the ring magnet towards the coil core and such seem to accelerate the ring magnet. Once the spikes are eliminated by the diode this "help" goes away and the spin rate drops by 30%.
You almost have it there but the logic is inversed. What's happening is that when you have the spikes, let's call that the "normal" speed. So there is no beneficial effect to the spikes. When you add the diode, the speed is being reduced. In other words adding the diode causes drag on the rotor and slows it down. So with the spikes is the normal rotor speed and adding the diode causes a detrimental effect on the rotor speed.
This is all shown in the lower left scope trace that that looks like a square wave. The voltage is near-zero when the transistor is switched on and this is what you would expect. When the transistor switches off the voltage is about -14 volts. This shows that when the transistor switches off the coil is continuously discharging it's stored energy through the diode. For example, if the voltage across the diode is normally one volt and your power supply voltage is 13 volts, then the scope trace will always display -14 volts when the transistor is switched off.
Notice how you arrive at that voltage: If the power supply is set to 13 volts, with your probe connections that will measure -13 volts. If current is flowing through the diode, then the diode causes another voltage drop of one volt to give you a scope reading of -14 volts. Notice that you never see any EMF waveform induced in the coil like in your upper-left scope capture. Since you don't see an EMF waveform in the coil, that's telling you that the coil is actively discharging energy into the diode during the entire transistor off time.
That means that current is continuously flowing through the coil. Current is increasing in the coil when the transistor is on, and decreasing in the coil when the transistor is off but it never reaches zero. With respect to your rotor, the rotor gets a push when the transistor is on to make it spin faster. When the transistor is off, the coil does not "shut off" and therefore it creates a pull on the rotor to slow it down. Assume that the transistor switches on at top-dead-center. That starts the push. After a certain rotation angle if the coil does not switch off, the push all of a sudden becomes a pull because the rotor magnet polarity has changed. So with the diode you get an undesirable pull on the rotor that slows it down.
Synchro:
When you are talking about pulse motor circuits and bifilar coils you have to be specific. Just making general comments won't work. I am assuming that when you say "bifilar coil" you are talking about two separate coils wound around the same bobbin. I am also assuming that they will not be made to work in self-cancellation mode because that makes no sense. So you have four terminals for the two separate wires that make up the bifilar coil. How do you connect each one of those four terminals into a pulse motor circuit? Can you draw a schematic because that's 1000 times better than a verbal description.
You state:
QuoteI don't think his bifilar needs any extra help to run a N S array. I don't think Bedini discovered that, I believe it had to be shown to him. The bifilar is ambivilant about a pole face. The approaching "Magnet Pole" causes an opposite pole to appear in the bifilar. This pole is reinforced by the power pulse.
I have no idea what means because I don't even know how you wire a bifilar coil into a pulse motor. If you want to clarify your statements and show a schematic and even add a timing diagram, even if it is a hand-drawn sketch, then people will have a much better chance of understanding you.
MileHigh
Conrad:
QuoteI always wondered why the Bedini circuit (and similar ones for monopole rotors) work so well with spinning ring or ball magnets (which are in effect N S N S rotors). May be the spikes are the explanation. The spikes seem to help the other pole to pass the drive coil. But I might be wrong.
There is a very simple explanation for this.
Suppose that you have a pulse motor with a rotor with four poles, all North facing out. When the rotor magnets fly by the drive coil the coil switches on after top-dead-center to give the rotor a positive push.
Now, what happens if you turn two of the rotor magnets around so that the rotor magnets are N-S-N-S facing out?
The answer is that the North magnets will give you the same results - the coil energizes after top-dead-center to give the rotor a positive push. The South magnets will cause the coil to energize
before top-dead-center to give the coil a positive
pull. The pull will stop at top-dead-center, which is what you want.
To understand this more just look at the transistor triggering waveform from the pick-up coil for a North-out and for a South-out spinning rotor magnet.
MileHigh
Quote from: Farmhand on April 11, 2013, 03:48:52 PM
Hi Conrad, A coil of many turns is not required, I got acceleration under load and short circuit using
a small coil of 270 turns with 7 mH and only 0.8 Ohms resistance.
I simply used the correct amount of capacitance so that the unloaded coil presented a fairly large Lenz drag
to the motor, then when the load is added or the output shorted the Lenz drag is reduced and so the motor speeds up the rotor.
There may be some resonant kick back to the rotor, but mainly it speeds up because the actual load is reduced by adding the
electrical load or short circuit.
Look at the scope shots. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFWin-crxQY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFWin-crxQY)
By winding many turns the resonant frequency of the coil is reduced into the range of operation of the motor generator, without adding a capacitor, same effect
but my way has less resistance.
If the effect is so unique and unusual, then how come i can do it with the small coil I used and how come i can do the transformer thing as well.
It is a frequency induced restriction of the maximum current and a reduction in Lenz drag when a load is added.
The "prime mover" I used was a universal motor powered by DC from a boost converter, the motor was designed for 240 volts but I used only 20 to 35 volts. ;)
We can see the effect is obvious with resonant systems. The electrical load reduces the total system loading by altering the parameters of the
circuit. The load on the supply is reduced, that is why the rotor speeds up when it is a generator and why the input reduces with a transformer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRzQ_CO9vnw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRzQ_CO9vnw)
Here's more with a regular transformer.
Input reduction under load effects ect.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zxde9qga79c (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zxde9qga79c)
Same transformer lighting a globe efficiently with full rated voltage. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pzqxQwxVGA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pzqxQwxVGA)
This is a normal effect, i see no reason why it shouldn't happen if the conditions are made to allow it to happen.
Normal generators/transformers are designed to be efficient and power loads when they are added with full voltage and power,
so they don't show the effects of a poorly designed and used generator or transformer.
All reactive power is just applied power not yet used, it doesn't come from anywhere but the supply.
Cheers
Indeed .... KneeDeep
@MileHigh: thank you for taking the time to explain my measurements and tests. This is what I always hope for in this forum, a discussion of specific set ups and circuits.
Greetings, Conrad
Hi Conrad,
I think that controlling the Hall sensor by the ring magnet may not give you as much flexibility in adjusting the length of the ON time for the switch as you would receive from a separate, smaller sized magnets on a separate disk.
With the ring magnet the Hall device can sense the same flux strength during very nearly 180° of a full 360° rotational cycle, as is shown by the 50% duty cycle of the switching pulses. I think this is why you found that you could not compansate for the "loss of the spikes", whereever you position the Hall sensor within a hemisphere volume the flux strength is more or less the same during a 180°rotational cycle.
Keep up the great work.
rgds, Gyula
Synchro:
When you are talking about pulse motor circuits and bifilar coils you have to be specific. Just making general comments won't work. I am assuming that when you say "bifilar coil" you are talking about two separate coils wound around the same bobbin. I am also assuming that they will not be made to work in self-cancellation mode because that makes no sense. So you have four terminals for the two separate wires that make up the bifilar coil. How do you connect each one of those four terminals into a pulse motor circuit? Can you draw a schematic because that's 1000 times better than a verbal description.
You state:
Quote
I don't think his bifilar needs any extra help to run a N S array. I don't think Bedini discovered that, I believe it had to be shown to him. The bifilar is ambivilant about a pole face. The approaching "Magnet Pole" causes an opposite pole to appear in the bifilar. This pole is reinforced by the power pulse.
I have no idea what means because I don't even know how you wire a bifilar coil into a pulse motor. If you want to clarify your statements and show a schematic and even add a timing diagram, even if it is a hand-drawn sketch, then people will have a much better chance of understanding you.
MileHigh
This picture is exactly what I'm talking about: Note the 4 wires 2 ends. Look below it, you'll see a red wire Tesla bifilar wraped on a thread spool, in series with a 12 volt reed switch. That's a "Mach Speed" circuit. I would post a schematic for it, but all it takes to spin a diametric tube is a battery between one end of the bifilar coil and one end of the reed switch. The other end of the bifilar coil attaches to the loose end of the reed switch. The power pulse passes directly through the reed switch. Three componants comprise this simpelist circuit. I can't explain why it seemingly begins to power itself over 25k.
Skycollection has posted a video (Confirming the delayed Lenz Effect) with a message for replicators
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP-k-AW-ejM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP-k-AW-ejM)
Message: A MESSAGE FOR THE PEOPLE WHO ARE BUILDING PANCAKE COILS, "NOT CONFUSE" ...! THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BI-FILAR PANCAKE COIL IS EASY BUT "IT DOESN´T MEAN THAT YOU ARE GOING TO DELAY THE LENZ EFFECT", THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE YOU WILL LOSE TIME AND MONEY. MY PTOTOTYPES OF PANCAKE COIL HAS INSIDE OF THE COIL A COMPONENT THAT IS ESSENTIAL TO DELAY THE LENZ EFFECT, FOR THAT REASON NOT HAVE BEEN REPLICATED.
According to the speech in the video he is going to explain it step by step in the future
I believe the series reed switch circuit accelerates the spinner and slips "Lenz effect". The setup achieves unity beyound threshold speed just like the twin self looped zero draw spirals. Bearingless spinners reduce friction loss to a minimum. I believe a Neo Sphere spinner inside a bifilar "Spiral Knot", pulsed by a reed switch in series with a battery, would demonstrate the zero amp draw "Lenz Delay Unity" threshold r.p.m with an amp meter and Laser tach.
We don't need a seperate self looped output coil to achieve "Unity" from "Lenz Cleansing". One levitating bearingless spinner inside a spifilar air core will balance the exchange after reaching "Glide Speed" just shorted to a battery throgh a reed switch!
Synchro1:
Thanks for clarifying what you mean in your case when your say bifilar coil.
Here are some comments about that and anybody is free to do their own testing on the bench to confirm this.
Supposing that you have a 500-turn regularly-wound coil and you have a (250 + 250)-turn bifilar coil as shown in your diagram. The main difference between the two is that the bifilar coil posses the capability to a have higher voltage potential for the inter-winding self-capacitance of the coil. However, the two coils possess the same number of turns and have the same inductance.
The way capacitance works is that it has more and more effect the higher and higher the frequencies that you are working with. The pulse motor works at very very low frequencies. Therefore it's expected that there will be no noticeable effects from using the bifilar coil in a pulse motor as compared to a regular coil. In both coils, the self-capacitance between windings might be on the order of tens or hundreds of picofarads. That is an extremely small capacitance. In addition, the capacitance is "transient" and only exists at very very high frequencies. There is no insulating dielectric between two plates like in a normal capacitor. There is actually a conductor between the "plates" which are the windings of the coil.
Relative to the bullet points in that graphic, and comparing a 500-turn regular coil with the (250+250)-turn bifilar coil you get the following:
1) The bifilar coil will not respond faster to the firing pulse
2) The bifilar coil will not have an increased magnetic field strength
3) The back-EMF spike produced will not be larger for the bifilar coil. The higher-voltage on the inter-winding capacitance may slow down the slew rate of the back-EMF spike and also slightly reduce its amplitude
4) There will not be any increased generator output. Generators operate at low frequencies and the bifilar capacitance will be insignificant and not have any affect at all
So, in pulse motor application it's highly unlikely you will see any difference in performance when you compare a 500-turn regular coil with the (250+250)-turn bifilar coil. Any pulse motor keeners that want to check this just have to make sure that the two coils that they test and compare have the same number of turns and approximately the same dimensions.
As a final comment myself personally I would not call this a "bifilar coil." "Bifilar" implies two separate conductors where the coil being discussed here is actually a single-conductor coil. It needs another name so that it is not confused with a true bifilar coil. Perhaps call it a "high-voltage self-capacitance" coil or something like that.
MileHigh
Quote from: hanon on April 14, 2013, 10:47:08 AM
Skycollection has posted a video (Confirming the delayed Lenz Effect) with a message for replicators
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP-k-AW-ejM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP-k-AW-ejM)
According to the speech in the video he is going to explain it step by step in the future
The best output reading I can see in this video is 14.25 Volt at 0.18 A, which is about 2.5 Watt. (I just take the highest readings on his meters which are visible, it might not mean anything tangible.)
Unfortunately we can not see any input power to the rotor driver. But I guess we would have heard some bragging in case the indication for OU were hight.
Greetings, Conrad
@Milehigh,
I beg your pardon here, but you're spreading stark falsehoods about the bifilar's attributes. Two coils with Iron nail cores wraped differently as you describe will pick up an uneven number of tacks when charged.
Here's a test done by degrees of magnetic compass deviation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iATOcAmbz3E (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iATOcAmbz3E)
Synchro1:
Anyone can check what I am saying by doing their own bench tests and compare he two different types of coils. I have explained the logic for the lack of differences between the two types of coils in a pulse motor application.
If you use ether type of coil as an electromagnet, then that's a DC application. If you set up a very controlled experiment to pick up tacks you should not see any differences between the two coils.
I also looked at the clip that you linked to where the guy shows the compass deviation. The guy is making a fundamental mistake in that clip and therefore coming to an incorrect conclusion. Can anybody spot the mistake?
MileHigh
Hi Conrad,
It occured to me to show you romerouk's coil switching schematic done also with a Hall sensor and a pnp transistor and the reason I refer to it is he connected a diode across the collector-emitter of his transistor. I thought you might wish to test it.
You can see the drawing here http://www.overunity.com/3842/muller-dynamo/msg284131/#msg284131 (http://www.overunity.com/3842/muller-dynamo/msg284131/#msg284131) in driver_coils_setup.jpg or redrawn by Groundloop in romerouk_setup.jpg a bit scrolling down the thread. Your UF4007 diode is a good one to use there too.
About the purpose of this diode: I think the induced voltage in his coils from the rotor magnets is fed back to the battery via the diode. If this is so, then your input current draw from the power supply should be a little bit reduced when you use that diode.
EDIT: no need for doing any other change in your switching circuit, just connect the diode and watch input current draw and maybe the waveform across the coil as before. The possibility that this diode may cause Lenz drag is not zero though...
rgds, Gyula
@MileHigh,
"Bifilar windings are used at metal scrap yards as electromagnets since they do more work per kwh"
Quit trying to pretend that the Tesla "Scrapyard bifilar electromagnet" dosen't really do anything special based on some side tests run by you.
.
Synchro1, I am not pretending anything, just sharing information with you. I can't comment on your "out of the blue" comment about scrapyard electromagnets except to say that scrapyard electromagnets will behave exactly the same way as an electromagnet on your bench.
To be helpful, I did a search on "ampere turn" for you. This is from one of the first few links:
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
It has been found that an electric current sets up a magnetic field
similar to that produced by a permanent magnet. This action is known as
Electromagnetism and is very important in many devices. A desirable
feature of electromagnetism is that it is possible to control the strength
and polarity of the magnetic field. When current exists in a coil, the coil
has all the magnetic qualities of a permanent magnet and is called an
Electromagnet. If this electromagnet is brought near a permanent
magnet or another electromagnet, the like and unlike poles react exactly
as explained for the permanent magnets. Moreover, an increase of current
in the coil increases the strength of the magnetic field, and a decrease
of current weakens the field.
Ampere-Turns:
When the number of loops or turns of the coil is increased and the
current remains the same, the strength of the magnetic field increases.
Each loop or turn of the coil sets up it's own magnetic field, which unites
with the fields of the other loops to produce the field around the entire
coil. The more loops, the more magnetic fields unite and reinforce each other
and, as a result, the total magnetic field becomes stronger.
To compare the magnetic strength of different coils, and to obtain
a basis for measuring the magnetomotive force of an electromagnet, the number
of turns of wire is multiplied by the number of amperes of current carried
by the wire and the result is called Ampere-Turns (NI). The ampere-turn
is the unit for measuring the magnetomotive force of a current-carrying
coil. In a formula, the magnetomotive force in ampere-turns can be expressed
as:
F = NI
F = magnetomotive force in ampere-turns
N = number of turns
I = current in amperes
For example:
A coil with 10 turns and a current of 10 amperes has an F of 100
ampere-turns.
The above excerpted from: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/boyce_smith/magnets.htm
Ampere-turns per meter is just as it reads, the number of ampere turns per length of the electromagnetic coil.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now, armed with that information, can you state what the mistake is in the clip that you linked to?
MileHigh
Hi Conrad, you are wrong with your conclussions and measurments, we need technology to make a prediction of the results,please not confuse more to the people, i will make an analisis of the pancake coil in the best laboratory in the world very soon...! saludos jorge.
View this as a concept:
One important thing to note...
One cannot test the difference between a bifilar coil vs a single filar coil just using a bifilar coil wired differently for each test. ;)
You have to have 2 separate coils, 1 wound and connected series bifi and one wound single filar with each having a total number of the same wire turns. Example, single filar is 100 turns of single strand, and the bifi is 50 turns of 2 strands equaling the same amount of wire on each bobbin, just connected differently.
There is a difference in how these coils react to input.
Mags
Quote from: skycollection on April 14, 2013, 07:47:31 PM
Hi Conrad, you are wrong with your conclussions and measurments, we need technology to make a prediction of the results,please not confuse more to the people, i will make an analisis of the pancake coil in the best laboratory in the world very soon...! saludos jorge.
@jorge: please tell us the input power (Volt and Ampere) to your drive circuit as shown in your video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP-k-AW-ejM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP-k-AW-ejM)
Your pancake coils are very interesting, but one should compare input (to your drive circuit moving the rotor) and output (from your pancake coils).
In case you plan to publish test results from the "best laboratory in the world" please take care to show
input power and output power.
I am not confusing the people, I am asking very straight forward questions.
Greetings, Conrad
Skycollection, you must try something with your first video, the lonely maget replaced by a coil who can spin must be a good way.
We can see in your video that you are a little less energy at the end, well if the energy calculated is the input.
Here's the nail core paper clip test: Zoom in. This experiment demonstrates "THE EXTRA POWER'" in the Nicola Tesla patented bifilar electromagnet. Scrap yard magnet secret revealed!
The Bifilar, with the same amount of voltage picks up twice the number of paper clips, and "Doubles" the magnetic power.
A simple experiment to see the power of bifi coils... :o
Thanks for sharing!
Regards
Cc
Synchro1 and Crazycut06:
You know the old cliche, you have to be very careful about what you read on the Internet.
The "Tesla bifilar electromagnet" stuff is bogus. Have either of you done the experiment? There is no reason that it should work.
I explained that the strength of a magnetic field for an electromagnet is determined by the ampere-turns. In that document you can see that both wire configurations around the nail will give you the same number of ampere-turns. Therefore both electromagnets will have the same strength.
Here is a big clue about the quality of the web site:
QuoteThe same amount of voltage, from the same battery, produces twice as much energy in the bifilar wound coil as in the single wound coil. This is just one of the many techniques Nikola Tesla used to make his inventions highly efficient.
The magnetic field is not produced by voltage, the magnetic field is produced by current. It's a subtle difference but it is still significant. If the guy or girl that put up that web page really knew what they are talking about they would not have made that mistake. Likewise, there is no "production of energy" associated with this, it's completely wrong to state that. They use the term "efficient" without qualifying it so it is meaningless. They are just using Tesla's name to make some money.
Because of this you should be very wary of that web site. To me it looks like a junk web site created in the year 2000. It just sits there to get some hits so that it can generate a bit of advertising revenue when people click through the ads.
If you don't believe me about the "Tesla bifilar windings" for an electromagnet, by all means do some testing yourself. You will quickly come to the conclusion that it doesn't matter if the wiring is "bifilar," the only thing that counts is the ampere-turns.
If you don't believe me and won't be doing the tests, then please explain why a "Tesla bifilar winding" to make an electromagnet is better than ordinary winding. After all, when you think about it there is no real difference between the windings. The "bifilar" business is the same deal as the graphic that Synchro1 posted for the "bifilar" coil. It's just an interleaved wiring of the coil, it's not truly bifilar.
The real point is that it's important to consider all the information coming at you and look at it in a logical fashion and evaluate it on a case-by-case basis. There is a lot of junk information out there no matter what you are researching. So you want to try to separate out the good information from the junk information.
MileHigh
@MileHigh,
Why don't you perform the experiment to expose it as fake? You're the "Gadfly" in the face of basic fundamentals practically everyone else already learned about.
The coil increases the field strength without the increased current draw as you infer, or no one would have any use for the coil design. How do you explain it's broad industrial application as an electromagnet. if there's no advantage to it?
This is a quote:
"Bifilar windings are used at metal scrap yards as electromagnets since they do more work per kwh".
You infer that the bifilar coil would draw twice the current as the single wrap coil of equal Ohms, if both coils were shorted accross input electrodes! Explain how the bifilar coil magicly doubles it's resistance to consume twice the current? You're saying one of those nail core coils has twice the resistance as the other with the same wire length. Think about it!
The increased magnetc field is a result of Lorentz effect quanta mechanics, not the result of higher current draw.
Go ahead and do the 10 minute experiment! Get a second "D" cell battery. Connect them in parallel untill the voltage levels off. Hook them up to the coils holding the paper clips, then measure and compare voltages. It won't take long for twice the watt consumption to register a voltage differential between the batteries if your purblind theory's correct.
Synchro1:
Actually I am more of a basic fundamentals guy! lol
QuoteThe coil increases the field strength without the increased current draw as you infer, or no one would have any use for the coil design. How do you explain it's broad industrial application as an electromagnet.
Can you show some links for the broad industrial application of quasi-bifilar coils for electromagnets? I tried on Google for a while but I couldn't find any.
Quote"Bifilar windings are used at metal scrap yards as electromagnets since they do more work per kwh".
Do you have a reference for this?
QuoteYou infer that the bifilar coil would draw twice the current as the single wrap coil of equal Ohms, if both coils were shorted accross input electrodes! Explain how the bifilar coil magicly doubles it's resistance to consume twice the current? You're saying one of those nail core coils has twice the resistance as the other with the same wire length. Think about it!
I didn't say that, perhaps you misunderstood me. We are always talking about a "pseudo" or "quasi" bifilar coil, right? It's just one conductor with interlaced windings. Sort of like an old NTSC or PAL video frame with odd and even fields. What I said is that the interlacing will not make a significant change as compared to a regularly wound coil assuming the same number of turns for the vast majority of coil applications. That is the key point. Do you agree with that?
QuoteGo ahead and do the 10 minute experiment! Get a second "D" cell battery. Connect them in parallel untill the voltage levels off. Hook them up to the coils holding the paper clips, then measure and compare voltages. It won't take long for twice the watt consumption to register a voltage differential between the batteries if your purblind theory's correct.
I don't really understand what your point is here or understand what your setup is. Could you make a schematic and show what voltages you want to compare? I am actually pretty knowledgeable about electronics, did you see my comments on Conrad's scope shots?
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on April 15, 2013, 11:05:30 AM
Synchro1 and Crazycut06:
You know the old cliche, you have to be very careful about what you read on the Internet.
The "Tesla bifilar electromagnet" stuff is bogus. Have either of you done the experiment? There is no reason that it should work.
I explained that the strength of a magnetic field for an electromagnet is determined by the ampere-turns. In that document you can see that both wire configurations around the nail will give you the same number of ampere-turns. Therefore both electromagnets will have the same strength.
Here is a big clue about the quality of the web site:
The magnetic field is not produced by voltage, the magnetic field is produced by current. It's a subtle difference but it is still significant. If the guy or girl that put up that web page really knew what they are talking about they would not have made that mistake. Likewise, there is no "production of energy" associated with this, it's completely wrong to state that. They use the term "efficient" without qualifying it so it is meaningless. They are just using Tesla's name to make some money.
Because of this you should be very wary of that web site. To me it looks like a junk web site created in the year 2000. It just sits there to get some hits so that it can generate a bit of advertising revenue when people click through the ads.
If you don't believe me about the "Tesla bifilar windings" for an electromagnet, by all means do some testing yourself. You will quickly come to the conclusion that it doesn't matter if the wiring is "bifilar," the only thing that counts is the ampere-turns.
If you don't believe me and won't be doing the tests, then please explain why a "Tesla bifilar winding" to make an electromagnet is better than ordinary winding. After all, when you think about it there is no real difference between the windings. The "bifilar" business is the same deal as the graphic that Synchro1 posted for the "bifilar" coil. It's just an interleaved wiring of the coil, it's not truly bifilar.
The real point is that it's important to consider all the information coming at you and look at it in a logical fashion and evaluate it on a case-by-case basis. There is a lot of junk information out there no matter what you are researching. So you want to try to separate out the good information from the junk information.
MileHigh
Hi MileHigh,
I cannot despute you on this as i don't have enough experience with this bifi coil, i'll look for a video that i saw where he used a single turn coil versus a mutifilar one.
Thanks for the brief warning...
Regards
Cc
@MileHigh.
Here's a hyperlink to the experiment. Use two batteries and compare voltages. You don't have any right to insult this labtester. He's been around, he's a PHD and above reproach. Who do you think you are compared to him to humiliate him as a "Junk knowledge" hoaxter? Check out his web site. This experiment has been replicated by plenty of people who think you're really dumb. Get with it.
http://www.tesla-coil-builder.com/bifilar_electromagnet.htm (http://www.tesla-coil-builder.com/bifilar_electromagnet.htm)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNAZ6heorEc
Mags
Synchro1:
Here is the key point from your link:
QuoteThe same amount of voltage, from the same battery, produces twice as much energy in the bifilar wound coil as in the single wound coil. This is just one of the many techniques Nikola Tesla used to make his inventions highly efficient.
I am not set up to do any experiments. On the other hand I have years of experience working on a bench. I am still assuming were are talking about a pseudo-bifilar coil here like I defined it in my previous posting. I also explained the logic: It's the ampere-turns that determine the strength of the magnetic field. Both coil configurations will give you the same number of ampere-turns. The fact that this guy makes reference to voltage in his statement instead of current is an indicator that he most likely a beginner to this stuff himself. It's just one of millions of pages on the Internet, it's not necessarily true. In fact, his conclusion is false. Please trust me, I am not stating this to make a fuss. I am qualifying this guy for you and telling you in all honesty that he is wrong. You can spend a few hours and find hundreds and hundreds of websites that will confirm what I am saying.
On the other hand, what is your reason for the two coils being different in magnetic field strength? Can you back up your statement with a logical argument? Forget about that guy's web page, what are your thoughts? What about the inductance?
Look, each loop in the entire coil, whether it comes from the "even field" coil, or the "odd field" coil is wrapped around the nail. Each loop is like a miniature magnetic field generator. They are all lined up in a row and contribute to the total magnetic field. The nail "doesn't care" if the loop is from the "even field" coil or the "odd field" coil. All the nail knows is that there are loops of wire around it generating a magnetic field and every loop has the same amount of current flowing through it. Can you see that?
If you can see that then that's good. The goal is to be able to know the basic fundamentals and then apply that knowledge to other configurations. I can look at a set of pick-up coils and rotor magnets have a decent idea of what the output waveform will look like before I even hook up a scope.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on April 15, 2013, 07:01:15 PM
Synchro1:
I didn't say that, perhaps you misunderstood me. We are always talking about a "pseudo" or "quasi" bifilar coil, right? It's just one conductor with interlaced windings. Sort of like an old NTSC or PAL video frame with odd and even fields. What I said is that the interlacing will not make a significant change as compared to a regularly wound coil assuming the same number of turns for the vast majority of coil applications. That is the key point. Do you agree with that?
I don't really understand what your point is here or understand what your setup is. Could you make a schematic and show what voltages you want to compare? I am actually pretty knowledgeable about electronics, did you see my comments on Conrad's scope shots?
MileHigh
Syncro posted the diagram 2 pages back #982
I dont think its the same as you have been describing, quasi or even pseudo as I dont recall Tesla calling it that. And he invented it. Got a patent and all. Pat. 512,340 ;)
In Syncros diagram pic, it describes some facts as to the coil style Syncro is talking about.
Mags
Magluvin:
For the clip you linked to:
Note in the beginning of the clip that he says both coils under test have the same length of wire. That means that they both have to measure approximately the same resistance. It's impossible for the pseudo-bifilar coil configuration to change the measured resistance as he seems to be implying.
What he calls the "regular" coil has roughly 11 ohms and the the "pseudo-bifilar" coil has roughly 6 ohms. That suggests that the "regular" coil is twice as long as the "pseudo-bifilar" coil and has twice as many turns.
The "regular" coil measures roughly 2.8 mH. The "pseudo-bifilar" coil measures roughly 0.7 mH. So the "regular" coil is four times the inductance of the "pseudo-bifilar" coil. That's exactly what you would expect if the "regular" coil was twice as many turns as the "pesudo-bifilar" coil.
So it appears that he is looking at one coil of 2N turns and a second coil of N turns. That way all the measurements make sense. There is a good chance that the coil with the 2N turns consists of interleaved "odd field" and "even field" interlaced turns around the drum.
So it is a mix-up on his part, but it all makes sense, you just have to "read between the lines" and reorganize.
Finally, he connects his capacitance meter to the coils. In the setup he has that only marginally makes sense. You simply can't connect up a capacitance meter to an inductor and get a reliable reading. You can't be sure what the capacitance meter is doing and what frequencies it is using and at low frequencies the capacitance meter will start seeing something that looks like a short circuit when it's expecting to see an open circuit. To make an attempt to truly measure the inherent self-capacitance of big coils like that you would have to do some measurements with a scope and a frequency generator. He is blissfully unaware of this.
I am using the term pseudo-bifilar coil to distinguish it from a true bifilar coil to avoid confusion in case people start talking about true bifilar coils. The drawing in posting #982 is a pseudo-bifilar coil. I discussed the bullet points in that drawing in an earlier posting and unfortunately they are misconceptions.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on April 15, 2013, 11:50:08 PM
Magluvin:
For the clip you linked to:
Note in the beginning of the clip that he says both coils under test have the same length of wire. That means that they both have to measure approximately the same resistance. It's impossible for the pseudo-bifilar coil configuration to change the measured resistance as he seems to be implying.
What he calls the "regular" coil has roughly 11 ohms and the the "pseudo-bifilar" coil has roughly 6 ohms. That suggests that the "regular" coil is twice as long as the "pseudo-bifilar" coil and has twice as many turns.
The "regular" coil measures roughly 2.8 mH. The "pseudo-bifilar" coil measures roughly 0.7 mH. So the "regular" coil is four times the inductance of the "pseudo-bifilar" coil. That's exactly what you would expect if the "regular" coil was twice as many turns as the "pesudo-bifilar" coil.
So it appears that he is looking at one coil of 2N turns and a second coil of N turns. That way all the measurements make sense. There is a good chance that the coil with the 2N turns consists of interleaved "odd field" and "even field" interlaced turns around the drum.
So it is a mix-up on his part, but it all makes sense, you just have to "read between the lines" and reorganize.
Finally, he connects his capacitance meter to the coils. In the setup he has that only marginally makes sense. You simply can't connect up a capacitance meter to an inductor and get a reliable reading. You can't be sure what the capacitance meter is doing and what frequencies it is using. To make an attempt to truly measure the inherent self-capacitance of big coils like that you would have to do some measurements with a scope and a frequency generator. He is blissfully unaware of this.
I am using the term pseudo-bifilar coil to distinguish it from a true bifilar coil to avoid confusion in case people start talking about true bifilar coils.
MileHigh
"Note in the beginning of the clip that he says both coils under test have the same length of wire. That means that they both have to measure approximately the same resistance. It's impossible for the pseudo-bifilar coil configuration to change the measured resistance as he seems to be implying."
Is it? ;)
"What he calls the "regular" coil has roughly 11 ohms and the the "pseudo-bifilar" coil has roughly 6 ohms. That suggests that the "regular" coil is twice as long as the "pseudo-bifilar" coil and has twice as many turns."
But he is using the same coils as you quoted above "Note in the beginning of the clip that he says both coils under test have the same length of wire." I did not see him change the coils to one with more turns and one with less. And he clearly specifies that he knows what people might be thinking when it comes to those measurements. I think he has dotted his I's. Im going to wind some coils such as these to try some things to post some vids. Its simple enough.
"The "regular" coil measures roughly 2.8 mH. The "pseudo-bifilar" coil measures roughly 0.7 mH. So the "regular" coil is four times the inductance of the "pseudo-bifilar" coil. That's exactly what you would expect if the "regular" coil was twice as many turns as the "pesudo-bifilar" coil."
Im not sure where you are getting that 1 coil has more turns than the other as those are the first talking points as to each coil having the same amount of copper and the same amount of 'total' turns, just wired differently. But by visual inspection should look identical except for the connections at the ends. The increase in capacitance, as Tesla has stated in his patent is that the capacitance 'neutralizes' the self inductance of any given current that may be employed. So thats why the inductance measured lower. ;)
"So it appears that he is looking at one coil of 2N turns and a second coil of N turns. That way all the measurements make sense. There is a good chance that the coil with the 2N turns consists of interleaved "odd field" and "even field" interlaced turns around the drum."
When he is testing the coils for resistance and inductance, he is only testing the coils of the same total number of turns. He did show a third coil earlier but stated it was for trying the difference of interlaced series bifi and a different way of having 2 layers, where the top layer starts at the beginning on top of the first thus giving 50% of input voltage difference between inner and outer adjacent turns. I havnt seen if he made a vid on that yet. But I think it might not be as effective at 'neutralizing' the self inductance as the series interlaced, as the first and second layers still have their adjacent connecting turn acting like a normal coil voltage difference between adjacent windings. I think it would be somewhere in between series bifi and a standard coil with a cap across its leads. And I only say that it is between the 2 because the capacitance is still built into the windings, just not between every successive connecting turn.
And he has the coils labeled as to what they are.
"Finally, he connects his capacitance meter to the coils. In the setup he has that only marginally makes sense. You simply can't connect up a capacitance meter to an inductor and get a reliable reading. You can't be sure what the capacitance meter is doing and what frequencies it is using. To make an attempt to truly measure the inherent self-capacitance of big coils like that you would have to do some measurements with a scope and a frequency generator. He is blissfully unaware of this."
I have to agree. The best way to measure the capacitance is to measure the capacitance between the 2 windings while the windings are open on each end, as in not series connected, not connected to anything but the C meter. Measuring the capacitance of a normally wound coil, straight 1 layer as shown, I would have to say that you could wind 2 turns, each of individual wire on the core alone. Then measure the capacitance of the 2 pieces of wire next to each other as if they were adjacent turns. Then count the spaces between all turns and divide that measured capacitance by that number. Yes divide, because those capacitances are in series. Thats a huge decrease in capacitance as a whole within the coil. lol the more turns, the less capacitance!! That is a normal coil.
Ive said it for a while now, 2 turns is a series bifi because of Teslas definition of the voltage differences across adjacent turns. But with 2 turns, we dont have much capacitance anyways. But it does fall within the guidelines. ;)
Now, a series wound bifi, the Tesla kind ;) , the more turns you have, the more capacitance you have. Quite the opposite of a normal coil where its capacitance decreases with more turns.
So if looking to measure or test the abilities of a bifi compared to a regular coil, I would suggest many turns. The more the better, and for a normal coil, the more the worse.
Testing coils with only a small number of turns will have less noticeable differences, and less detail about those differences. So many many turns to see things more clearly. ;)
Mags
Quote from: MileHigh on April 15, 2013, 11:50:08 PM
I am using the term pseudo-bifilar coil to distinguish it from a true bifilar coil to avoid confusion in case people start talking about true bifilar coils. The drawing in posting #982 is a pseudo-bifilar coil. I discussed the bullet points in that drawing in an earlier posting and unfortunately they are misconceptions.
What is a true bifilar?
Mags
A true bifilar coil is two windings with either four terminals or three terminals. Three terminals means at one end they are joined together but there is an electrical connection made. It means that two independent currents can travel in the two windings.
Just a mention about coil capacitance, isn't the best way is to determine it by experiment ?
With air core solenoids we can use calculators and compare with what is observed by experiment to confirm.
eg. if I take a coil wound to whatever specs and put the values into this calculator http://www.extremeelectronics.co.uk/calcs/index.php?page=oltc_calc.php
it can tell me the coils self capacitance and it's inductance as well as the effect of adding a known capacitance.
So if we know the inductance and we find the resonant frequency then the capacitance needed should be simple, by using
this calculator http://www3.telus.net/chemelec/Calculators/LC-Calculator.htm we can put in the inductance and adjust the capacitance to get the observed
resonant frequency by experiment (function generator and scope).
some more calculators.
Spiral coil calculator
http://www.deepfriedneon.com/tesla_f_calcspiral.html
This one doesn't seem to work for me, but I'll include it because i might not be using it correctly.
https://www.rac.ca/tca/RF_Coil_Design.html
Wire properties guide
http://www.rfcafe.com/references/electrical/wire-cu.htm
Cheers
Quote from: MileHigh on April 16, 2013, 01:11:16 AM
A true bifilar coil is two windings with either four terminals or three terminals. Three terminals means at one end they are joined together but there is an electrical connection made. It means that two independent currents can travel in the two windings.
I see these used in switching supply transformers. I had not ever read the term 'True bifi'.
Its just like having separate secondary windings(outputs) but they have a common connection at the beginning or end of the wind. Ive seen some audio transformers that claim bifilar windings, but I dont think they are series wound like Tesla intended. I have some files on that stuff. Would have to look deep. :o ;D Maybe I can find it easier online. But it is something different totally.
Mags
Quote from: Farmhand on April 16, 2013, 01:21:44 AM
Just a mention about coil capacitance, isn't the best way is to determine it by experiment ?
I agree. I have not seen a series bifi coil calculator. ;) Will be interesting to 'determine by experiment' ;)
Mags
Magluvin:
Note the resistance test for the coils is a DC test. It can't be "fooled" by any arrangement of coil connections. So he is clearly working with coils of two different lengths and number of turns.
QuoteIm not sure where you are getting that 1 coil has more turns than the other as those are the first talking points as to each coil having the same amount of copper and the same amount of 'total' turns, just wired differently. But by visual inspection should look identical except for the connections at the ends. The increase in capacitance, as Tesla has stated in his patent is that the capacitance 'neutralizes' the self inductance of any given current that may be employed. So thats why the inductance measured lower.
In theory it's possible but highly unlikely, perhaps if the inductance meter is poorly designed. The thing to keep in mind is that in a coil, the inductance is millions of times higher than the capacitance in relative terms. The capacitance is like a fly siting on an elephant which is the inductance, even with a pseudo-bifilar configration.
What happens in the time domain when you go to energize a coil that also possesses some capacitance? The capacitance charges up nearly instantly, because that's what capacitors do. Then the inductance takes over for a long time. It's the old flywheel effect. The current climbs in slow motion relative to the zippy capacitance current. The inductance meter reads that, the slow current climb due to the inductance, it's doesn't read the minuscule capacitance and it's associated minuscule current which has almost no affect on the real operation of the inductor.
I haven't read too much about Tesla so I can only guess what he was up to with these kinds of coils. It's possible that capacitor technology at the end of the 19th century was barely starting so he was improvising. Perhaps Tesla had these very large coils 10 feet high and he experimented with the interleaved coil winding to use these giant coils as a energy storage device - a giant LC resonator. If you can imagine putting 100 amps through a giant coil and then disconnecting the DC feed, then the coil would self-resonate for x seconds. With the inductance being so large and the capacitance so small, the voltages generated across the self-resonating coil would have been very high. You can go to a coil calculator site and calculate the inductance for a giant coil. Then make up a very small capacitance value. Assume the resistance of the coil is quite low. Then go to an LC resonator sim site and punch in the numbers and see what happens. As the capacitance value gets lower the peak voltage will go towards millions of volts.
MileHigh
Farmhand:
I didn't even know that there were sim sites that would give you an associated capacitance for a given inductor geometry. You learn something new every day as they say.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on April 16, 2013, 01:42:03 AM
Magluvin:
Note the resistance test for the coils is a DC test. It can't be "fooled" by any arrangement of coil connections. So he is clearly working with coils of two different lengths and number of turns.
In theory it's possible but highly unlikely, perhaps if the inductance meter is poorly designed. The thing to keep in mind is that in a coil, the inductance is millions of times higher than the capacitance in relative terms. The capacitance is like a fly siting on an elephant which is the inductance, even with a pseudo-bifilar configration.
What happens in the time domain when you go to energize a coil that also possesses some capacitance? The capacitance charges up nearly instantly, because that's what capacitors do. Then the inductance takes over for a long time. It's the old flywheel effect. The current climbs in slow motion relative to the zippy capacitance current. The inductance meter reads that, the slow current climb due to the inductance, it's doesn't read the minuscule capacitance and it's associated minuscule current which has almost no affect on the real operation of the inductor.
I haven't read too much about Tesla so I can only guess what he was up to with these kinds of coils. It's possible that capacitor technology at the end of the 19th century was barely starting so he was improvising. Perhaps Tesla had these very large coils 10 feet high and he experimented with the interleaved coil winding to use these giant coils as a energy storage device - a giant LC resonator. If you can imagine putting 100 amps through a giant coil and then disconnecting the DC feed, then the coil would self-resonate for x seconds. With the inductance being so large and the capacitance so small, the voltages generated across the self-resonating coil would have been very high. You can go to a coil calculator site and calculate the inductance for a giant coil. Then make up a very small capacitance value. Assume the resistance of the coil is quite low. Then go to an LC resonator sim site and punch in the numbers and see what happens. As the capacitance value gets lower the peak voltage will go towards millions of volts.
MileHigh
"In theory it's possible but highly unlikely, perhaps if the inductance meter is poorly designed. The thing to keep in mind is that in a coil, the inductance is millions of times higher than the capacitance in relative terms. The capacitance is like a fly siting on an elephant which is the inductance, even with a pseudo-bifilar configration."
When you say 'pseudo', what does that imply exactly? Yes the capacitance of a coil is very tiny indeed. But the series bifi increases it dramatically in comparison to a normal coil. And the more turns in the series bifi, the more capacitance, where as a normal coil, the capacitance becomes less with more turns.
"What happens in the time domain when you go to energize a coil that also possesses some capacitance? The capacitance charges up nearly instantly, because that's what capacitors do. Then the inductance takes over for a long time."
Yes! Being that the series bifi has much more capacitance, the series bifi charges up more and quicker, being that the larger internal capacitance neutralizes the self inductance.
"Assume the resistance of the coil is quite low. Then go to an LC resonator sim site and punch in the numbers and see what happens. As the capacitance value gets lower the peak voltage will go towards millions of volts."
Is there a calculator for series bifilar coils? As they have a different nature. Trying to read them with meters give erratic results as compared to a normal coil.
Mags
Quote from: MileHigh on April 16, 2013, 01:42:03 AM
I haven't read too much about Tesla so I can only guess what he was up to with these kinds of coils. It's possible that capacitor technology at the end of the 19th century was barely starting so he was improvising.
http://www.free-energy-info.com/TeslaPatents/US0512340.pdf
Its only 2 pages of description. ;)
Mags
Final comment about an inductor with an associated capacitance. How does it respond in the frequency domain?
We know that as you sweep the frequency higher, the inductor will show an increasing impedance. As the frequency tends towards infinity, the impedance of the inductor tends towards infinity.
What happens is that above a certain high frequency, the very small capacitance starts to take over. So above a certain frequency the impedance of the inductor starts to drop, and it will tend to go towards zero as the frequency tends towards infinity.
The converse applies to capacitors, as the frequency tends towards infinity, the small inductance associated with the capacitor starts to take over, and the impedance tends towards infinity.
(I am simplifying in the examples above to keep it relatively simple.)
Those are basic nuts and bolts to keep in mind. The example that most will relate to is the gate capacitance for a MOSFET. At very high frequencies, power can pass through the MOSFET via the gate capacitance because the impedance is very low. That can screw up very precise measurements at high frequency.
MileHigh
Magluvin:
I read that patent a while ago. The jist of it is that the "interleaving" or "pseudo-bifiler" winding of what is actually a single coil allows for the inherent capacitance between the coils to be charged to a much higher voltage potential. So it's "tricky" in the sense that there is not much more capacitance in the windings, but rather the opportunity to charge that inter-winding capacitance to a higher potential.
You can also visualize (at least I do) this: The "mini capacitors" between each winding are "fleeting" in the sense that the dielectric that sustains the electric field does not emulate a purely insulating environment. Thee is a conductor in parallel with the dielectric that acts to short out the "mini capaciors."
There is an excellent model in real life for all of this. A true model of an ideal inductor is a massless spring. It's just a "force in the air." But a real-world spring has mass. And lucky for us, mass is equal to capacitance in this model. So that means a real-world spring is a decent analogy for an inductor with an associated capacitance, but oscillating thousands or millions times more slowly.
MileHigh
What I got from reading the patent some time ago was that one of his main objectives for the "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS",
was to do away with capacitors which were costly at the time. Page 1 lines 26 to 31 cover this objective and then
lines 32 to 38 he says what he means by the term "coils". Then he states that the arrangement can be made so that for a given frequency the
arrangement is resonant because of the increased capacitance due to the way it is wound.
Then the two claims made by the patent are on page 2 lines 43 to 54. The claims are fairly clear and real.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=baRZAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q&f=false
Cheers
P.S. Basically by some formula a coil can be wound to be resonant at a fairly low frequency due to the way it is wound.
To me logic says that for a given coil wound that way the more voltage used the higher the capacitance will be and the lower the resonant frequency will be.
P.S. 2, So I'm assuming the resonant frequency of a given coil wound that way would be very different when excited by 10 volts as compared to being excited by 100 volts.
How is this useful to us, it seems it could be a very useful property in a coil and very different to using just a regular spiral coil and a capacitor.
P.S. 3. The funny part of it is that the way Tesla describes what he terms as a coil for the purposes of the patent means he has pretty much covered all types of coils.
So it's all open to be used in any way we please.
..
Naudin :)
http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE24en.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE24en.htm)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=t2Zid7HWonY
Quote from: MileHigh on April 15, 2013, 10:13:16 PM
Synchro1:
Here is the key point from your link:
I am not set up to do any experiments. On the other hand I have years of experience working on a bench. I am still assuming were are talking about a pseudo-bifilar coil here like I defined it in my previous posting. I also explained the logic: It's the ampere-turns that determine the strength of the magnetic field. Both coil configurations will give you the same number of ampere-turns. The fact that this guy makes reference to voltage in his statement instead of current is an indicator that he most likely a beginner to this stuff himself. It's just one of millions of pages on the Internet, it's not necessarily true. In fact, his conclusion is false. Please trust me, I am not stating this to make a fuss. I am qualifying this guy for you and telling you in all honesty that he is wrong. You can spend a few hours and find hundreds and hundreds of websites that will confirm what I am saying.
On the other hand, what is your reason for the two coils being different in magnetic field strength? Can you back up your statement with a logical argument? Forget about that guy's web page, what are your thoughts? What about the inductance?
Look, each loop in the entire coil, whether it comes from the "even field" coil, or the "odd field" coil is wrapped around the nail. Each loop is like a miniature magnetic field generator. They are all lined up in a row and contribute to the total magnetic field. The nail "doesn't care" if the loop is from the "even field" coil or the "odd field" coil. All the nail knows is that there are loops of wire around it generating a magnetic field and every loop has the same amount of current flowing through it. Can you see that?
If you can see that then that's good. The goal is to be able to know the basic fundamentals and then apply that knowledge to other configurations. I can look at a set of pick-up coils and rotor magnets have a decent idea of what the output waveform will look like before I even hook up a scope.
MileHigh
Magluvin just posted a video by the Oldscientist. He demonstrates clearly that the Tesla bifilar has exactly 1/2 the Ohmic resistance of the single wire coil of same length and gauge wire. This doubles the bifilar's magnetic field strength, and makes a more efficent pulse motor power coil. There's a copper weight to Weber advantage over the single wire coil of equal wire. That's the point you began to dispute. I hope you learned something.
Synchro1:
QuoteMagluvin just posted a video by the Oldscientist. He demonstrates clearly that the Tesla bifilar has exactly 1/2 the Ohmic resistance of the single wire coil of same length and gauge wire. This doubles the bifilar's magnetic field strength, and makes a more efficent pulse motor power coil. There's a copper weight to Weber advantage over the single wire coil of equal wire. That's the point you began to dispute. I hope you learned something.
Please see my postings #1008 and #1015 about the Oldscientist clip. He simply got mixed up when he made the clip.
MileHigh
@Milghigh,
So far everyone else has made a mistake but you. Twice the paper clips per gram of copper is "More bounce to the ounce". The way to run this coil with a Bedini circuit is like Gadgetmall does, with a third single wire trigger coil wraped around the bifilar. This gives you two leads from the Tesla electromagnet bifilar coil for power, and two from the single wire trigger coil for the four SSG connections. This Hybrid trifilar can't be beat for a pulse motor power coil.
The true Tesla serial wired bifilar coil, trigger wrapped outside into a hybrid Trifilar coil, Quadruples the efficency of Bedini's patented psuedo bifilar SSG, with 1/2 the wire for power.
Skycollection appears to power his spinners with the true Tesla pancake with trigger or Hall effect transistor.
Quote from: wings on April 16, 2013, 05:03:28 AM
Naudin :)
http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE24en.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE24en.htm)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=t2Zid7HWonY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=t2Zid7HWonY)
Kanarev Sergey Zatsarinin motor a Vladimir Utkin evolution remember me Garry Stanley's coil setup and this test by gotoluc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wV6LVs27pwo&list=UUBxdlsnXExuFcilHualB_pw&index=11 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=wV6LVs27pwo) :)
http://www.micro-world.su/files/mg-1.wmv (http://www.micro-world.su/files/mg-1.wmv)
Synchro1:
QuoteThis Hybrid trifilar can't be beat for a pulse motor power coil.
The true Tesla serial wired bifilar coil, trigger wrapped outside into a hybrid Trifilar coil, Quadruples the efficency of Bedini's patented psuedo bifilar SSG, with 1/2 the wire for power.
If you look over the discussion over the past day and apply it to understanding how a pseudo-bifilar coil will function as drive coil in a Bedini motor compared to a regular coil this would be the conclusion:
Both coils will work the same way, they will be indistinguishable from one another. The main difference between the coils is that the pseudo-bifilar coil has the ability to store higher voltage and higher energy in the self-capacitance of the coil. The capacitance in both coils is insignificant in comparison to the inductance.
When either type of coil is energized when the transistor switches on here is what will happen: In a few microseconds the coil's self-capacitance will get charged to the battery's potential. If you had a scope channel monitoring the current flow you might see a tiny tiny little pulse of extra current corresponding to the self capacitance charging up when the transistor switches on. Then the inductance will take over and the current will start its slow climb up as the inductor gets energized and also pushes on the rotor magnet.
Likewise, when the transistor switches off the self-capacitance will slow down the slew rate of the back-EMF spike by just a tiny tiny amount. If you have a reverse-biased diode across the drive coil to remove the back-EMF spike then you will not even be able to notice the effect of the self-capacitance.
This is a learning exercise for everyone and I hope some people get some benefit from it. Believe me, I don't know all the answers, but basic stuff about the properties of coils is something I do know. I think it's worth it to demystify coils and you have a lot of beliefs that many others share. For example, many people believe that there is a Bloch wall inside a coil when that's not true. So hopefully you will read over my postings and give them some serious thought. Any pulse motor builder that is very curious about your proposition simply can make say a 200-turn regular coil and a 200-turn pseudo-bifilar coil and try them out in their pulse motor setup and see for themselves.
MileHigh
Quote from: wings on April 16, 2013, 01:38:48 PM
Kanarev Sergey Zatsarinin motor a Vladimir Utkin evolution remember me Garry Stanley's coil setup and this test by gotoluc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wV6LVs27pwo&list=UUBxdlsnXExuFcilHualB_pw&index=11 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=wV6LVs27pwo) :)
http://www.micro-world.su/files/mg-1.wmv (http://www.micro-world.su/files/mg-1.wmv)
Thanks for the test by Gotoluc. He explains why high inductance in millihenries increases coil efficency. The Oldscientist measures 40x the inductance in the Tesla bifilar over the single wrap of equal gauge and length.
Synchro1:
I looked at Luc's clip. I can't explain why he measures more inductance on the pseudo-bifiler coil when he states that the wire length is the same (which he confirmed with his multimeter). It would merit further investigation.
The following explanation is a bit technical: What he is demonstrating is that when he puts a magnet on top of the toroidal coil, it
interferes with the core material and reduces its effectiveness. The magnetic field from the external magnet puts a "straightjacket" on some of the magnetic domains and "takes them off the playing field" and prevents them from flipping such that they can't contribute to the magnetic flux in the core anymore. This results in lowering the inductance of the coil and therefore lowering the energy storing capacity of the coil. That's the only affect the magnet has on the coil.
The inductance of the coil itself has nothing directly to do with the efficiency of the motor. In other words, a bigger coil does not necessarily make for a more efficient motor. If that was true then everybody would have jumbo coils.
Where the amount of inductance comes into play has to do with the timing and related parameters of the motor. Bigger inductance means a stronger magnetic field, more energy storage, a bigger back-EMF spike, and a slower rise time for the current through the coil.
MileHigh
1 Vladimir
2-3 Zasarinin - kanarev - Gary - Gotoluc experiments with opposite coil and magnet .... - Joule Thief?
and a test on similar configuration
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=vya6E5M_jt8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=vya6E5M_jt8)
the coil has to be tuned as Vladimir said symmetrical condition with resonance in the coil
In the Energy Amplification thread, I posted a theory on what Romero was doing with his coils that took him soo long to tune, as he stated.
He used 7 strand litz. He stated that we needed to increase the capacitance of the coil. I at the time had made the suggestion that he had wound them bifilar. And he confirmed it.
But even then, the coils were like 300 turns. From my experience, he would have needed many more turns and much more capacitance that that in order to get the coils to ring at the freq of the rotors magnets were applying.
So I had thought that maybe he split the litz into 2 individual bundles of strands, where one bundle is one winding and the other bundle is the other. But it always bothered me that there were an uneven number of strands. This would make one of the windings 1 strand thicker than the other, 4 and 3 of 7. ???
If we split the strands into 2 separate windings(of a bifi) we get 2 times the number of turns. 600 ;D Magsy likes. ;) And if we select different strands to test for comparative capacitance, there will be differences depending on if the 2 strands are in close proximity within the litz form.
So that would be a time consuming 'tune' session. Getting all the strand ends coordinated so that every other one was combined to one winding, and so on and so forth. A pic below of the cross section of the litz. The blue are 1 winding and the red are the other. This will increase the capacitance even further than just using 2 complete strands of litz next to each other. ;) So now we have increased the number of turns, and possible inductance, along with much more capacitance, more than double at least. ;) Magsy really like. ;D
But the other day I realized another possibility....
The 7th strand. Considering Romero was doing many experiments with coil shorting just before the Muller vids, I would put my money on the 7th strand being shorted within the litz. :o ;D Thats the one in the middle in the pic below.
Along with making a standard and bifi coil for comparison, I am going to make a litz cable with 7 strands of fine wire and see what happens.
It will be interesting to see if the multi strand splitting theory has any merit. ;)
Mags
I tested a multi layer solenoid bifilar coil last night, it has I think three or five layers of about 46 strands per layer 23 of each winding per layer side by side.
I used a 10 k resistor on one leg of the function generator and scoped the windings.
Both windings measure 251 uH each, together in series the top of one winding connected to the bottom the other and I get exactly four times the inductance of
each winding alone at 1004 uH. When connected in cancelling configuration the inductance is zero. The resistance of each winding is 1 ohm and both in series is 2 Ohms.
One winding is only half the wire of two windings in series we must remember that. I also had a sniffer coil of about 10 turns around the coil.
The one thing I noticed that was a little bit odd to me was that the resonant frequency of one winding alone is the same as the resonant frequency of both in series.
Which is kinda counter intuitive and indicates a big reduction in capacitance rather than an increase because with four times the inductance and the same capacitance
the resonant frequency should have reduced, with even more capacitance the resonant frequency should be reduced even further.
The resonant frequency was a mere 265 kHz. Which would indicate a self capacitance of 1440 pF for one winding alone and a self capacitance of only 360 pF for both coils in series.
The only explanation I can think of is that with the other winding in place it affected the actual capacitance of one of the single windings quite a bit.
The only way to test is to make two separate coils , one with a certain wire length wound like normal and one with the same amount of total wire length but wound as a bifilar coil.
The tuning to max voltage is very broad, which could be useful in some cases. When a square wave excitation is used after the resonant point the wave shape becomes square again with big spikes.
Of course the voltage produced by a single 251 uH winding was a bit less than half the voltage produced by the two windings in series almost half. However the
sniffer coil voltage only increased to 700 mV from 640 mV when two windings are used as compared to one.
The layers of the coil are separated by wax paper.
Cheers
Quote from: Farmhand on April 17, 2013, 04:29:41 AM
snip...
Both windings measure 251 uH each, together in series the top of one winding connected to the bottom the other and I get exactly four times the inductance of each winding alone at 1004 uH. When connected in cancelling configuration the inductance is zero. The resistance of each winding is 1 ohm and both in series is 2 Ohms.
snip..
That helps to explain why bifilars seem to work better than ordinary coils regarding AUL. With a higher inductance for a given number of total turns, comes a higher inductive reactance at any given frequency, compared to a single wound coil.
It follows that the inductive reactance to resistance ratio would then be higher in a bifilar, and current phase shifts in the bifilar coil will occur more readily at any given frequency, compared to a single wound coil of the same number of total turns.
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on April 17, 2013, 04:52:50 AM
That helps to explain why bifilars seem to work better than ordinary coils regarding AUL. With a higher inductance for a given number of total turns, comes a higher inductive reactance at any given frequency, compared to a single wound coil.
It follows that the inductive reactance to resistance ratio would then be higher in a bifilar, and current phase shifts in the bifilar coil will occur more readily at any given frequency, compared to a single wound coil of the same number of total turns.
Cheers
Yes that makes perfect sense. Also the frequency seems to be very low for the coil size/inductance, so the self capacitance compared to a single coil of similar inductance
must be much more even at 360 pF. And theoretically as the supply voltage increases if the capacitance does increase with it then the resonant frequency should drop further.
That was for a multi layered solenoid with an iron powder core. Which is covered by Tesla's Patent "COIL FOR ELECTRO MAGNETS".
I happen to have a very similar coil but with only one winding with very nearly the same inductance 264 uH, i'll determine it's self capacitance and see what gives, gotta find it first.
Cheers
P.S. In case no one noticed my accelerating under load generator coil had a long core and "C" shaped, the core ends were the length of the coil or more away from
the ends of the coil. Which might have helped the effect in my case due to magnetization delay. As per Tesla's other patent. If I had wound those cores with bifilar coils
I might not have needed the capacitor. :)
Motor with delayed magnetization patent.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=uwhBAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=1#v=onepage&q&f=false
...
Quote from: Farmhand on April 17, 2013, 05:31:45 AM
Yes that makes perfect sense. Also the frequency seems to be very low for the coil size/inductance, so the self capacitance compared to a single coil of similar inductance
must be much more even at 360 pF. And theoretically as the supply voltage increases if the capacitance does increase with it then the resonant frequency should drop further.
That was for a multi layered solenoid with an iron powder core. Which is covered by Tesla's Patent "COIL FOR ELECTRO MAGNETS".
I happen to have a very similar coil but with only one winding with very nearly the same inductance 264 uH, i'll determine it's self capacitance and see what gives, gotta find it first.
Cheers
P.S. In case no one noticed my accelerating under load generator coil had a long core and "C" shaped, the core ends were the length of the coil or more away from
the ends of the coil. Which might have helped the effect in my case due to magnetization delay. As per Tesla's other patent.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=uwhBAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=1#v=onepage&q&f=false (http://www.google.com/patents?id=uwhBAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=1#v=onepage&q&f=false)
...
Since capacitive reactance decreases with frequency (rpm), then the role of a coil's self capacitance lessens with respect to current / mmf phase shifting as frequency or rpm increases.
Most experimenters scope shots always seem to indicate a lagging coil current when heavily loaded, as opposed to a leading coil current.
This is what one would expect when the induction is much greater than the capacitance as is generally the case with coils. Especially coils with ferromagnetic / metal cores.
Therefore, it seems probable that only the inductance and resistance need to be considered with regard to coil current and mmf delays that result in AUL.
Cheers
OK so a regular multi layered single winding solenoid of 261 uH on an iron powder core has a resonant frequency of over 3.3 MHz.
Which would indicate a self capacitance of only about 8 or 9 pF. When compared to 360 pF there is a big difference. About 3 MHz difference.
The 261 uH coil in this test has less than 1 Ohm resistance, the wire size is 1 mm as well, same as the others.
If the coil has more capacitance then the resonant frequency is lowered, that's the point.
Cheers
Quote from: Farmhand on April 17, 2013, 06:19:52 AM
OK so a regular multi layered single winding solenoid of 261 uH on an iron powder core has a resonant frequency of over 3.3 MHz.
Which would indicate a self capacitance of only about 8 or 9 pF. When compared to 360 pF there is a big difference. About 3 MHz difference.
If the coil has more capacitance then the resonant frequency is lowered, that's the point.
Cheers
I understand, and it likely has a great deal of relevance to high frequency solid state devices. It also imparts a high relevance to the discharge time of a coil via regenerative feedback circuits, not only because it changes the coil's time discharge constant, but because there is more energy "stored" in the coil's field, as explained by Tesla.
My opinions are only relating to AUL in motor / generator setups. Frequencies are low, generally in the region of 1 - 1000 hz and rarely (if ever) more than that.
Cheers
PDF of Tesla's Electromagnetic motor: This is an a.c. attraction motor with an iron magnetic rotor. The core lag advances the rotation of the rotor.
Either a.c. polarity charge generates an attraction field in the electromagnetic motor coils. Pulsed d.c. would work just as well. One silmultaneous d.c. pulse through the four coils, would generate two out of phase and two silmultaneous attraction events in the coils and make the iron rotor spin.
This motor can easily be redesigned to run on pulsed d.c. to propel a magnet rotor. The a.c. current creates an attraction field for the iron rotor regardless of polarity, so pulsed d.c. would power the motor the same way and also drive a magnet rotor in repulsion. A rotating magnetic field should develop naturally with no additional circuitry.
Here the challenge is to drive a repulsion magnet rotor with Tesla's magnetic lag field rotation from the long core output coils.
The long core magnetic lag coils should generate an out of phase rotary repulsion from the output under load counter-field, just like the induced power pulse from the delayed magnetic field in the original. The two short core coils at 180 degrees could be counter wound to deliver a silmultaneous repulsion pulse to a diametric rotor at TDC, and then the 90 degree magnetic lag phase long core output coils would generate an a.c. current and deliver an independent "Lenz Delayed" repulsion pulse of their own that's correctly timed. The motor can run the same way as a monopole too. This simple engineering innovation is probably in advance of anything currently under development. Slightly oversized long cores can allow the output coils to easily slide along their cores to their correct, rotor speed up positions.
So now we create a rotating magnetic field with help of the output coil Lenz delay. This design should at least run at unity, like my spiral coil spinners. Maybe four more mid-sized long core output coils at 45 degrees would help add to the motor alternator's efficiency.
@hoptoad
this recent posts reminds me the long core rods I used in an Adams type motor, but the other way around. That is: sliding an output coil at the tail of a long driving coil rod.
I know it is a very different concept, as the output coil was energized by the motor pulse, but anyway, I noticed that loading this collector coil, no additional drag nor lenz observed, neither a rotation decrease.
The long core, in fact produced stronger thrusts than a short one and thus faster rotor rpm.
By the way, thanks so much for those totallydamped pages, I constantly use a lot the N19 schematic with excellent results.
cheers
Quote from: ALVARO_CS on April 17, 2013, 12:49:34 PM
@hoptoad
this recent posts reminds me the long core rods I used in an Adams type motor, but the other way around. That is: sliding an output coil at the tail of a long driving coil rod.
I know it is a very different concept, as the output coil was energized by the motor pulse, but anyway, I noticed that loading this collector coil, no additional drag nor lenz observed, neither a rotation decrease.
The long core, in fact produced stronger thrusts than a short one and thus faster rotor rpm.
By the way, thanks so much for those totallydamped pages, I constantly use a lot the N19 schematic with excellent results.
cheers
Can you upload a video of that?
Quote from: Farmhand on April 17, 2013, 04:29:41 AM
....
The only way to test is to make two separate coils , one with a certain wire length wound like normal and one with the same amount of total wire length but wound as a bifilar coil.
.....
Hi Farmhand,
I think what you wrote above is important. Why I mention this?
Member synchro1 referred to (in this link http://www.tesla-coil-builder.com/bifilar_electromagnet.htm ) a bifilar electromagnet test where a given length of wire is used: first a 100 turns of coil was made onto a nail and then a 50 turns of coil was made BIFILARLY onto another nail. This latter bifilarly wound coil was then connected in series aiding and obviously it had then the same 100 turns like the non-bifilar coil on the first nail. Now I quote from the text under the picture in the link:
"Now connect the battery to the end leads of the single wound nail. This will energize the coil and cause the nail to become magnetic. Now pick up as many paper clips with the nail as you can.
OK, connect the battery to the ends of the bifilar wound coil. Now pick up as many paper clips as you can with this electromagnet.
The same amount of voltage, from the same battery, produces twice as much energy in the bifilar wound coil as in the single wound coil. This is just one of the many techniques Nikola Tesla used to make his inventions highly efficient." So everybody is supposed to make his own conclusion as to what amount of paper clips are picked up by the first and the second nail? i.e. which is stronger?
I have not done this paperclip test. I wonder if synchro1 or anybody else here have already done that? and if yes, with what results?
It is one thing to imply something and another thing to speak after a real test.
A coil made on a nail with 100 turns has (say) an L value inductance. A coil made on a similar sized nail with 50 turns has about L/4 value inductance, provided the second nail has the same permeability like the first one and we use the same wire gauge like on the first nail. The L/4 inductance value comes from the fact that the relationship between the number of turns and the inductance is quadratic and this works backwards too.
Now if the coil on the the second nail is wound bifilarly i.e. using two parallel guided insulated wires to make the 50 turns and then the two windings are connected in series aiding fashion so the total number of turns is 100 just like on the first nail, the question is what resultant inductance the bifilar coil will have on the second nail?
Some years ago I wound such two test coils on a paper tube in the fashion like I just described to see the L values on an L meter and if my memory does not fail I got very close (a little bit less) the L value inductance for the second coil (i.e. for the bifilar) like the first coil had. If the strength of an electromagnet is defined by Amperturns then such two coils, made as described, perform very nearly in an equal way. Again, everybody is welcome to do the paperclip test, I did not do it back then because the inductance measurements on the two coils I made did not force me to do paperclip tests.
It is sure that if one makes a normal coil from a given length of wire and measure the inductance, then one uses two parallel guided wires of the same length and make a bifilarly wound coil (i.e. use twice as long wire as before) one will have nearly 4 times as high inductance when connecting the two wires in series aiding fashion, no problem with this. In a bifilarly wound coil the mutual inductance due to the close coupling factor between the two wires can increase inductance four times.
I agree with your tests.
rgds, Gyula
PS Folks, I am not questioning Tesla patent on Coil for electromagnets, Tesla clearly described why he used two pieces of wires and what benefits such wire arrangement had.
Farmhand:
QuoteBoth windings measure 251 uH each, together in series the top of one winding connected to the bottom the other and I get exactly four times the inductance of each winding alone at 1004 uH.
The resonant frequency was a mere 265 kHz. Which would indicate a self capacitance of 1440 pF for one winding alone and a self capacitance of only 360 pF for both coils in series.
Thanks for doing those measurements. Let's crunch the numbers to check the capacitive and inductive energy stored in the pseudo-bifilar coil. Note the capacitance is all about the geometry of the windings and the permittivity of the dielectric so that likely explains the 360 pF.
Let's assume that the coil has one amp going through it and the voltage across the coil is 12.6 volts.
E(coil) = 502 micro-Joules.
E(cap) = 0.029 micro-Joules
So there is about 17,000 times as much inductive energy stored in the pseudo-bifilar coil as compared to capacitive energy with the initial conditions of one amp current and 12.6 volts potential. That shows how the capacitance is insignificant for most situations as I previously stated.
I will make some comments about measuring the delayed Lenz effect later.
MileHigh
Quote from: ALVARO_CS on April 17, 2013, 12:49:34 PM
@hoptoad
this recent posts reminds me the long core rods I used in an Adams type motor, but the other way around. That is: sliding an output coil at the tail of a long driving coil rod.
I know it is a very different concept, as the output coil was energized by the motor pulse, but anyway, I noticed that loading this collector coil, no additional drag nor lenz observed, neither a rotation decrease.
The long core, in fact produced stronger thrusts than a short one and thus faster rotor rpm.
By the way, thanks so much for those totallydamped pages, I constantly use a lot the N19 schematic with excellent results.
cheers
The sliding output coil sounds interesting. Glad you have been able to use some of my posted information in your experiments.
Cheers
@Gyulasum,
The bifilar nail core experiment yields a 100% increase in magnetic field strength in the Tesla winding. The single wire coil attracts two paper clips and the bifilar four. Milehigh maintains that the bifilar draws twice the amperage to generate twice the magnetic field. That's a very shallow explanation. What advantage would Tesla's industrial patent hold if it had no practical value? Milehigh's inference is that; The single wrap is equally efficient as an electromagnet with twice the power input, to equal the bifilars, and not that, "The bifilar yields twice the magnetic force per watt". Ampere's law does not explain properties described by the Lorentz effect. The increased magnetic field is caused by electrons passing one another at near light speed velocity in the opposing wires. You need to catch up with the times Milehigh.
I find it ludicrous that Milehigh continues to debunk Tesla's cornerstone achievement as a so called "Psuedo" bifilar. Place those words in the Google search engine and see if anything comes up. We don't need any crypto word smithing from someone who's trying to hide his ignorance about a century old invention in such broad use.
Does anyone believe that the bifilar would somehow mysteriously consume twice the power if shorted accross a "D" cell battery, then the single wrap coil of equal wire length? How could that be possible? No one's stupid enough to believe that. Try the simple electromagnet experiment with two fresh batteries of equal charge, and compare the remaining voltage after a few minutes of paper clip attraction on each kind of coil. Believe me when I tell you that you've never been more wrong about anything Milehigh! Please stop ridiculing Nicola Tesla, and confusing people with your concieted sophistry.
Synchro1:
It seems like there is a communication gap and let me try to bridge it here. In your posting you seem to be attributing a lot of things to me that are both incorrect and I did not say. So let's try to address them.
QuoteMilehigh maintains that the bifilar draws twice the amperage to generate twice the magnetic field.
I didn't say that. I said that if you compare a 100-turn regular coil and a 50 + 50 turn pseudo-bifilar coil that they will be the same: same inductance, same wire length, same resistance, same power consumption, same magnetic field generation.
QuoteMilehigh's inference is that; The single wrap is equally efficient as an electromagnet with twice the power input, to equal the bifilars, and not that, "The bifilar yields twice the magnetic force per watt".
See above, equally efficient with the same power input. There is no such unit as "the magnetic force per watt." The coil's resistance and the coil's inductance are two completely separate things. Magnetic force is related to the number of turns and the current and the core material. Once the magnetic field has been created by the coil, there is zero power consumption to maintain it. All the power that is being consumed is turned into waste heat by the resistance of the wire.
QuoteI find it ludicrous that Milehigh continues to debunk Tesla's cornerstone achievement as a so called "Psuedo" bifilar.
I will gladly explain this in more detail. I am choosing to use that terminology myself because it's clearer. On a schematic the pseudo-bifilar coil would be represented as a single inductor with two terminals. "Bifilar" is "bi" which means "two" plus "fil" which means wire. i.e.; "Bifilar" means "two wires." The pseudo-bifilar coil only has one wire. In my 30+ years of being around electronics, I have never encountered pseudo-bifilar coils except for here. There is no electronics terminology in common use for the pseudo-bifilar coil.
QuoteDoes anyone believe that the bifilar would somehow mysteriously consume twice the power if shorted accross a "D" cell battery, then the single wrap coil of equal wire length? How could that be possible? No one's stupid enough to believe that.
Sorry but I have to emphasize that I never said that.
QuotePlease stop ridiculing Nicola Tesla.
I haven't done that and I don't know why you would feel like that. It looks to me like Tesla was the first person to start playing and experimenting with high power electronics and using LC resonators and stuff like that. Not every experiment he did carried through to how we currently do things. I am not aware of any current-day usage for the pseudo-bifilar coil. If you want to make an LC resonator, you just connect a capacitor across a coil, simple as that. That's the easy way to do it and it's possible that pseudo-bifilar coils are simply not used at all in the electronics industry.
I hope that it's clearer now.
MileHigh
With all due respect to MileHigh what he says seems correct to me, but somewhat off the point.
Synchro did you read the claims of the patent ?
QuoteWhat I claim as my invention is
1 A coil for electric apparatus the adjacent convolutions of which form parts of the circuit between which there exists a potential difference sufficient to secure in the coil a capacity capable of neutralizing its self induction as hereinbefore described.
2 A coil composed of contiguous or adjacent insulated conductors electrically connected in series and having a potential difference of such value as to give to the coil as a whole a capacity sufficient to neutralize its self induction as set forth.
NIKOLA TESLA Witnesses ROBT F GAYLORD PARKER W PAGE
What I see is the effect of the increased capacitance on the resonant frequency as the main benefit of the way the "COIL FOR ELECTRO MAGNETS" is wound.
I think it's easy to see the inductance stores more energy than the capacitance but Tesla does not state that it does that.
So I don't understand why it is being made an issue. I don't think the inductance storing more energy than the capacitance is relevant.
But I do think that winding a coil so that it has a few hundred pF more self capacitance will lower the resonant frequency considerably,
and I think this is the point of the patent. It is about cancelling the self inductance for a certain frequency, and doing it that way can
negate the need for an external capacitor.
Seems straight forward to me. I don't understand the argument. Why complicate things ?
Cheers
What seems troubling to me is how people think they can make claims for Tesla when the claims are laid out in the patents.
How dare people do that. Misunderstanding a patent is one thing, but making claims for a patent that Tesla or any patent holder
didn't make is wrong. Especially saying it like it is fact.
What claims do you say Tesla makes about the device in this patent Synchro. Why do you need to even make claims of
what it does or is for, when the inventor has already done it.
..
@Farmhand,
The Tesla bifilar, miscalled a "Psuedo Bifilar" was patented as an ELECTROMAGNET. I'm not claiming anything else. Milehigh says it dosen't work as described. He asks where are they in use? The answer is: Every automotive junkyard. Big as manhole covers, the thick gauge wire Tesla Pancake electromagnet coils lift tons of scrap powered by six volt lantern batteries. These are the most powerful electromagnets in industrial use. Why would anyone have to ask a question that inane?
Milehigh just boldly states "Tesla Coil Builder's" wrong, without spending the few minutes it would take to expose him as a fraud by failing to replicate his experiment. Milehigh expects us to brand "Tesla Coil builder" a hoax artist with no counter evidence. He says we should spend thousands of hours of internet research to find out for ourselves how wrong his two minuite experiment is. What would Milehigh do to someone like me who successfully replicated the experiment?
Some comments about the delayed Lenz' effect and measuring it. For this discussion I am assuming the motor is some kind of pulse motor.
I know this concept has been discussed in depth over many months and I just glanced at the threads from time to time. I will give you my take on it with the caveat that I would have to do some verification on the bench myself to make sure what I am saying checks out. I am pretty confident of what I am saying.
The basic idea is that you put a load on a pick-up coil and observe that the rotor speeds up. The assumption is that somehow the Lenz' Law repulsion force is "delayed" so that the rotor magnet gets to pass the pick-up coil with less resistance. I think that's too far a leap, and you can't really be sure unless you do some testing of the hypothesis.
Please see my posting #919 and #927 for a way to see the voltage/current for a pick-up coil load resistor and compare it to the rotor magnet position. This test bridges the gap between the assumption that the Lenz drag is being delayed and the visual check to see if that is actually true on your scope display.
You can look at a coil as operating in three possible modes for the purposes of this discussion:
1. Coil being energized like the drive coil in a Bedini motor. The outside power source is expending energy to create the magnetic field around the coil. There is an L/R time constant for energizing the coil where R is equal to the output impedance of the battery in series with the switched-on transistor or MOSFET.
2. Coil discharging energy through a load. The magnetic field is collapsing and turning the coil into a power source. There is an L/R time constant for the discharge where R is the resistance of the load on the coil.
3. Coil acting like a pick up coil and driving a load.
When the coil is acting like a pick-up coil it has no relationship to either mode (1) or mode (2) above. It's a totally different animal and the L/R time constants don't apply.
What's happening is that the coil is kind of a passive device and will react to the changing magnetic field. The passing magnet sort of looks like the primary of a transformer. The passing magnet generates EMF in the coil and that drives a load resistor. The coil's EMF output is a slave to the changing magnetic flux due to the passing rotor magnet.
So it looks to me like there is no "delayed Lenz effect." There are no phase shifts. The amount of current flowing through the coil does not correspond to the the amount of stored energy like in mode (1). It's all dependent on the external moving rotor magnet and the load resistor.
That begs the question why does the rotor speed up when you put a load on the pick-up coils? I don't have the answer but the first thing I would do would be to make before and after average-power-in and total average-power-out measurements. You can also easily calculate the power dissipated in the pick-up coils themselves.
You can arrive at this equation: average-power-in equals average-power-out (pick-up coil loads) plus coil-resistive-power plus unknown-power.
In other words the "unknown power" is just your input power minus the power you can measure with your multimeter; the power dissipated in the load resistors and the power dissipated the resistance of the pick-up coils themselves.
So does the unknown-power increase when the rotor speeds up? You would think it might. Alternatively or in combination, does the input power increase when the rotor speeds up? Some people report that the input power decreases. What about the radial load on the bearings no-load vs. load? Perhaps that's one of the causes of the rotor speed up. There has to be a reason for the rotor to speed up, but I don't think you will find it with a "delayed Lenz effect." I suspect the answer lies somewhere else.
MileHigh
Well I've been arguing against the claims of it being able to produce over 100% efficiency, I see no evidence of that.
The effect of the rotor of a generator speeding up when loaded is real, I did it, but it isn't OU and it isn't delayed Lenz effect either in my opinion.
I also disagree with most people's reasons for the effect of the speeding up rotor under load " I don't consider it delayed Lenz effect" it is what it is.
I'm no expert in this field but I think I have some understanding of things in a practical way or visualization.
And a good memory for snippets of info I pick up that seem like they are important.
In my opinion accelerating under load effect when a prime mover and a PM generator is used is that the unloaded drag on the rotor is significant because of
increased Lenz effect ( above normal), because of all the energy being stored in the coils I guess, then when the load is added or the output short circuited
the drag is reduced and the rotor speeds up because the coils cannot store as much energy and so the Lenz effect is decreased.
It's a case of placing a huge artificial and unnecessary drag on the rotor so that when a load is added the drag is reduced.
Because of the frequency and reactance is restricting the current, when the load is added the waveform is flattened. Less voltage, less energy being stored/transferred, less drag
as a result of the loaded Lenz drag being less than the ridiculously high and artificial Lenz drag without load (by design).
Using the theory I state above anyone can get an accelerating rotor under load fairly easily. But to what end ? Fool people and raise money ?
The magnitude of the Lenz drag is relative to the energy transferred, with that I do agree.
Cheers
There is no need to try to discredit Tesla, most of the claims people say he made he did not make.
...
Farmhand:
I think that you are in the right ballpark for some points, but I disagree with your comments about energy stored in the coils as being part of the explanation. I suspect that you might be right on track with respect to the extra load or drag on the rotor when there is no load on the pick-up coils. That creates cogging from the attraction between the rotor magnets and pick-up coil cores. You assume the cogging creates radial stress on the bearings, and some bearings can cope with radial stress better than others. I am making an assumption that when the pick-up coils are driving loads, that the cogging is reduced. That's a big assumption that would have to somehow be verified.
Certainly there is no over 100% percent efficiency. To describe the setup in somewhat abstract terms you can say the battery sees the entire motor setup as an electrical load with an average impedance. The average impedance determines the power draw from the battery.
If you change the impedance by changing the motor configuration the power consumption will go up or down. The impedance is a complex electro-mechanical impedance that is dependent on several factors, the speed of the rotor, the inductance values, where your losses are, air friction, bearing friction, etc.
It's also possible that you can change the motor configuration and the impedance will only be marginally affected from the point of view of the battery. However, where that power goes internally relative to the motor itself may change. One possibility is that less power will be dissipated in the bearings, and that allows more power to go to turn the rotor. Hence the rotor speeds up but the motor power consumption does not change.
MileHigh
Farmhand:
I did the coil energy calculations because Synchro1 believes that a pseudo-bifilar coil gives you great advantages in pulse motor applications. There is also the diagram he posted with the bullet points. The distinguishing factor in a pseudo-bifilar coil as compared to a regular coil is the capability to store more capacitative energy. So when you look at pulse motor applications you can see that typically the capacitative energy is far too small to have any affect on the operation of the pulse motor.
QuoteWhat I claim as my invention is
1 A coil for electric apparatus the adjacent convolutions of which form parts of the circuit between which there exists a potential difference sufficient to secure in the coil a capacity capable of neutralizing its self induction as hereinbefore described.
2 A coil composed of contiguous or adjacent insulated conductors electrically connected in series and having a potential difference of such value as to give to the coil as a whole a capacity sufficient to neutralize its self induction as set forth.
NIKOLA TESLA Witnesses ROBT F GAYLORD PARKER W PAGE
You:
QuoteWhat I see is the effect of the increased capacitance on the resonant frequency as the main benefit of the way the "COIL FOR ELECTRO MAGNETS" is wound.
I think it's easy to see the inductance stores more energy than the capacitance but Tesla does not state that it does that.
Tesla is basically describing how a coil or a pseudo-bifilar coil can act like an LC resonator using 19th century English. "
capacity capable of neutralizing its self induction" just means that when the capacitative voltage is at its peak, the current in the coil is zero.
For some reason I always imagine Tesla with a 10-foot-high coil. You can imagine putting DC current in at the top of the coil. When you throw the knife switch as fast as you possibly can to disconnect the power source, the two terminals would start to undergo violent arcing. By the time the switch contacts are a few inches apart the arcing would stop. Then the coil would self-resonate with voltage peaks of perhaps a few hundred thousand volts. It would be a dangerous and mean resonating machine for several seconds or perhaps tens of seconds. If the frequency is high enough, I presume it would radiate some of its stored energy out into space as EM waves.
What was Tesla's intended use for this pseudo-bifilar coil setup? From my recollection in reading the patent he does not say. He describes the fact that it will resonate. Are there other writings that discuss applications? I don't think they were intended to be used as small pick-up coils and driver coils in pulse motors or solenoids, etc. It's possible that this was more like "pure research" by Tesla but I am only guessing.
MileHigh
Yes there could be many factors playing a role. But the important things are it is very inefficient to do, and the energy transferred is relative to the Lenz drag.
I agree with you about what the supply see's. And the supply is what the word describes, it supplies all the energy for the setup.
I think Thane likes to just leave the driving motor or the "prime mover" energy consumption out of it. Which is just silly, in my opinion.
It's not OU until it outputs more energy as useful loads than is input by the operator (us).
Why do they say it is ? That's what I don't understand.
Cheers
P.S. MileHigh I do see your point about the stored energy, But rather than being stored and resonant as in when there is no load isn't it transferred more directly with no Q ? Kinda like by transformer action.
...
Synchro1:
I tried for 15 minutes on Google to find any references to bifilar coils used in electromagnets and could not find any. I found lots of companies that make big electromagnets, companies that sell scrap yard cranes with electromagnets, etc. I found out that they also sell giant magnets to do the same thing. in this case the coil will briefly neutralize the magnetic field to drop the scrap metal. That sounds like a more efficient way to do it. I asked you for references before about the scrapyard elecromagnets being "bifilar" or "pseudo-bifilar" but you did not reply.
Here is the fundamental issue for you to consider: Why would a pseudo-bifilar pancake coil make a better electromagnet as compared to a regular pancake coil? I can't think of a logical reason for that to be true. When I visualize the effects of regular vs. pseudo-bifilar in my mind I don't see any differences in the field generation.
I also have presented evidence to back up my claims and made a reference or two.
Here is a great link that I found: "Factors affecting inductance."
http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_1/chpt_15/3.html (http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_1/chpt_15/3.html)
MileHigh
Milehigh, No prob's, I see now why you made the calculations. Very informative as well.
As far as a use for the coil, I think he states that from lines 26 to 31 of page 1 of the patent. :)
At the time probably useful in ways we don't immediately think of. Maybe not practical any more because of the supply of good cheap capacitors.
One use I can see for it would be to lower the resonant frequency of a Pulsed electromagnet or something without an external capacitor.
Cheers
"What was Tesla's intended use for this pseudo-bifilar coil setup? From my recollection in reading the patent he does not say. He describes the fact that it will resonate. Are there other writings that discuss applications? I don't think they were intended to be used as small pick-up coils and driver coils in pulse motors or solenoids, etc. It's possible that this was more like "pure research" by Tesla but I am only guessing".
MileHigh
Look at the top of this Patent. It reads: "COIL FOR ELECTROMAGNET"! Is this what your refering to with that extraneous rubbish you coined to describe it?
Synchro1, all coils are electromagnets with the exception of toroidal coils.
Farmhand:
Thanks I went back and read lines 26 to 31 and also lines 43 to 54. ;D
So it is indeed to overcome capacitor limitations! You can imagine that 10-foot coil. When it starts to get "really excited" and generate massive voltages it could start to form internal arcing. So it looks like Tesla took up the challenge of spacing the loops of the coils and possibly adding a dielectric between the loops to make an impressive "self resonating machine" that was not prone to internal arcing. And then at the end he just says that he has made an LC resonator within the inherent design of the coil.
So there is no planned "killer app" for the coil. Yes, it generates a magnetic field.
That's the way it looks to me.
Also, just look at how capacitors are made, all the different types. That kind of tech simply didn't exist in Tesla's time. It's actually very difficult to make a capacitor at home that has a significant capacitance. I am not counting the more recent "gray electrolytic goop" stuff that some people try. I never read those threads so I don't know how successful those attempts are.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on April 17, 2013, 09:59:54 PM
Synchro1, all coils are electromagnets with the exception of toroidal coils.
That's why this one's special. This coil was labeled specifically for "Electromagnets" may have better been labled anything! Because what else may Tesla really have been thinking? That poses a huge mystery for the rest us, right Holmes? Not so much of a hint of it's intended use?
Synchro1:
You are also forgetting the context of the times. Almost no one understood electricity. But they did see electromagnets, in the telegraph office, perhaps to operate traffic lights, etc. So "electromagnet" was common parlance in those days and considered a new high tech wonder. You are reading too much into the use of the word. Try reviewing the material about ampere-turns and visualizing the toroidal magnetic field each loop of wire makes. All the toroids from all the loops add together. There is nothing to distinguish the even loops from the odd loops. They simply all add together to make the toroidal field that the coil projects into space.
Farmhand:
I agree with you about Thane's logic.
QuoteMileHigh I do see your point about the stored energy, But rather than being stored and resonant as in when there is no load isn't it transferred more directly with no Q ? Kinda like by transformer action.
I am not sure what transfer you are talking about. I assume that Tesla tried to optimize the Q factor for his setups. If you can explain more I will try to respond.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on April 17, 2013, 10:35:11 PM
Farmhand:
I agree with you about Thane's logic.
QuoteMileHigh I do see your point about the stored energy, But rather than being stored and resonant as in when there is no load isn't it transferred more directly with no Q ? Kinda like by transformer action.
I am not sure what transfer you are talking about. I assume that Tesla tried to optimize the Q factor for his setups. If you can explain more I will try to respond.
MileHigh
Slight misunderstanding, I didn't clarify, I was referring to just a regular high impedance coil used by Thane ect. Or even to the single winding coil I used with a capacitor across it to lower it's frequency enough to hit the harmonics. I wasn't referring to Tesla's coil there. My bad.
In this short clip, we can see the input current reduce from almost 2.5 amps from the 12 volt battery to about 2 amps from the 12 volt battery while accelerating under short circuit, the reason being the load or draw on the battery is reduced, the reason for that is the motor is seeing less load, and the reason for that is the reduction of the induced drag on the generator rotor. How the load on the rotor is reduced is irrelevant because the input power dropped only slightly when loaded by the bulb which was only 3 watts rated I think. But the input was around 30 Watts unloaded and dropped to about 24 Watts when shorted. Either figure is seriously inefficient no matter how it is looked at.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFWin-crxQY
The same thing happens when a transformer is driven to resonance (max voltage) the input to do that at idle is increased as compared to not, then when the load is added the parameters are changed and the setup is put "out of tune" so the input drops and unloads the supply, the output is dismal of course, as is predicted by the MIT lecture I linked.
At least part of the reason for the behavior/effect is already predicted by conventional knowledge.
Cheers
Farmhand:
I can suggest a theory that may explain what happens in your clip. The first step is the fact that a shorted pick-up coil is likely to be a very low load on the rotor because there is no power being transferred into the "load." The basic idea is that open-circuit is no load, a short is no load, and somewhere in between those two extremes is the matching load for maximum power transfer and 50% efficiency.
In addition, I believe the shorted coil should remove the most or all of the cogging. A simple spin-down test comparison with no load resistor and a "zero ohm" load resistor should confirm this. When the rotor magnets pass the shorted coils currents will be induced into the coils to make the coil and it's core "disappear."
So there is a possible mechanism for the speed up just like you stated - less rotor resistance because cogging and radial stresses nearly eliminated when coils shorted and no power transferred into the zero-ohm "load."
I made reference to the motor being a complex electro-mechanical impedance. There is a good chance that the motor has two or more stabilization points with respect to the RPM. So you got a speed up with the short, and that resulted in the motor "landing" at a different speed stabilization point. That is not an unusual phenomenon at all.
Cheers,
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on April 17, 2013, 09:43:13 PM
Synchro1:
I tried for 15 minutes on Google to find any references to bifilar coils used in electromagnets and could not find any.
Hmm. Im not even going to look. Back when I was just introduced to the series bifilar coil, I did searches and all it came up with was bifilar relay windings, audio transformers and switching supplies, etc., and finally pulse motor coils on youtube. There are many search results for them, I tell ya what, be back in one min.... I just Yahooed 'bifilar coil and got over 215,000 results. ;) A relay coil is an electromagnet and some are 'bifilar'. ;) In this case, one winding is finer wire than the other. A rated current needs to be applied to both windings in parallel in order to get enough field to pull the contacts closed. Once pulled the heavier winding is disconnected while the thinner winding remains connected to the on source till the relay is no longer needed to be on.
It is a way of saving power if a relay is intended to be on for long periods. They were used in LARGE relays I used to work with at Union Switch and Signal. The contacts are carrying large amounts of currents so the spring to unload the contacts is pretty strong, so a decent amount of power is required to pull the contacts together. But the 'holding' current is much less once the contacts are already pulled shut. So energy is saved by switching over to the thinner winding once pulled. Some of the boxes were 40 footers holding many racks of relays, so saving on power was a wise decision. These switch boxes were for railroad and subway controls and signaling, all vital equipment as lives depend on them. So running the relays cooler in these situations is preferred also and provides higher reliability.
Lets just call them 'series bifilar coils'. As 'pseudo' , as you like to describe it means pretend, fake, or sham. I asked you the other day what you meant by pseudo. Its your way of discrediting bifilar coils, as we understand them to be, described by the great Tesla himself in his patent way back in 1893. You are the only person I have ever heard the term from. So now that everyone is on the same page, lets just describe them as series bifilar coils. SBC if you like. Or SB Series bifi, as I have found that others that have experience with them get what Im saying right away. But using pseudo, quasi seems to have 'us' asking, what do you mean. ;)
And Quasi 'resembling' 'having some, but not all of the features of' is still a bit of a negative term to apply to something that is held of higher value by others.
And even 'true' bifilar. Describing some different winding than what is being discussed as if what we are discussing is false in comparison. ??? ::)
Do you find it hard to believe that I or even we might take notice to these things?
Your version of a 'true bifilar' verses our 'fake coils' 'sham coils' 'pretend coils'. I know you will no holds barred put all you can into 'talking' points of why these coils are useless compared to True coils. ::) Common man. ;D
Can you see what Im getting at with your clever choices of wording and how some might take it, if they take a close look at what you are saying? ;)
Mags
Magluvin:
I have no problem calling them SBC's and that's a lot easier to type.
But I have to state strongly you are wrong about my use of the term "pseudo." "Pseudo" is also a technical term and it in no way is it meant to be, or is it an attempt to be, derogatory. It's never been an issue. It just means "looks like" in this context. The truth is SBC's don't even look like bifilar coils and I just used that term anyways. It's just because of my desire to distinguish between two completely different coil configurations. The uncertainty stresses me out.
No doubt you will find references to bifilar coils if you search. But the links will be about "true bifilar" coils. I was looking for junkyard electromagnet SBC's and came up zip.
MileHigh
From what Im just beginning to understand more recently is that the SB in Teslas pat is intended as an electro magnet, and that when input is applied, the capacitance increase 'within' the coil neutralizes the self inductance of the coil so current flows much faster right from the start thus producing a stronger magnetic field. After all, the output property of an 'electromagnet' is a magnetic field. ;) So the objective is a stronger magnetic field. ;)
MH may be right about the coil resistances reading the same in the SB configuration. I have to test that myself. But the initial field production is much quicker from the beginning because currents flow much quicker due to the 'internal' capacitance. We cannot compare that to just adding a capacitor to a coil ad call it the same. A normal coil is going to take in what its given as the impedance allows over time.
In the case of the nail with wire wound on it, if there is more capacitance within the bifi coil compared to the normal wound nail, then the SB nail could result in more field due to this current input rush as compared to the impeding, slower building, normal coil.
It is said that if you attach a magnet to a metal bar and measure the holding strength before release right away as compared to leaving the mag on the metal for a longer period of time, the one that was there the longest will have the stronger hold. So if the inrush of the bifi is stronger initially than the normal coils full current, then the nail could have a stronger field even once the SB coil settles to full constant current flow. Especially if there are metal objects to be picked up added to the end of the core(nail) 'initially'.
I would imagine that 'if' the sb coil can pick up more staples or paper clips well after the sb coil is connected to the battery, then it should pick up even more if the nail is already in contact with the staples before the current is applied. This is just my thoughts on it before doing tests.
And then there is the indisputable lowering of resonant freq with the added capacitance that is what I am interested in also.
Then there is their use in a transformer. What would be the effects if the capacitance is built into the coil(in the transformer) rather than external? I have a n ecore prepped for my home made litz winding I will be making this weekend to see. ;) The litz will be made with 7 strands stretched out between 2 mixing sticks and then then slowly twist the stick on one end til it is wound into one wire. And all the ends will be ready for capacitance readings to get things as balanced as possible. And a 7th strand to test out shorting along the way. So testing of the sb in the transformer as a primary and as a secondary will be done.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on April 18, 2013, 12:48:11 AM
MH may be right about the coil resistances reading the same in the SB configuration. I have to test that myself.
I have a coil I wound way back as a bifi. I didnt know what I was doing with it then. I went to get it out the other day and one of the leads coming out near the core was broken off. I have to unwind it to fix. ;)
But that coil was strange when it came to measurements. Capacitance checking was the real weird one. Measuring capacitance across one of the windings, meaning a winding from end to continuity end measured 1uf. ??? Measuring capacitance between the 2 open windings was about 11nf if I remember correctly. These coils will mess with your mind. :o ;)
I also had an idea a while back using a bifi secondary connecting opposite open ends to a bridge rectifier. If an AV plug can pull from a single ended open secondary into a cap, using the bifi's open ended to a bridge might be interesting. The connection in the transformer between the 2 windings will be capacitive. Just ideas.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on April 18, 2013, 12:48:11 AM
From what Im just beginning to understand more recently is that the SB in Teslas pat is intended as an electro magnet, and that when input is applied, the capacitance increase 'within' the coil neutralizes the self inductance of the coil so current flows much faster right from the start thus producing a stronger magnetic field. After all, the output property of an 'electromagnet' is a magnetic field. ;) So the objective is a stronger magnetic field. ;)
MH may be right about the coil resistances reading the same in the SB configuration. I have to test that myself. But the initial field production is much quicker from the beginning because currents flow much quicker due to the 'internal' capacitance. We cannot compare that to just adding a capacitor to a coil ad call it the same. A normal coil is going to take in what its given as the impedance allows over time.
In the case of the nail with wire wound on it, if there is more capacitance within the bifi coil compared to the normal wound nail, then the SB nail could result in more field due to this current input rush as compared to the impeding, slower building, normal coil.
It is said that if you attach a magnet to a metal bar and measure the holding strength before release right away as compared to leaving the mag on the metal for a longer period of time, the one that was there the longest will have the stronger hold. So if the inrush of the bifi is stronger initially than the normal coils full current, then the nail could have a stronger field even once the SB coil settles to full constant current flow. Especially if there are metal objects to be picked up added to the end of the core(nail) 'initially'.
I would imagine that 'if' the sb coil can pick up more staples or paper clips well after the sb coil is connected to the battery, then it should pick up even more if the nail is already in contact with the staples before the current is applied. This is just my thoughts on it before doing tests.
And then there is the indisputable lowering of resonant freq with the added capacitance that is what I am interested in also.
Then there is their use in a transformer. What would be the effects if the capacitance is built into the coil(in the transformer) rather than external? I have a n ecore prepped for my home made litz winding I will be making this weekend to see. ;) The litz will be made with 7 strands stretched out between 2 mixing sticks and then then slowly twist the stick on one end til it is wound into one wire. And all the ends will be ready for capacitance readings to get things as balanced as possible. And a 7th strand to test out shorting along the way. So testing of the sb in the transformer as a primary and as a secondary will be done.
Mags
I'm not so sure about that, if we add a capacitance to a coil it will keep much the same resonant frequency when fed different voltages, going by what I can gather the SBC
will change it's resonant frequency with voltage changes. But I don't know this for certain. A coil that lowered it's resonant frequency as the applied voltage is increased would be useful for sure. But a SBC fed with 12 volts at it's resonant frequency say 10 kHz, should act in a similar way magnetically to a normal coil with the same amount of wire and fed with 12 volts at 10 kHz and tuned with a capacitor to be resonant at 10 kHz. I would say the effect of the self capacitance cancelling the inductance would be the same as an added capacitance cancelling the self inductance, which is common practice.
The difference between 260 kHz and a few mHz is a lot. If the turns can take the strain then it's all good. Need to test the difference in the resonant frequency of an SBC fed with say 1 volt as compared to 100 volts. Frequency could remain fairly stable, I've never tested it and wouldn't bother to try to work out how to calculate it then test it anyway.
I don't have a simple way to pulse a coil with 100 volts at 260 kHz on hand. Edit: Well actually I do, but it could make smoke without loading the coil. I can open the window and blow the smoke out I suppose. ;D If I do it I'll be sure to film it in case there might be a spectacular failure..
Cheers
on 5/17/04 11:11 PM, David Thomson at yahoogroups@... wrote:
My research on bifilar windings indicate magnetic field is the primary purpose of the coil. The origional patent calls the bifilar coil, a coil for electromagnets. My readings indicate that the size is of primary importance as the strength of the field is squared with each doubleing in size of the coil. There is no reason that I am aware of that the flat coils cannot be stacked like pancakes. The flat coils could also be placed over a cone shape so they would assume a cone shape. The coil more than likely acts like a condenser found in old cars. The magnetic field created by one wire, acts to create resistance to the electricity flowing through the second wire.
Paul
The "Oldscientist" measured 40x less inductance and half the Ohms in a Tesla series wired bifilar compared to a single wire coil of equal gauge and length. The Tesla bifilar also produces twice the magnetic field, as proven by "Tesla-Coil-Builder". "Magnetic field is the primary purpose of the coil". This major point grows overshadowed by discussions concerning the bifilars other unique characteristics and diverse applications, and needs re-emphasis.
Well I haven't seen the Old Scientists video so I can't comment, he might be confused. He might have meant to say four times as
much inductance.
Anyway this is words from the patent.
Clearly it's not just for spiral coils, it was probably just easier to show with spirals for the diagrams. The words are clear I don't see how that can be disputed.
Lines 33 to 38 of Page one.
QuoteI would here state that by the term coils I desire to include generally helices solenoids or in fact any conductor the different parts
of which by the requirements of its application or use are brought into such relations with each other as to materially increase the self induction found that in coil there exists
Another clear statement if the coil already has sufficient capacity for the working frequency it's good to go, also if the coil can be made to have sufficient capacity by some other method it is good to go also.
Lines 50 to 57 of Page one.
QuoteIt is well known that the higher the frequency or potential difference of the current the smaller the capacity required to counteract the self induction hence in any coil however small the capacity it may be sufficient for the purpose stated if the proper conditions in other respects be secured
And this indicates to me that the frequency of a Coil wound in such a way will decrease with an increase in the applied voltage.
Lines 67 to 79 of Page one.
QuoteIn order to attain my object and to properly increase the capacity of any given coil I wind it in such way as to secure a greater difference of potential between its adjacent turns or convolutions and since the energy stored in the coil considering the latter as a condenser is proportionate to the square of the potential difference between its adjacent convolutions it is evident that I may in this way secure by a proper disposition of these convolutions a greatly increased capacity for a given increase in potential difference between the turns
I'm sorry but I'm not really interested in what you say some other guy said he measured or the conclusions the other guy came to.
If I do the measurements and mine differ I'll believe mine. I'm biased.
Cheers
My discovery:
Four wires wraped together will wind a "Quadfilar coil". Wired as two Tesla serial bifilars, one pulsed D.C will invert the power to A.C. in the other, plus the "Q" coil doubles the pulsed D.C. to A.C. output voltage.
Magluvin:
The resistances will be the same. We are talking basic fundamentals of electronics here. Will two five-meter lengths of wire in series measure the same DC resistance as a 10-meter length of wire? The answer is yes.
Farmhand:
The self-resonant frequency of a coil is independent of the magnitude of the oscillating voltage. Just look at the formula for the resonant frequency of an LC tank circuit. Not a mention of voltage to be found.
Synchro1:
The Oldscientist measured 4X not 40X, he made a verbal slip-up and he makes other mistakes. Just look at the multimeter displays in his clip. Likewise the SB coil does not produce twice the magnetic field as a regular coil with the same number of turns. These are basic fundamentals of coil design.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on April 18, 2013, 08:23:30 AM
Magluvin:
The resistances will be the same. We are talking basic fundamentals of electronics here. Will two five-meter lengths of wire in series measure the same DC resistance as a 10-meter length of wire? The answer is yes.
Farmhand:
The self-resonant frequency of a coil is independent of the magnitude of the oscillating voltage. Just look at the formula for the resonant frequency of an LC tank circuit. Not a mention of voltage to be found.
Synchro1:
The Oldscientist measured 4X not 40X, he made a verbal slip-up and he makes other mistakes. Just look at the multimeter displays in his clip. Likewise the SB coil does not produce twice the magnetic field as a regular coil with the same number of turns. These are basic fundamentals of coil design.
MileHigh
I have one word for you and your classic design formulas. You're stuck with outdated Newtonian concepts in an area of Quantum Mechanics. The two wires can't create the extra field according to your steam era laws of Physics. The one word is : LORENTZ.
Does anyone think there's any value to this discovery of mine? Two serial bifilars wound together act as a pulsed D.C to A.C. voltage doubling inverter transformer.
Synchro1:
When you learn about electronics you start with the basic building blocks. You learn one block, and then learn another block and put that on top of the first block, and so on. As you learn more advanced stuff you go higher and higher and you keep on referencing the blocks you learned before. So I am 100% certain that what I am saying is true about the magnetic fields being the same for the two coil configurations.
I will throw a fun curve ball at you. There is actually no such thing as a "north" and "south" magnetic field. Have you ever looked at the magnetic field of a long straight wire with current going through it? The magnetic field lines travel in circles around the axis of the wire. So where is the "north" and where is the "south" in this case? There is none. We just use the terms "north" and "south" as constructs to make it easier to talk about magnetic fields.
So it turns out that Tesla experimented with LC resonators where the coil itself is the resonator. The main reason he did this was because capacitor technology in the 19th century was unavailable to do the things he wanted to do, so he found another way to do it. But I think that he created a solution in search of a problem.
The magnetic field generated by a coil is proportional to the current times the square of the number of turns. They discovered that Mother Nature likes to keep things simple. That happens over and over. Another example is that a coil is not so unique. It turns out that a flywheel acts exactly like a coil. Who would have thought that an electrical coil is basically the same thing as a mass spinning about it's axis, like a big flat disk spinning on a shaft with a high-quality bearing to keep the friction to a minimum. Again, another example of Mother Nature keeping things simple.
MileHigh
You continue to ignore the results of "Tesla-Coil_Builders" paper clip attraction experiment. I can't permit you to slick by that kind of concrete proof coupled with pejorative jargon. You're stealing the wonder this magnification of field stregth permits us, by canvasing it in a smoke screen of "Hocus Pous" pseudo science.
Please get the two 16 penny nails, the few yards of magnet wire and run the experiment for your self. You're acting like a superstious aborigene, recoiling from a pilot's reflective mirror. .
Synchro1:
You have a situation where you have two differing opinions about Tesla_Coil_Builder's experiment. So don't take my word for it or TCB's word for it. My advice to you would be to do more research and see what you think for yourself. In other words, make a more informed decision. Learning is one of the spices of life!
I mentioned to you that TCB is clearly a beginner because he did not use the correct terminology for his experiment. Therefore his experiment is suspect. I have mentioned many other valid points that you have ignored. I am certainly not talking hocus-pocus pseudo science.
Thee is a huge body of knowledge related to electronics. Try to do some research in manageable chunks and you will have more fun and insight with your experiments.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on April 18, 2013, 01:17:10 PM
Synchro1:
You have a situation where you have two differing opinions about Tesla_Coil_Builder's experiment. So don't take my word for it or TCB's word for it. My advice to you would be to do more research and see what you think for yourself. In other words, make a more informed decision. Learning is one of the spices of life!
I mentioned to you that TCB is clearly a beginner because he did not use the correct terminology for his experiment. Therefore his experiment is suspect. I have mentioned many other valid points that you have ignored. I am certainly not talking hocus-pocus pseudo science.
Thee is a huge body of knowledge related to electronics. Try to do some research in manageable chunks and you will have more fun and insight with your experiments.
MileHigh
I've designed built and experimented with Tesla series wraped coils for around ten years. You don't know what you're talking about.
The increased magnetic power of the Tesla bifilar is undeniable to the hands and senses when pulse powering magnet spinners. That's compared to the single wrap. Have you ever built and operated a Tesla bifilar pulse powered magnetmotor?
Synchro1:
No, I never built a pulse motor. It's not as relevant as you might think. Plus I do know what I am talking about and that is clearly shown in my postings. You are playing Straw Man when you state that I don't know what I am talking about. Note that Tesla_Coil_Builder didn't measure the current though the wire for both for the regular and the SB-based electromagnets so we are missing that most critical piece of information. It's actually crazy that he didn't make that measurement. Nor did he attempt to figure out if the nail core was saturated or not. So that document is not giving you any solid evidence.
How about you, did you replicate Tesla_Coil_Builder's experiment?
Anyway, no need to repeat ourselves. I covered some of your issues and also talked about the delayed Lenz effect and how to make some measurements and gave my take on that issue. I still don't believe that the mystery of how and why the rotor speeds up has been fully explained by someone.
MileHigh
Quote from Milehigh:
"No, I never built a pulse motor"
I'm glad I asked you that question. You have no idea how big a difference there is in actual performance between these coil types. The SBC is really a "Super Charged Coil"! You have no right whatsoever to say anything more on this subject. This is a builders thread. You are a pedantic Ivory Tower Egg Head. An impertient imposter. You put me through all that crap without so much as ever testing one? That's an outrage! The difference is totally awesome. Overwhelming! You're nothing but a huge deadweight pain. MIB spoiler plant?
Synchro1, no need for the high drama or the fantasy. You have exposed yourself for all those that want to see. I guess you never replicated the Tesla_Coil_Builder nail test yourself since you didn't answer the question!
Quote from: MileHigh on April 18, 2013, 08:01:04 PM
Synchro1, no need for the high drama or the fantasy. You have exposed yourself for all those that want to see. I guess you never replicated the Tesla_Coil_Builder nail test yourself since you didn't answer the question!
I'm showing you that nail experiment. I learned about bifilar properties seperately on the test bench before I ever even saw it. My first SBC was shop wound with a ferrite core, and when wired in series and energised with a 12 battery, flew down the kitchen counter and stuck to a cutlery box, dragging the battery behind it. That experience traumatised me, but substituted for the nail experiment first.
This Tesla series bifilar coil is the closest thing to a free lunch that science has to offer. The SBC charges itself spontaneously as a capacitor, and goes into self resonance as an independent L C tank circuit at the correct frequencies. I believe this SBC tank reonance drives my high speed neo tube in series with a battery and reed switch, when the r.p.m. exceeds the reed switch limit.
Quote from: synchro1 on April 18, 2013, 08:21:54 PM
This Tesla series bifilar coil is the closest thing to a free lunch that science has to offer. The SBC charges itself spontaneously as a capacitor, and goes into self resonance as an independent L C tank circuit at the correct frequencies. I believe this SBC tank reonance drives my high speed neo tube in series with a battery and reed switch, when the r.p.m. exceeds the reed switch limit.
Hey Syncro
Are you driving your SBC just as you would a regular coil pulse motor?
Also, are you sending charge back to the battery from the drive coil?
Any circuits you can show?
Thanks
Mags
@Mags,
The two ends of the red wire thread spool SBC: One goes to one end of the reed switch. the other end of the coil wire and the other end of the reed switch connect to the two battery electrodes. Three simple components in series. Secondly, you can see the position of the reed switch over the coil face for running, and lastly: The spinner.
Quote from: synchro1 on April 18, 2013, 08:21:54 PM
snip..
I believe this SBC tank reonance drives my high speed neo tube in series with a battery and reed switch, when the r.p.m. exceeds the reed switch limit.
Quite possible.
Cheers
"the energy stored in the coil will now be two hundred and fifty thousand times as great."
If there is no difference in this coil and a normal coil, why would Tesla state this? Sounds like a HUGE difference to me. Nothing identical about it. And he clearly represents it as compared to a normal coil. ;)
"Capacity secured in this particular way 'possesses an additional advantage' in that it is evenly distributed, a consideration of the greatest importance in many cases, and the results, both as to efficiency and economy, 'are more readily and easily obtained' as the size of the coils, the potential difference, or frequency of the currents are increased."
He clearly states that there is an advantage. Both as to efficiency and economy are more readily and easily obtained. I read somewhere, I think it was a debate or lecture that Tesla stated that the higher the voltage, the advantages become more apparent. Something like that. Id have to find that.
Mags
Quote from: synchro1 on April 18, 2013, 08:21:03 AM
My discovery:
Four wires wraped together will wind a "Quadfilar coil". Wired as two Tesla serial bifilars, one pulsed D.C will invert the power to A.C. in the other, plus the "Q" coil doubles the pulsed D.C. to A.C. output voltage.
Any resonant transformer can make an AC sine wave from a pulsed DC input.
Tesla coils do it well.
Cheers
EDIT: changed "will make" to "can make".
..
Quote from: synchro1 on April 18, 2013, 08:21:54 PM
I believe this SBC tank reonance drives my high speed neo tube in series with a battery and reed switch, when the r.p.m. exceeds the reed switch limit.
This is entirely possible, simply put the pulses to the coil create harmonics and if the harmonics are of a low enough frequency and the Q is good enough the rotor could see the harmonics as driving "pulses" and the rotor speed would increase relative the influence of the harmonics. Still the energy in the harmonics is from the supply, it's oscillating energy.
Cheers
Over 25k the resonant frequency begins to drive the neo tube, but it takes 1/2 a minute to run up to that speed, then "Shazzammm" it begins to "Hyper Accelerate" at around 10,000 r.p.m. per second up to near a 50k plateau. I tried disconnecting the battery, but it droped dead. I'm pretty sure the reed switch is stuck closed. There's an open circuit, but no longer any measureable amp draw.
Quote from: synchro1 on April 18, 2013, 10:39:08 PM
Over 25k the resonant frequency begins to drive the neo tube, but it takes 1/2 a minute to run up to that speed, then "Shazzammm" it begins to "Hyper Accelerate" at around 10,000 r.p.m. per second up to near a 50k plateau.
Well hot dang!! ;) Any vids? ;D
That reed switch must be a champion. ;D I have a few of them. I like the ones that the reed pulls out of the relay when you straighten the leads. Some at RS are sealed, last I got some. I cut the plastic carefully around the end of the relay to remove the reed and POOF! An amazing amount of super fine wire coil jumped out like a can of peanuts, um, I mean snakes. lol It was one that was 1024 ohm. At first the sound came and I thought I broke the reed, and then I didnt understand what I was seeing as there was sooo much wire and I just didnt get it for a couple seconds. I laughed. I got a pic of it and its posted here somewhere also. It literally 'unsprung' outward and expanded.
Reeds have an upper limit of their freq of operation. I dont know what the RS ones are. But maybe being in close proximity to that diametric mag, as they are strong, I have a few in different sizes, the field is strong enough to take the reed contacts beyond that rating. They have resonant freq also, and show also at harmonics there of.
Mags
It runs completly enclosed to protect from magnet fragmentation. I may cut a window through the side. I have to lasertach from below, half off a countertop.
The coil grew cold to the touch after warp factor!
The reed switches vary widely in their performance. Maybe one in five will reach these upward frequencies.
It was 1050 ohms. ;D
Mags
Hey Syncro
With just the sbc, a reed and a battery, the coil will produce only one field out in the direction of the magnet. How does the reed know which pole of the magnet to fire on to get the mag polarities right ?
Here is what I did in this case a while ago...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYgs7dvyZqc
This was before I started using a tiny bias magnet on the reeds so that it only closed when a particular pole be it N or S, depending on the bias mag polarity.
This drill bit deal, I was literally looking to get the magnets field attracted to the reed while the reed was further away. I dont know what I was thinking or even how I came up with it. but it did bias the reed to a particular pole of the magnet depending on what side of the reed the bit was near.
I have seen that if the reed is at the right distance from the mag, just on the verge of not firing, it would only fire for 1 pole and not the other. It could be an abnormality in the magnet and how it was made. But the drill bit, or a nail, was a weird encounter. :o ;D
Mags
Quote"the energy stored in the coil will now be two hundred and fifty thousand times as great."
If there is no difference in this coil and a normal coil, why would Tesla state this? Sounds like a HUGE difference to me. Nothing identical about it. And he clearly represents it as compared to a normal coil. (https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2FSmileys%2Fdefault%2Fwink.gif&hash=0d9aacf9391b7fda4adbf7cd091f687bfd283341)
"Capacity secured in this particular way 'possesses an additional advantage' in that it is evenly distributed, a consideration of the greatest importance in many cases, and the results, both as to efficiency and economy, 'are more readily and easily obtained' as the size of the coils, the potential difference, or frequency of the currents are increased."
He clearly states that there is an advantage. Both as to efficiency and economy are more readily and easily obtained. I read somewhere, I think it was a debate or lecture that Tesla stated that the higher the voltage, the advantages become more apparent. Something like that. Id have to find that.
This can rephrased to give you another viewpoint. The SB wiring creates the opportunity for adjacent loops in the coil to sustain a higher potential between them. Therefore the tiny capacitance can be charged to a higher potential more "easily" because of the coil geometry. So if you say that there was one volt of potential between loops, and then with the SB wiring you can get 500 volts between loops, there is your 250,000 times the stored energy capacity.
So if the coil self-resonates the odd-even interleaving facilitates this capacitative energy storage at high voltage potentials.
However, if the coil is not self resonating and instead being used in pick-up coil or driver coil applications, then the coil winding-to-winding potential never gets excited to such high levels except for the generation of a back-EMF spike. So this "extra capacity for energy storage" never gets exercised for conventional applications. The capacitance is still assumed to be minuscule and of no significance.
That implies the only advantage is self-resonance but I am not aware of any applications for this.
@Mags,
Pretty cool setup! Tiny magnets are alot of fun to play around reed switches with.
"With just the SBC, a reed and a battery, the coil will produce only one field out in the direction of the magnet. How does the reed know which pole of the magnet to fire on to get the mag polarities right" ?
The face of the SBC changes field polarity to just the opposite of the approaching magnet pole, in compliance with "Lenz's Law". It really makes no difference to the magnet spinner what side of the SB coil pulses at TDC, because the polarity will always be in repulsion. A single wire coil would assert a pole, and fail to work.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFGiEQecEsQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFGiEQecEsQ)
Skycollection ( http://www.youtube.com/user/skycollection (http://www.youtube.com/user/skycollection) ) has published the new video above.
Again he does not do any conclusive input and output measurements. Very strange, because that would be a straight forward thing to do.
Greetings, Conrad
Hi Conrad, this is the effect that zirofosil caused in my projects for his "video attack", i will not participate in past projects and future projects because the people of this forum attack me too...!
Quote from: conradelektro on April 19, 2013, 03:02:31 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFGiEQecEsQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFGiEQecEsQ)
Skycollection ( http://www.youtube.com/user/skycollection (http://www.youtube.com/user/skycollection) ) has published the new video above.
Again he does not do any conclusive input and output measurements. Very strange, because that would be a straight forward thing to do.
Greetings, Conrad
Well something is weird. The big battery to the right seems to be connected to the cap and the meter is measuring the battery? The battery starts off at 11.1v. That is completely discharged, as far as useful charge as it was intended.
That is the reason it can be taken to 29v. ;) And then it even stays near 20v after the gen motor is stopped. That tells me the battery is in terrible shape and the cap is "trying to hold' the charge but it is leaked into the battery, and the battery doesnt seem to want much of it as slowly as the voltage is dropping, or the cap/battery voltage would have dropped down to at least something over 11.1v pretty quickly. ;)
Its a shame that some show so much but it all remains a mystery. ;)
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on April 19, 2013, 07:11:51 PM
Its a shame that some show so much but it all remains a mystery. ;)
Mags
Until someone who understands these things figures it out. ;D
Other than the battery being toast(looks new though) that cap may look large, but knowing those types, and what range of capacitance they are, I dont see anything very exciting about the level of charge happening. The Voltage would be more if the dead battery were not in the circuit. ;)
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on April 19, 2013, 07:11:51 PM
Well something is weird. The big battery to the right seems to be connected to the cap and the meter is measuring the battery? The battery starts off at 11.1v. That is completely discharged, as far as useful charge as it was intended.
That is the reason it can be taken to 29v. ;) And then it even stays near 20v after the gen motor is stopped. That tells me the battery is in terrible shape and the cap is "trying to hold' the charge but it is leaked into the battery, and the battery doesnt seem to want much of it as slowly as the voltage is dropping, or the cap/battery voltage would have dropped down to at least something over 11.1v pretty quickly. ;)
Its a shame that some show so much but it all remains a mystery. ;)
Mags
Yeah I agree Mags, the battery is badly sulfated or damaged and if he does not mention that in the video he is either very uninformed of being deceptive.
I also seen nothing in the video to indicate and miraculous charge rate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFGiEQecEsQ
Looks to me like he is a neat experimenter, but doesn't understand what he is doing/seeing or he is deceptive/misleading.
Basically I would not watch any more video's without being very very skeptical.
If he wants people to not question him he should not make video's.
The result we see in the video is perfectly normal behavior for a badly sulfated battery fed energy from a coil discharge. That is the effect the video shows.
The cap is probably there because without it being there the voltage generated at his drain or collector pins would destroy them
due to the battery not being able to take on the energy quick enough. As many of us know quite well. We've seen the same effect.
That is why neons are used between the collector and emitter pins on desufator circuits, because if the battery is too badly sulfated
the developed voltage will usually damage the transistors. Adding a large capacitor across the charge battery is common practice for
when a battery is so sulfated the safety neons fire continuously.
Haven't we moved past pulse motors and sulfated battery effects ?
I'm not attacking him either just making observations.
Cheers
P.S. Isn't this getting way off topic. It has as much to do with "Delayed Lenz Effect". It's a pulse motor trying to charge a badly sulfated battery.
What exactly was he claiming for the video ? I don't see any "new" inductors.
...
Quote from: Farmhand on April 19, 2013, 11:45:15 PM
Yeah I agree Mags, the battery is badly sulfated or damaged and if he does not mention that in the video he is either very uninformed of being deceptive.
I also seen nothing in the video to indicate and miraculous charge rate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFGiEQecEsQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFGiEQecEsQ)
Looks to me like he is a neat experimenter, but doesn't understand what he is doing/seeing or he is deceptive/misleading.
Basically I would not watch any more video's without being very very skeptical.
If he wants people to not question him he should not make video's.
The result we see in the video is perfectly normal behavior for a badly sulfated battery fed energy from a coil discharge. That is the effect the video shows.
The cap is probably there because without it being there the voltage generated at his drain or collector pins would destroy them
due to the battery not being able to take on the energy quick enough. As many of us know quite well. We've seen the same effect.
That is why neons are used between the collector and emitter pins on desufator circuits, because if the battery is too badly sulfated
the developed voltage will usually damage the transistors. Adding a large capacitor across the charge battery is common practice for
when a battery is so sulfated the safety neons fire continuously.
Haven't we moved past pulse motors and sulfated battery effects ?
I'm not attacking him either just making observations.
Cheers
P.S. Isn't this getting way off topic. It has as much to do with "Delayed Lenz Effect". It's a pulse motor trying to charge a badly sulfated battery.
What exactly was he claiming for the video ? I don't see any "new" inductors.
...
Hey Farmhand
Yeah, I always looked up to his builds, and so many. But its a bit of a tease at times, where it possibly looks like something 'real good' but never any answers to 'real questions'
I can see that he has done just about every variety, style and some new ideas in his builds, so I think he knows what is going on within his circuits, at the least by now. ;)
Im not sure what he intended to show in the vid as a result being the voltage reading of what I see. But if I had to guess, from what I see, it seems like a bit of transparent trickery. :o ;D
Mags
sorry for the delay in answering
no video cam available and I do not like to post videos neither, for a main reason: I am very short in measurement knowledge, therefore, I am unsure of the results gotten from many of the experiments done . . so the least thing I want is to mislead or give false info, as I have poor measurement equipment even no oscope.
I am here mainly to learn, and something I found very often, is people showing videos with no specs nor schematics and many of them showing only voltages but no Amps, which is very frustrating.
IMO measurement of output pulsed DC without a scope originates many wrong conclusions, as well as batteries behavior.
Anyway, taking constructive criticism as an attack is just a childish behavior. . . . so your considerations about the attached pic are very welcomed.
Is just to clarify what I meant for a "sliding coil" in my previous post.
If any is interested I may post as many specs or schematics as required. Of course I insist in the poor measurement subject.
The motor type Adams is driven by 2 hand made electromagnets, a reed switch and a 2N3055 transistor.
I just placed a voltage divider before the reed input as to elongate its life, using just a small current/voltage at the transitor base.(I know this way is not efficient because of resistance looses)
It works from 3V to12V. (but at 12V the trans. gets warm, so I use 6V as average input, the mA input varies also)
Average rpm at 6V- 500mA: 3600 rpm.
About the sliding coils, I tested many, mainly tesla series bifilar ones (solenoid) and mainly with 3500 turns, the higher output voltage was fitting the output coil physicaly closer to the driving coil, but average Amps were always quite low. Very easy to load many leds but very weak with resistive loads.
The lack of a Scope, do not allows for an accurate search for the resonant condition. I go as far as I can.
Cheers
edit-forgot to say: no input or rpm changes perceptible at any loading condition.
IMO, in this kind of setup the collector coil is electricaly isolated from the driver coils, and influenced by the magnetic saturation-collapse of the ferrite core, but I cannot see the diference if this happens only by the electric pulse of driver coil, or the magnet`s rotor action, or probably both.
The driver in this case is metal shielded around and back, and when pulsed its magnetic field may be sensed at a far distance. Leedsalkin stated (I checked this) that shielding that way enhances the magnetic properties, but winded normally. this ones are series bifilar but with a diode between. Ideed the magnetic polarity reverses,thus I winded opposite at right hand rule, to get a North-north repulsing situation at rotor-drive.
sorry for long rant :P
english not my native language :-[
cheers
@ALVARO-CS,
That's called a "Piggy Back" coil. It shares the core with the power coil. Gadgetmall reprted O.U. results with one just like it. Thank you for showing us pictures of the build. Very interesting test bed! You mentioned earlier that the output coil could be adjusted to help deliver a kick to the rotor? A lasertach would sure be nice to help confirm any "Lenz Delay" effect.
sorry sinchro, I may be explained it in a wrong way. What I meant is that the output increases as the output coil gets closer to the driver, but not difference in rpm nor in input power.(no kick)
I even noticed no changes starting the motor and adding the output coil (already loaded) after max rotor speed.
The driving circuit acts as if the output coil was invisible.
Quote from: ALVARO_CS on April 20, 2013, 10:42:50 AM
sorry sinchro, I may be explained it in a wrong way. What I meant is that the output increases as the output coil gets closer to the driver, but not difference in rpm nor in input power.(no kick)
I even noticed no changes starting the motor and adding the output coil (already loaded) after max rotor speed.
The driving circuit acts as if the output coil was invisible.
"Lenz Masking"! I implied a motor might be concievable, but your accomplishment stands as an advance unique unto itself. I'm certain Gadgetmall confirmed your results with his setup. Very impressive outcome. "Zero Lenz" output coils are not the Unicorn!
Quote from above:
"this ones are series bifilar"
What coils are serial bifilar, the power, output or both?
The power coil pulse may be all the output coil gets, but so what, it's free energy. The output coil needs to be tested alone on the sliding core for "Lenz propulsion" effect".
Synchro1:
Good clip for you:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gINzRCOOs-8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gINzRCOOs-8)
Alvaro:
You are right, both the pulse of the driver coil and the magnet's rotor action will generate output in your pick-up coil. If the pick-up coil drives a very small load you might not see and changes in rotation speed because the change in speed is not noticeable. You are getting a Lenz' Law resistance to the rotor turning but it is probably very small. You have to experiment with different load resistors.
There is no over unity from a pick-up coil like in your setup. Proper measurements would show this.
MileHigh
wait wait, I have to emphasize in avoiding any claim, as I said, the lack of accurate equipment may drive to inapropriate measurements. (no hurras by now please)
This is the first time I post this here (or anywhere), and not aware of related Gadgetmall accomplishments. (I miss him in the Joules thief thread)
If someone here would be interested in replicating such a setup, and make some oscope shots, THAT would be the way to confirm or deny it.
If this will be the case, I would have a pleasure in posting the physical specs as No of turns, sizes etc.(I don`t know the flux density of my magnets from HD, neither the saturation degree of the ferrite core, from a AM radio)
cheers
Gadget's "Piggyback Coil" video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LczzeeyfFoA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LczzeeyfFoA)
Gadget wires a tny capacitor in series with the powercoil, and generates even more power in L C tank oscillation with the rotor stopped. The series bifilar behaves the same way.
Moire patterns:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cn-TNQXl9KE
Lorentz force acting on moving charges resulting in moire patterns:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h89TaH6Er1Y
Sinchro1: The schematic for the motor coils are at page 5 in: http://www.totallyamped.net/adams/Coils11.swf (http://www.totallyamped.net/adams/Coils11.swf)
(I think author is Hoptoad)
The collector coils I tested were series bifilar (solenoid wind, not panckake) some 3500 turns of both wires winded in parallel connected end of A with beggining of B. - 0.2 mm enameled copper.
The driver coils: as per attached schematic /diode 1N4007 / 0.4mm enameled copper wire / 320 turns each, total 640 T / shield from a small dc motor / back: a steel washer / core diam - 10mm, x length 100mm.
MileHigh: I tried with leds and with a dc incandescent lamp 12.V - 07.A through a .1mF cap in parallel,-FBR - electrolytic cap bank.-load
As you said, small loads of leds easy to light up, but not power enough to lite the incandescent lamp.
Nevertheless, as I said in both conditions a change in the rpm should be noticed, above all the short at the incands. lamp.
cheers
PS: guys you are so fast in posting I get always late ;D
Alvaro:
That circuit that you are using may damage your transistor. If you notice when the transistor switches off the inductive energy gets discharged inside the transistor.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on April 20, 2013, 12:24:09 PM
Lorentz force acting on moving charges resulting in moire patterns:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h89TaH6Er1Y (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h89TaH6Er1Y)
Very cool, but is this the only way we can visualize this? If we do the same with iron filings under glass, would it show these differences? Or even the standard view of a magnet where the iron filings show the N and S fields to the left and the right? Would the S(right) side show a more expanded field than the N(left)?
Orrr, is it possible that the yokes in the monitor causing the difference in what we are seeing between the N poles down and the S poles down? Or some other factors within the monitor itself like maybe the anode screen being charged upwards of 30kv, because as we know, magnetics and electrics are interactive. Think about this. If the yoke fields in the monitor can alter the electron beam up, down, left and right, might not there be a possibility that the high voltage electron beams could have an affect on the tuning forks magnets fields, depending on their polarities?? ;)
Im not quite buying that as an example of an egg shaped field between N and S.
It was a cool vid to say the 'most', but does it have a point when it comes to this thread?
Mags
MileHigh: for the moment it holds it very well, I guess the 3055 is very robust, or the kick back gets dissipated via diode and coil A,
I have used this setup many times and never failed. I recently got a hall switch to use it with mosfets and will need another kind of driving circuit, but I will stand with this kind of coils, as it has proven to deliver a stronger thrust.
Thanks for your remark
Retrod is spinning a tube magnet with a 70 hertz a.c. signal from a sine wave audio generator. The magnet's in "Synch" with the signal, higher then the spin rate. The SBC resonating signal is pure sine a.c. also. Perhaps it drives my high speed precision ceramic bearing reed switch magnet motor the same way, with an a.c. frequency harmonic from the SBC L-C resonance?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQ7Ax_b6S4k (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQ7Ax_b6S4k)
The oscillation takes over and leaves the reed switch behind. The amplified tank resonance powers the magnet spinner alone, with no further measurable input from the power source. The SBC resonant signal may be in the megahertz range!
Hi synchro1,
I thought to make two electromagnets like the link (you referred to http://www.tesla-coil-builder.com/bifilar_electromagnet.htm (http://www.tesla-coil-builder.com/bifilar_electromagnet.htm) ) shows. I used two identical sized bolts M6x40mm (i.e OD 6mm length 40mm). I used two 6 meter long enamelled+silk insulated copper wires, OD 0.3mm (awg #29).
I wound one 6m wire as a single wire onto one of the bolts, lets name it bolt1, it has about 136 turns, DC resistance is 1.6 Ohm, inductance is 416 uH.
I folded into half the other 6m long wire and wound the two parallel wires onto the other bolt, let's name it bolt2, it has about 63 bifilar turns, then I identified the wire ends of the coils on bolt2 and connected the end of the first wire to the start of the second wire. Thus the two wires in series have DC resistance also 1.6 Ohm, inductance in series is 423 uH, individually each coil is about 107uH.
When these two latter coil wires are unconnected from the series aiding fashion, the capacitance between either the two wire ends or between the wire starts is measured as about 220 pF with a C meter.
Obviously, the tiny difference between the inductances on the two bolts (416 uH and 423 uH) can be explained by any difference in the permeabilities of the bolt materials.
Then I connected the coils on bolt1 and bolt2 in series and switched onto a mini variable DC power supply (see picture) to have the same current flow in both of them at the same time and started to lift paper clips with them. I noticed soon that the clips do not readily attract to each other when being the third or the fourth in a vertical line, the last one or two easily fall down. So I chained first 3 - 3 clips as if they were members of a chain and then the electromagnets could lift them up without falling for even a small unintentional movement.
It turned out soon that the bifilarly wound coil performs the same as the single wire coil. Finally I chained 4 - 4 clips and at a given
current (about 0.42 Amper at 1.5V) each electromagnet was able to hold its four member chain as shown in the picture, any more clips chained into either the single wire or the bifilar wire electromagnet fell down, there was no holding force for more clips in any of the electromagnets at the 0.42 Amper DC current level.
For me this test shows that when a bifilar coil is wound with N/2 number of turns with respect to a comparable single wire coil with N number of turns and the two windings within the bifilar coil are connected in series (in aiding phase, not in cancelling phase) to get the same N number of turns, then there is no any advantage to make a bifilar coil WHEN you use it as a DC operated electromagnet.
I am not saying that such bifilar coil, when operated with AC or pulsed DC current, performs the same way as the comparable single wire coil, it can have the advantage like Tesla found (when driven with AC or pulsed DC current at the bifilar coi's resonant frequency, i.e. you apply the patent correctly).
I am saying that out of these two electromagnets, made as per described in the link, the bifilarly wound electromagnet has no advantage in lifting force at a steady DC current.
The lifting force of a bifilarly wound electromagnet can surely double for DC current too IF you make N number of turns bifilarly and compare its holding force to a single wire coil wound also with N number of turns, in this case the advantage is clear because when you connect the bifilarly wound windings in series you will have a resulting coil with actually 2N number of turns versus the single wire wound coil with N number of turns.
HOWEVER, for the bifilarly wound coil in this example you have to use thicker wire to make the bifilar N number of turns because when you connect the two windings in series, it should have the same DC resistance like the single wire coil has, wound with also N number of turns, to make the two performance comparable correctly.
And remember, the website did not claim that the bifilarly wound electromagnet on the nail lifted up twice as many clips as the single wire electromagnet did. (No such claim on that site, you claimed it in Post #998, page 67 in this thread).
I hope this helps. I have no intention to argue with you, I wrote what I found in the test and explained my findings.
PS regarding the strong electromagnets used in scrapyards you mention, the 'trick' is to use pot-magnet-like electromagnets where BOTH poles of the electromagnet are arranged to appear on the same (facing) side and their flux can close THROUGH the ferromagnetic target to be lifted. See pot magnets or a laudspeaker designs. The pot magnet design 'trick' can multiply the holding force at least 7 to 10 times when compared to the holding force of the same coil and DC input power but it uses one of its poles only for lifting.
rgds, Gyula
Very informative test Gyulasun, that is the test we needed to see done and get the results from, thank you very much for doing that.
Ampere turns rules the day. Makes complete sense.
Now could you possibly test the resonant frequency of both of those coils ?
And see if there is a difference in resonant frequency in the bifilarly wound coil when excited by 1 volt as compared to 10 volts ?
My Function generator is analogue and the frequency drifts a lot, it's almost useless. I'm going to buy another digital one. I get more stable signals with a circuit I made
but it's a pain to adjust and has limited range.
Cheers
Hi Farmhand,
Thanks. Unfortunately I do not have a variable frequency generator to do those tests. MAybe I can chime in to some place to let me use but not sure when I can do it.
My initial guess is that the resonant frequency cannot change with voltage level in resonant circuits unless the core in the coils goes near or into the saturation area. Or the insulating material of the wires (which has a role in capacitance) changes its dielectric constant with increasing electric field amplitude.
Gyula
@Gyulasum,
Thanks for the test. I plan to email your results to "Tesla-Coil-Builder" for comment.
Let me say I did notice a stark difference. Tesla-Coilbuilder tested his coils individually, not in series with a power source!
Okay, just do that.
@Gyula:
Excellent testing and demonstrations. You are doing a lot to clear up the misconceptions held by certain people about what a "Tesla bifilar" coil is and how it works.
There is one other type of "bifilar" coil that is often used and confused with Tesla's design. This is the "hairpin" coil. The hairpin configuration uses the same amount of wire but is non-inductive. If you have the time, you might consider winding a third bolt as a hairpin, and repeat the inductance and electromagnet tests with it.
The hairpin winding is just what you did for the Tesla bifilar, but without cutting and splicing the ends.
ETA: The Function Generator and the Oscilloscope are essential instruments for any electronic experimentation, especially involving pulses, coils, and so on.
You do _not_ need absolutely modern, digital, SOA bleeding edge kit. Most people will find a 3 MHz function generator and a 60 MHz dual-trace scope entirely adequate for their daily needs. Three hundred dollars US will buy a decent used analog scope and basic FG.
You're holding those coils in close adjacency. There's a strong chance their fields are under mutual influence tested silmultainiously and in close proximity.
Magluvin:
If you brought an external magnet near to the filings as per your image, and tapped the paper again, you would see the field lines change shape a bit. Although it's not directly related to the Lorentz force, visually you get similar effects.
For the monitor, the two yokes are making use of Lorentz forces to scan the electron beam. In the clip, the difference between the north pole down and the south pole down is due to the Lorentz force and the cross-product-right-hand-rule stuff. What colour you actually see on the monitor is due to the moire pattern effects.
The point is this quote from Sunchro1:
QuoteYou're stuck with outdated Newtonian concepts in an area of Quantum Mechanics. The two wires can't create the extra field according to your steam era laws of Physics. The one word is : LORENTZ.
There is no Lorentz force magic. The Lorentz force is the reason the Earth is protected from high-energy charged particle radiation from the Sun. All of the particles corkscrew around and end up getting directed towards the poles.
Alvaro:
Good thing that your transistor is surviving. The second coil and the diode are actually not absorbing the coil energy, it's all going into the transistor.
Gyula:
Thanks for doing the experiment and it was very astute to put both coils in series to guarantee that they have the same current flow.
Farmhand:
Note as the SB coil gets smaller the resonant frequency gets higher. It may be that the frequency is too high to get reliable results, I'm not sure. At very high frequencies and factoring in the minuscule capacitance of the coil, attaching the scope probe and it's associated minuscule capacitance and other effects may disturb the setup too much to get a reliable measurement. On the other hand a non-contact measurement technique using a sniffer coil may work better. But even that may cause problems. You might need to be a hard-core analog/RF design engineer to know what to do here.
MileHigh
I forgot to add that Gyulasun is absolutely right about the pot-magnets and closing the field thru whatever you are trying to lift (or magnetize, or oscillate, or pull or push against.) I have long tried to point out that most of the magnet motor designs I see here are actually wasting half of the "output" of their magnets (of course I am using "output" metaphorically, magnets don't output anything). Half the field is essentially unused. By clever core-piece design you can use all the field.
The Rodin Vortex coil, along with my Spiral SBC both project a monopole.
Quote from: TinselKoala on April 20, 2013, 05:50:06 PM
@Gyula:
You are doing a lot to clear up the misconceptions held by certain people about what a "Tesla bifilar" coil is and how it works.
Whoh, not quite yet. Putting the coils in series is not going to let the bifi do as it will with the single filar coil dictating current flow. ;)
Mags
There is no such thing as a "monopole" magnet. Your windings and Rodin's windings are just hiding or redirecting one polarity. All magnetic field lines are _closed loops_. That is the meaning of divB=0. If you have found otherwise, and can prove it, you are in line for a Nobel Prize and Maxwell's Equations will have to be rewritten.
Quote from: Magluvin on April 20, 2013, 06:08:52 PM
Whoh, not quite yet. Putting the coils in series is not going to let the bifi do as it will with the single filar coil dictating current flow. ;)
Mags
That demonstration was simply to assure that both coils were getting the same current in a simple manner. The results from powering the coils individually, at the same current, will not differ.
Here's an interesting video. He states his screw driver magnatizes with only one south pole.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zD9kox0bNdE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zD9kox0bNdE)
And on the electromagnet test, the serial input invaldates any results!
QuoteThe Rodin Vortex coil, along with my Spiral SBC both project a monopole.
I think there were some reports many months ago about some highly specialized laboratory experiments possibly detecting a magnetic monopole with some kind of special setup. Sorry, I am very vague on the details and I think the links on the web looked legit but I can't be sure.
But in the real world on your bench you did not observe a monopole. For what it's worth "Rodin" coils are just coils, no more and no less. There is a perception that there are "special" coils out there. It would be more correct to say that there are special coil configurations for different applications, but they are all ultimately just coils and they all behave fundamentally the same way. Any special "Rodin" coil clips you can find online can be replicated with ordinary coils. The whole thing is just "hot air." Nor is there any kind of "vortex."
MileHigh
@Alvaro:
The way to extend the life of the Reed Switch is to place a small capacitor (ceramic) across the contacts, right at the switch. Of course, since the "special" thing about reed switches is that they are noisy and allow ringing and arcing to occur, the capacitor might eliminate your chances of getting OU.
Of course, as Steorn showed in their famous Waterways demo, you don't really need a reed switch after all. Theirs, on their "plinth" Orbos, froze up after a few hours of operation, so they replaced them with optical sensors firing standard OTS solid-state relays, which are just mosfets-in-a-box. And with that setup they were able to show just as much overunity performance as before.
Quote from: synchro1 on April 20, 2013, 06:15:25 PM
Here's an interesting video. He states his screw driver magnatizes with only one south pole.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zD9kox0bNdE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zD9kox0bNdE)
And on the electromagnet test, the serial input invaldates any results!
Well you wouldn't expect two south poles would you ?
???
Quote from: synchro1 on April 20, 2013, 06:15:25 PM
Here's an interesting video. He states his screw driver magnatizes with only one south pole.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zD9kox0bNdE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zD9kox0bNdE)
And on the electromagnet test, the serial input invaldates any results!
Ooooh, a TriField Meter! That proves his claims are correct.
(From now on I'm going to include my TriField Meter in my videos.)
If you think that "the serial input invaldates any results" (sic) I put it to you: Prove it. Get some bolts and some wire and some power supplies, and demonstrate some difference between the "serial input" and the same current through the electromagnets individually.
Quote from: Farmhand on April 20, 2013, 06:20:43 PM
Well you wouldn't expect two south poles would you ?
???
ROFL..... ;D
Do they make Rodin coil bird's nest soup? :-X
When I exercise my superb qualifying skills I can state with confidence that the "coil south monopole effect" clip is done by a beginner who does not know what he is really doing.
The Internet is a dangerous place to play!
Yes I see, he mentions capacity in the sense of the capacity for energy not in the sense of "capacitance" as such. I get it.
Easy enough to explain in future.
QuoteIt is evident that I may in this way secure by a proper disposition of these convolutions a greatly increased capacity for a given increase in potential difference between the turns.
Cheers
Quote from: MileHigh on April 20, 2013, 05:58:48 PM
Gyula:
Thanks for doing the experiment and it was very astute to put both coils in series to guarantee that they have the same current flow.
This is not astute. "to guarantee that they have the same current flow" ??
Would it be any different if they were in parallel or just individually?
Mags
All that's left for me to test is the difference in resonant frequency between two coils wound the same way Gyulasun did.
Both with the same total wire length, one single winding, one bifilar wound. I predict a big difference, so I can test that.
I'll do it tonight. Hopefully.
In my opinion that is the purpose for the patent. To lower the resonant frequency of a coil with a given length of wire and no external capacitors.
If it does that the patent claims are valid as far as I can tell.
Cheers
Quote from: Magluvin on April 20, 2013, 06:38:23 PM
This is not astute. "to guarantee that they have the same current flow" ??
Would it be any different if they were in parallel or just individually?
Mags
Just like two lamps in series, if they both have the same DC resistance they will both get the same current and power.
It's a valid test as far as I see it.
Cheers
Quote from: TinselKoala on April 20, 2013, 06:13:04 PM
That demonstration was simply to assure that both coils were getting the same current in a simple manner. The results from powering the coils individually, at the same current, will not differ.
Oh. So he is going to do the individual tests next?
Mags
In fairness as a replicator, standards of conformance are called for. The coils are close enough to one another to cause a horseshoe effect. This constitutes a serious departure from the original experiment.
Farmhand:
With the coils in series they don't have to have the same resistance. That's the point for putting them in series, to negate any requirement to do precise current flow measurements.
Magluvin:
Of course it actually would be easy to do do separate tests. All that you need is a multimeter set to read current and preferably a variable-voltage power supply.
Putting them in parallel is no good. By the same token, their resistances are probably so close in value that putting them in parallel would probably work and show the same field strength. The point is that you should be aware that you don't want to do this.
MileHigh
Quote from: Magluvin on April 20, 2013, 06:50:35 PM
Oh. So he is going to do the individual tests next?
Mags
Why ? Can you see a reason ? I'm open minded.
Synchro, Sorry for the dig at you, I meant no harm. My apologies.
I watched the "south pole monopole" video, seems he increases the power just enough to detect the south pole.
Maybe the south pole is more concentrated or something, if he increases the power more it might show detectable levels for the north pole.
Imagine a permanent magnet with some length, in the shape of a cone, with the south pole as the tip and the north pole as the big round base.
I'm seeing a concentration of field lines at the tip of the cone. Maybe. Dunno. must be an explanation.
Cheers
Quote from: MileHigh on April 20, 2013, 06:57:32 PM
Farmhand:
With the coils in series they don't have to have the same resistance. That's the point for putting them in series, to negate any requirement to do precise current flow measurements.
Magluvin:
Of course it actually would be easy to do do separate tests. All that you need is a multimeter set to read current and preferably a variable-voltage power supply.
Putting them in parallel is no good. By the same token, their resistances are probably so close in value that putting them in parallel would probably work and show the same field strength. The point is that you should be aware that you don't want to do this.
MileHigh
I realize that, I was addressing what I assumed Mag's concern was, that there was some restriction on the bifilar coil from being in series.
..
Synchro1:
QuoteIn fairness as a replicator, standards of conformance are called for. The coils are close enough to one another to cause a horseshoe effect. This constitutes a serious departure from the original experiment.
Don't be surprised if the tests were done with one bolt being tested and the other bolt out of the way and vice-versa. The two bolts were then placed together for the picture. Even like this, note there is no "horseshoe effect" visible in the picture at all.
You are trying to find reasons to invalidate the experiment but it's not going to happen. I am assuming that you never did this experiment yourself. I asked you and you intentionally ignored the question. Like I said, don't trust everything you see on the Internet.
MileHigh
Quote from Tesla Builder...
"The same amount of voltage, from the same battery, produces twice as much energy in the bifilar wound coil as in the single wound coil."
Doesnt say anything about free energy
The page does not say that the current remains the same, only that the same voltage is used. And if he implies that there is more energy in the bifi, then he is not saying that the current is the same either.
So putting the 2 in series deprives the bifi from the possibility of taking on more current initially than the single fi coil because the single fi is in the way.
So do you guys believe that putting the 2 coils in series is definitive proof that the bifi cannot produce a stronger mag field using the same voltage input individually?
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on April 20, 2013, 07:15:05 PM
Quote from Tesla Builder...
"The same amount of voltage, from the same battery, produces twice as much energy in the bifilar wound coil as in the single wound coil."
Doesnt say anything about free energy
The page does not say that the current remains the same, only that the same voltage is used. And if he implies that there is more energy in the bifi, then he is not saying that the current is the same either.
So putting the 2 in series deprives the bifi from the possibility of taking on more current initially than the single fi coil because the single fi is in the way.
So do you guys believe that putting the 2 coils in series is definitive proof that the bifi cannot produce a stronger mag field using the same voltage input individually?
Mags
Do his coils actually have the same length of wire in them ? If the DC resistances are different he either has more wire on one or a different gauge wire on one.
If the coils have both exactly the same DC resistance then the same DC current will flow for the same applied voltage, then the two could be tested separate and
the result would be much the same as Gyulasun achieved. If the DC resistances were the same and the applied DC voltage is the same the current will be the same
then a comparison can be made. No matter in series or separate.
So yes I do.
Cheers
P.S. Total turns on the bifilar should equal total turns on the single winding coil as well.
..
Quote from: MileHigh on April 20, 2013, 06:57:32 PM
Magluvin:
Of course it actually would be easy to do do separate tests. All that you need is a multimeter set to read current and preferably a variable-voltage power supply.
Putting them in parallel is no good. By the same token, their resistances are probably so close in value that putting them in parallel would probably work and show the same field strength. The point is that you should be aware that you don't want to do this.
MileHigh
Hmm. I dont get it. The site does not require or state any current differences or equalities between the 2 different coils.
What is stated is that the bifi has more magnetic pull than the singlefi. But it appears the argument here is the current draw differences. Well putting them in series is a flawed test of that being that the current will be the same in series.
And parallel would be a good test as each coil will have its own ability to do with that voltage presence introduced to its leads as it will, without the influence of the others.
You guys know better than that. :-*
Mags
I denied ever having performed the test!
Quote from: Magluvin on April 20, 2013, 07:26:51 PM
Hmm. I dont get it. The site does not require or state any current differences or equalities between the 2 different coils.
What is stated is that the bifi has more magnetic pull than the singlefi. But it appears the argument here is the current draw differences. Well putting them in series is a flawed test of that being that the current will be the same in series.
And parallel would be a good test as each coil will have its own ability to do with that voltage presence introduced to its leads as it will, without the influence of the others.
You guys know better than that. :-*
Mags
Do you dispute that if the coils have the same total wire length and the same wire gauge both coils will have the same DC resistance ?
...
Quote from: Farmhand on April 20, 2013, 07:26:00 PM
Do his coils actually have the same length of wire in them ? If the DC resistances are different he either has more wire on one or a different gauge wire on one.
If the coils have both exactly the same DC resistance then the same DC current will flow for the same applied voltage, then the two could be tested separate and
the result would be much the same as Gyulasun achieved. If the DC resistances were the same and the applied DC voltage is the same the current will be the same
then a comparison can be made. No matter in series or separate.
So yes I do.
Cheers
P.S. Total turns on the bifilar should equal total turns on the single winding coil as well.
..
But we are neglecting the capacitive differences in the coils. We concentrate on the resistance, the current flow. We are neglecting what happens 'initially' within the 2 coils when the input is connected.
I would agree that if we measured the current with a meter it would be the same once the field is max. But nobody is looking at what really happens in the beginning. It would be easy to not even notice a peak input current with a meter. A scope would be needed.
If there is an initial high burst of mag field, the nail could be magnetized more even possibly permanently somewhat than if done slowly and without spikes or peaks that would not happen in an inductor of a single wire winding.
Mags
Quote from: Farmhand on April 20, 2013, 07:32:26 PM
Do you dispute that if the coils have the same total wire length and the same wire gauge both coils will have the same DC resistance ?
...
I answered that in my last post. ;)
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on April 20, 2013, 07:38:29 PM
But we are neglecting the capacitive differences in the coils. We concentrate on the resistance, the current flow. We are neglecting what happens 'initially' within the 2 coils when the input is connected.
I would agree that if we measured the current with a meter it would be the same once the field is max. But nobody is looking at what really happens in the beginning. It would be easy to not even notice a peak input current with a meter. A scope would be needed.
If there is an initial high burst of mag field, the nail could be magnetized more even possibly permanently somewhat than if done slowly and without spikes or peaks that would not happen in an inductor of a single wire winding.
Mags
But then we are talking of a pulsed input. And any oscillation will demagnetize the core after the spike
and reverse the magnetic polarity because of a reversal in current..
P.S
Also if the inductance is the same or more then the rate of rise of the current will be the same or less.
Some kind of very slight effects might be seen and if they are useful to you then good, go ahead and use it.
But to me the actual purpose of the patent is to lower the resonant frequency of a coil with a given length of wire
without the need of external capacitors or a loss or magnetic field strength.
When we use the coil at resonance frequency we will see the biggest advantage, as well as with higher voltages the advantages are more "apparent". apparently. ;D
Using a frequency means pulsing or AC excitation.
Is there any purposes for AC electromagnets ?
.
..
Quote from: Farmhand on April 20, 2013, 07:44:41 PM
But then we are talking of a pulsed input. And any oscillation will demagnetize the core after the spike
and reverse the magnetic polarity because of a reversal in current..
..
Maybe. It will have to be looked at, not just make assumptions yet. ;)
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on April 20, 2013, 07:57:19 PM
Maybe. It will have to be looked at, not just make assumptions yet. ;)
Mags
Yes I agree, have a look is the best way. I'll try to wind the coils today so I can test tonight.
I want a fair bit of inductance so the frequency for the single winding coil is within my 3.3 mHz Function Generator limit, no prob's.
This is a very informative discussion, even though it's completely off topic and in the wrong place to be seen by people trying to research
these coils for previous experiments. All this info is kinda hidden. What a shame, maybe the Moderators could move the posts about the "COIL FOR ELECTROMAGNETS" to
a better place if it's considered a good idea.
Cheers
I guess using toroidal cores is out of the question. :D
..
Quote from: Farmhand on April 20, 2013, 08:07:57 PM
Yes I agree, have a look is the best way. I'll try to wind the coils today so I can test tonight.
I want a fair bit of inductance so the frequency for the single winding coil is within my 3.3 mHz Function Generator limit, no prob's.
This is a very informative discussion, even though it's completely off topic and in the wrong place to be seen by people trying to research
these coils for previous experiments. All this info is kinda hidden. What a shame, maybe the Moderators could move the posts about the "COIL FOR ELECTROMAGNETS" to
a better place if it's considered a good idea.
Cheers
Maybe your right. This is what was being discussed when I rejoined in recently.
Mags
We talked about the capacitance neutralizing the self inductance the other day.
If we have a coil with a cap across it, and then we just apply a dc source across it, the cap will charge virtually instantly, but the inductor wont. This might imitate a neutralizing of self inductance of the coil, where the current flows easily through the cap. We are talking about applying DC here.
If the capacitance is 'in' the coil, well that current that charges that capacitance goes 'through the coil' neutralizing the self inductance. And if it neutralizes self inductance, then maybe we could think, does that mean that the magnetic field is neutralized also, or just the effect of impedance is neutralized and outer magnetic field is unaffected. If so then initially there could be a very intense field pulse, as compared to a slowly building standard inductive field build, depending in the inductance.
That internal capacitance is charged through a coil that can make an external field like any other coil and the impedance is neutralized. So until this capacitance is charged, this coil might be acting like a super electromagnet. Sounds like a heck of an idea to patent. ;)
If we consider the cap connected to a coil, there probably isnt any purpose for it in the DC world. But here the capacitance is in the coil, and in my opinion, there should be a difference.
Also I stated earlier about the ability of holding power over time. Well if the field is huge in the beginning through the object being held, this may give us that stronger hold over time, instantly instead.
So you can see why I am emphatic about not testing them in series. It is not conclusive in any way. It does not show if one coil could pull more current than the other with the same voltage input. Its not correct in any way. The only thing that does is possibly show that the 2 coils can pick up the same amount of clips. But the singlefi coil in series wont allow the capacitance of the bifi to charge as it would connected to the supply alone, thus no initial magnetic pulse from the bifi.
Will see soon. ;) Im going more is better. :o ;D
Mags
Many things have been discussed that are worth a second read. The capacitance is insignificant, should be ignored. No special effects related to capacitance will be observed and it's the wrong investigative path to go down. You don't discuss voltage excitation for coils in the context of this test - what counts is current and the number of turns. Different gauges of wire with the same number of turns will give you the same strength of electromagnet as long as you ensure that the current flow is the same. That obviously will not be the same case if you connect them to the same voltage source.
"Neutralizing the self inductance" is an awkward and misleading use of 19th century phrasing. All it means is that when the SB coil resonates that when the capacitive voltage is at it's max, the current in the coil is zero, and the inductance is "neutralized." The property of inductance is still there.
As an exercise for anybody that is interested go back to Farmhand's coil measurements where I showed that in a typical example the coil's inductive energy storage is 17,000 times the capacitive energy storage. Calculate the resonance frequency. Then, with the same initial conditions that I stated, calculate the peak voltage in the coil due to the self-capacitance when it resonates.
Well I think Tesla intended that the patent device is for pulsed DC or AC excitation. I'll have to read the patent better.
But the inductance of the coil will only be neutralized at a given frequency as far as I can tell, so that rules out DC
except for maybe when the coil is first energized as you say, but if the coil was energized for long periods that would be of little benefit.
It may allow a faster magnetization of the core if the core will allow it. Not sure. With huge coils it could be very helpful.
Most of the comments and tests are about a steady state DC. Not sure why.
Still I'm going by the patent claims, and what is written there by Tesla.
I guess it depends on where your point of interest is. Mine concern is with the patent claims, what the claims actually are and if they are true or false.
Also the other information given in the patent is useful.
Cheers
Basically what I see is, some people are making claims on Tesla's behalf that he did not make, or just making claims that are not
entirely correct ect. and that brings in people who try to discredit Tesla based on the errant claims other people imply he made.
I'm here to try to clarify what Tesla actually claimed, and see if it is true or false. Simple. I see myself as being in the middle.
I'm no expert but I think too many people attribute claims to Tesla he did not make. And too many people try to discredit Tesla based on those
claims made by others not by Tesla. I'm not infallible, but I seek the truth.
Cheers
All this dubious claims and pseudo skeptic discrediting of Tesla is unnecessary. All it does is put down a great inventor and fill pages with rubbish.
It also creates more confusion and more dubious claims as well as divide people and cause tension.
Who else is in the middle with me ? Anyone ?
..
Farmhand:
My interpretation of the patent is that Tesla patented a way to make a coil into a resonator. It doesn't even possess extra capacitance as compared to a regular coil. It just facilitates higher voltage and therefore higher energy storage in the capacitive component of the coil. The patent doesn't say anything beyond that. It's not surprising, this was the dawn of the electrical revolution.
I am going to guess that the application might have been for his experiments in his own laboratory. I don't think it ever really saw the light of day in a practical application.
If you want to push the envelope and open up the definition to include LC resonators in general, then LC resonators are used in RFID tags. You pulse an RFID tag with a short burst of radio energy, and the LC resonator in the RFID tag stores some energy for a few milliseconds. That stored energy powers the RFID tag for a fraction of a second so it has a temporary power source to broadcast out the bits it has been programmed with back to the RFID reader.
MileHigh
If the "COIL FOR ELECTROMAGNETS" did anything like produce anomalous energy and Tesla noticed it he would have said so I believe.
As far as I know of the only claims he made for the arrangement was the two claims at the end of the patent.
As far as patents go they are fairly clear cut and reasonably easy to understand.
Some patents make claims that are difficult to even read not to mention understand what they are trying to claim. ;D
...
Quote from: MileHigh on April 20, 2013, 09:25:08 PM
Farmhand:
My interpretation of the patent is that Tesla patented a way to make a coil into a resonator. It doesn't even possess extra capacitance as compared to a regular coil. It just facilitates higher voltage and therefore higher energy storage in the capacitive component of the coil. The patent doesn't say anything beyond that. It's not surprising, this was the dawn of the electrical revolution.
I am going to guess that the application might have been for his experiments in his own laboratory. I don't think it ever really saw the light of day in a practical application.
If you want to push the envelope and open up the definition to include LC resonators in general, then LC resonators are used in RFID tags. You pulse an RFID tag with a short burst of radio energy, and the LC resonator in the RFID tag stores some energy for a few milliseconds. That stored energy powers the RFID tag for a fraction of a second so it has a temporary power source to broadcast out the bits it has been programmed with back to the RFID reader.
MileHigh
Well then I have a simple question. Are the claims in the patent true and correct ? Yes or No.
Cheers
Farmhand:
Yes they are true. The big mistake is to think that this 19th century patent is automatically applicable to pulse motors.
One other point I forgot to mention. It's possible that the pancake spiral design for the coil is what relates back to the "electromagnet" angle. I think most big electromagnets like for scrap metal applications (one sided) are formed like this. The reason being is that then you have a more even distribution of magnetic field strength across the entire surface of the disk.
It's actually hard to visualize that in your head when you look at the individual loops. There is a lot of magnetic field cancellation going on between adjacent loops like that, it's very complicated. So you close your eyes and just visualize the entire disk as a "swirling disk of current" and ignore the individual loops, i.e.; no individual conductors.
MileHigh
Check out this amazing pulse motor!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsmehZrqsPM
Quote from: Farmhand on April 20, 2013, 09:29:24 PM
If the "COIL FOR ELECTROMAGNETS" did anything like produce anomalous energy and Tesla noticed it he would have said so I believe.
I follow that line also. Never said anything about OU. But I will look for the differences, as Tesla stated there is. ;) And I get what MH is saying about the capacitance being small. But they are way more significant than what a normal coil has, because of the voltage differences. Every wire turn has a wire next to it that is 50% of the total input voltage, no matter how many turns. A normal coil, the more turns makes for less difference in potential between adjacent turns.
Imagine a coil made of 8000 turns of 26awg wire, in layers on a spool, and another coil wound bifilar, 26awg 4000 turns. This will have the same amount of copper on each spool. Imagine the small amount of voltage difference between adjacent turns of the singlefi coil. It would have to be 8000v to have 1 v between adjacent turns. But the bifi will have 4000v between turns. That is not an insignificant difference in no way shape or form. Or if we have only 8v applied to the coil, turn for turn would only be .001v. The bifi would be 4v. This is big. The reason its big is, the higher the voltage for one, the more the attraction to be charged and more current in order to do so. Tesla said that there is lots of power in a tiny capacitor.
I have to look it up, there was an article that talked about a large coil of say 60H and a cap of I believe it was 40pf, in that range anyways, and it rings at 60hz. It caught me a bit as I never imagined using a 40pf cap for any involvement in resonance with any coil and ring that low. I gave me a sense of perspective. ;D
Also there are ways of increasing that capacitance greatly as I had described and shown a diagram of the other day.
As for the DC use subject, this is what the guy used with the nails. So far nobody here has shown the experiment repeated as it was prescribed. Putting them in series kills the ability for the bifi to charge up as it would alone. That test only proves that the coils running full tilt produce approximately the same magnetic field while constant DC current is running through them.
Tesla does mention alternating current there. So maybe he doesnt intend it as an ELECTROMAGNET. ??? ;D
Mags
It's very interesting I agree. I think an electromagnet can be AC and still attract ferrous metals but the attraction would not be continuous. Not sure.
Anyway I have some idea's for experiments. Any results I get that seem interesting I might post in a more relevant thread.
Cheers
"@all
Hi , i know that one i used to have a pdf copy of a old book called AC electromagnet , and it could pick up any thing plastic you name it .
I will see it i could find it again i tried before without succes.
Mark
Quote from: Farmhand on April 20, 2013, 11:50:57 PM
It's very interesting I agree. I think an electromagnet can be AC and still attract ferrous metals but the attraction would not be continuous. Not sure.
Anyway I have some idea's for experiments. Any results I get that seem interesting I might post in a more relevant thread.
Cheers
I vaguely remember an AC electromagnet discussion in tech school many (very many LOL) years ago. However it was not really an AC electromagnet, though it was referred to as one.
Instead, the coil comprised a bifilar winding with each winding connected in parrallel but with a diode connected in singular series with each single winding, in opposite conducting directions. The coils polarities were such that each half phase of the AC supply produces a net unidirectional magnetic polarity, mimicking that of a single coil connected to dc. There is however a pulse ripple associated with each half wave of the supply, resulting in a varying magnetic strength (oscillation) similar to pulsed dc.
Cheers
Quote from: MileHigh on April 20, 2013, 10:01:11 PM
Check out this amazing pulse motor!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsmehZrqsPM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsmehZrqsPM)
MileHigh
thank you for this sophisticated piece of technological experiment, could not stop laughing for a good half an hour !! ;D ;D ;D
cheers
Quote from: ALVARO_CS on April 21, 2013, 03:21:52 AM
MileHigh
thank you for this sophisticated piece of technological experiment, could not stop laughing for a good half an hour !! ;D ;D ;D
cheers
Me Too !
Hi Folks,
Synchro1 and Magluvin objected the series connection of the two coils to be compared so I repeated the tests separately.
OF course I used 0.75 V DC voltage from my variable supply to have about 430 mA DC current into any one of the (separated) coils, I used the same coils as yesterday. (DC resistance for both is 1.6 Ohm.)
(Synchro1 also objected that the two bolts were too close to each other so they influenced magnetically each other. Well, as I held them in my hand I did not feel any such interaction (nor attraction, nor repulsion). IF these electromagnets had the force of an equivalent Neo cylinder magnet I surely was not able to keep them in my palm like that, they would either jump away or snap together for sure. What I felt was as if they were weak BaFe ceramic magnets.)
This time I used small nuts as objects to be lifted because I thought they fit here better than paper clips for picking them up. I sorted out 50 - 50 nuts to make two separate groups, 50 for the single and 50 for the bifilar coil tests.
I started with the single wire coil, I pushed the head of the single wire bolt into the pile of 50 nuts, switched on the supply (430mA) and slowly lifted up the bolt and moved to a clear area to separate the nuts from the pile and count how many were lifted. I repeated this till all the 50 nuts were used up from that pile.
Then I did the same test with the bifilar wire electromagnet, using the other pile of 50 nuts. Here are the results:
Single wire coil test Bifilar wire coil test
first lift 11 nuts 12 nuts
second lift 8 nuts 9 nuts
third lift 13 nuts 11 nuts
fourth lift 9 nuts 10 nuts
fifth lift 9 nuts 8 nuts
This shows the performance of the two electromagnets practically the same.
Gyula
Quote from: TinselKoala on April 20, 2013, 05:50:06 PM
...
There is one other type of "bifilar" coil that is often used and confused with Tesla's design. This is the "hairpin" coil. The hairpin configuration uses the same amount of wire but is non-inductive. If you have the time, you might consider winding a third bolt as a hairpin, and repeat the inductance and electromagnet tests with it.
The hairpin winding is just what you did for the Tesla bifilar, but without cutting and splicing the ends.
...
Hi TinselKoala,
Thanks and at a later time I can do the third coil too. I understand also that such bifilar coil has only a few nanoHenry inductance depending on how precisely the winding is done. Long time ago I also tested Caduceus coils for inductance but they have a residual inductance in the some microHenry range, flux cancellation is not so precise in them like in bifilar coils.
Gyula
hi Hoptoad
Are those "totallydamped" pages yours ?
If yes, Ill like your opinion about the possible damage of transistor (MileHigh states)
in the circuit I posted earlier (No 19)
thanks
cheers
Hi guy's started a thread here -- http://www.overunity.com/13460/teslas-coil-for-electro-magnets/new/#new .
I'll be posting some results there soon, feel free to join in.
Cheers
Thank you Gyula. The original experiment involved shorting both coils accross a "D" cell battery. The obvious difference between the experiments is that power is free to rise to load with the battery, unlike Gyula's latest try, where the power is governd. Maybe the bifilar electromagnet will draw more input then Gyula's inputing to it, if you feed it. The original experiment allows for increased current consumption compared to Gyula's generous attempt. Enlighting regardless!
I find it hard to believe "Tesla-Coil-builder" would set out to decieve anyone judging from his polished website. It remains important that any erroneous experiment be exposed as fake.
A monopole of increased strength appears in the center of my "SB Spiral Coil". A window coil of single wrap, a large loop of wire with a large space in the center, generates two poles. The serial bifilar displays a dramatic difference in this Spiral configuration as a pulse motor coil. This is where I can independently demonstrate doubling of "Magnetic Field" strength. A monople of doubled strength is formed in the center of the coil. This model broke all the speed records. The red plastic wheels allow the axel and spinner to rotate inside the wooden cup.
Synchro1:
Gyula's second experiment was done properly. The regular and the SB coil have the same wire and the same number of turns so the resistance will be the same. Therefore the current draw will be the same. In fact, that's just secondary logic. You know that the basis for making the comparison between the two coils is that you feed both of them the same current level and see what happens. That's the primary logic.
Here is a thought experiment: You have an ideal voltage source power supply connected to the nail and the wrapped wire, just like the original setup from the web page experiment link. The wire is a special imaginary wire where we can define any resistance for the wire.
If we set the voltage source to one volt, and the wire resistance to one ohm we get one amp of current flow. If we set the wire resistance to 0.001 ohms we get 1000 amps of current flow.
So that's a meaningless experiment. The strength of the electromagnet has nothing to do with any potential differences in resistive load of the wire wrapped around the coil. It has to do with the current flowing through the wire. That's a concept that all must understand. A magnetic field is created by current flow alone, it has nothing to do with voltage and it has nothing to do with the resistance of the wire or the amount of resistive electrical load the setup puts on the battery.
MileHigh
Quote from: Mk1 on April 21, 2013, 02:13:24 AM
"@all
Hi , i know that one i used to have a pdf copy of a old book called AC electromagnet , and it could pick up any thing plastic you name it .
I will see it i could find it again i tried before without succes.
Mark
I believe I have read that old book in the public library from my home town in PA. Do you remember if it used multiple windings and copper washers? It wasnt just a winding it on a core thing. It could pick up pennys, dimes, etc. I dont remember plastics.
My mom used to like bingo here n there, and some of the players used dimes or pennys to cover the numbers on the cards, and they had a hand held plastic box like the sizs if a medium cell phone or cigarette pack and swipe it over the cards to pick up the coins for the next round.
In electronics class back in the days, the teacher discussed what metals a magnet or electromagnets could pick up. I told him of that and he disagreed. I brought in the old book and that was the point where, everyone in the class took my crazy ideas more seriously. Before I brought the book in they thought I was nuts. :o :o ;D
If you can find that, I would really appreciate that. ;)
Thanks
Mags
Quote from: gyulasun on April 21, 2013, 07:43:43 AM
Hi Folks,
Single wire coil test Bifilar wire coil test
first lift 11 nuts 12 nuts
second lift 8 nuts 9 nuts
third lift 13 nuts 11 nuts
fourth lift 9 nuts 10 nuts
fifth lift 9 nuts 8 nuts
This shows the performance of the two electromagnets practically the same.
Gyula
I wish we saw more such straight forward and useful tests.
Thank you Gyula, after pages of waffle, finally something tangible.
Conrad
Quote from: synchro1 on April 21, 2013, 09:27:58 AM
Thank you Gyula. The original experiment involved shorting both coils accross a "D" cell battery. The obvious difference between the experiments is that power is free to rise to load with the battery, unlike Gyula's latest try, where the power is governd. Maybe the bifilar electromagnet will draw more input then Gyula's inputing to it, if you feed it. The original experiment allows for increased current consumption compared to Gyula's generous attempt. Enlighting regardless!
That makes sense. If the supply limits current then its possible that the low ohms of the 2 coils could push those current limits on their own, possibly not letting the currents needed bi the bifi to occur. Dunno yet. But will. ;)
Mags
Quote from: Mk1 on April 21, 2013, 02:13:24 AM
"@all
Hi , i know that one i used to have a pdf copy of a old book called AC electromagnet , and it could pick up any thing plastic you name it .
I will see it i could find it again i tried before without succes.
Mark
Hi,
I also remember this book. However, conduction is a key factor for the principle shown in it so metals (even if they are non-ferrouos) able to conduct electric current can be involved. The principle is inducing eddy current in a metal piece by the changing AC field.
Here is a link to the PDF file: http://www.themeasuringsystemofthegods.com/Non-ferrous%20metals.pdf
Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on April 21, 2013, 01:32:17 PM
Hi,
I also remember this book. However, conduction is a key factor for the principle shown in it so metals (even if they are non-ferrouos) able to conduct electric current can be involved. The principle is inducing eddy current in a metal piece by the changing AC field.
Here is a link to the PDF file: http://www.themeasuringsystemofthegods.com/Non-ferrous%20metals.pdf (http://www.themeasuringsystemofthegods.com/Non-ferrous%20metals.pdf)
Gyula
Great pdf. Thanks. ;D
But the book I read was a book of electronic(or electric) experiment projects. I dont remember if it was older than 1952. But it was just one of the projects it presented. But this one you have shown, gives a lot of info to where one could learn a lot in one sitting. ;) Good one.
Mags
@all
I have found this ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8TbqZa8li4 atracting a stone with a coil.
I also made a coil a while back that did not show load on the circuit , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w54lxNS3Hus&list=UULKKCauubuWLRdng24R-cKQ&index=4
Its a simple joule thief with a pickup coil , a led on the output of the coil and on the joule thief , usually doing so dims the light output of both led , but not in this case because the led is connected backwards.
Mark
Sorry to distract from the magnetisation and coil topic.
I could design a commutating circuit with one hall sensor, two P-Channel and two N-Channel MOSFETS (some sort of transistor H-Bridge).
See the attached circuit, scope shots and photo. The scope shots are over the drive coil. Looks like some very clean switching (commutation) of the drive coil.
The results of a first test:
12 Volt, 17 mA, 70 Hz (0.2 Watt, 4200 rpm)
20 Volt, 25 mA, 140 Hz (0.5 Watt, 8400 rpm)
I still have a mechanical problem, the plastic axle is not straight (causes vibrations). I will make a brass axle which should be better.
This seems to be a low power drive circuit to produce considerable spin. One can now try to find some "Lenz free coils" which produce more than 0.2 Watt or 0.5 Watt from the 4200 rpm or 8400 rpm.
May be people who build similar set ups can publish their power requirements for their spinners?
Greetings, Conrad
Other MOSFETS:
I switched to the AUIRF9Z34N (P-Channel) and the AUIRFZ34N (N-Channel) because they have less resistance when switched on. This produces a little bit higher rpm value (about 10%) for the same power input. Theire 55 V Drain to Source braekdown Voltage is high enough because the drive coil is switched (commutated) cleanly, only small spikes.
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: ALVARO_CS on April 21, 2013, 08:11:48 AM
hi Hoptoad
Are those "totallydamped" pages yours ?
If yes, Ill like your opinion about the possible damage of transistor (MileHigh states)
in the circuit I posted earlier (No 19)
thanks
cheers
Yep, those are my pages. If following figure number 19, with one coil winding connected back to the supply via a diode (in feedback mode), the cemf spike will be damped by the battery and should alleviate any potential harm to the transistor. If the circuit is not using one winding as feedback, or there is not even a diode straight across the driving coil winding, there is a possibility of transistor damage if you are using high impedance coils or supply voltages greater than 12 volts. However, if you have connected the windings as shown in fig 19 then there is no real threat of potential transistor damage.
Cheers
Hoptoad:
Sorry but I am going to correct you.
In figure 19 when the transistor is on the current from the battery flows through bi-filar winding A only.
When the transistor is switched off the bi-filar winding A becomes the power source and it has to discharge its stored energy. The "load" in this case is the switched-off transistor, bi-filar winding B, and D1, and this is in parallel with the battery.
[I am editing here to add the battery to the discussion when the bi-filar coil A discharges.]
Note the current can also flow through the switched-off transistor and through the battery. So when the bi-filar winding A is discharging the current can take two paths.
So the load is the switched-off transistor, the bi-filar winding B, and D1 and the battery. So that's three components in series in parallel with the battery, which is a fourth component. The vast majority of the power dissipated in the load will go into the component that has the highest resistance.
The component with the highest resistance is the switched-off transistor. So when the transistor switches off, it instantly gets whacked with almost all of the energy that is stored in bi-filar winding A.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on April 21, 2013, 10:22:10 PM
Hoptoad:
Sorry but I am going to correct you.
In figure 19 when the transistor is on the current from the battery flows through bi-filar winding A only.
When the transistor is switched off the bi-filar winding A becomes the power source and it has to discharge its stored energy. The "load" in this case is the switched-off transistor, bi-filar winding B, and D1. That's how the current flows. The battery has no affect on what happens during the inductive energy discharge.
So the load is the switched-off transistor, the bi-filar winding B, and D1. So that's three components in series. The vast majority of the power dissipated in the series load will go into the component that has the highest resistance.
The component with the highest resistance is the switched-off transistor. So when the transistor switches off, it instantly gets whacked with the energy that is stored in bi-filar winding A.
MileHigh
Sorry but we'll have to agree to disagree. When the transistor turns off, current is fed by winding B into the battery. The stored energy does not create a high voltage into winding A, manifesting as a high voltage across the collector and emitter of the transistor, so long as winding B is connected as shown. You can theorize as much as you like, but
actual current measurements show that winding B discharges any stored energy from the coil/s into the supply, when the transistor turns off.
Cheers
Hoptoad,
For starters, I corrected my posting and edited it to also include the battery when bi-filar winding A discharges.
QuoteWhen the transistor turns off, current is fed by winding B into the battery.
This is not possible for a simple reason. Current has to go into the top of bi-filer winding A as per your schematic. It can come from either bi-filer winding B or from the battery. There is no opportunity for current to flow from winding B into the battery.
Note the discharging coil sets up a clockwise current flow in the left loop and a counter-clockwise current flow in the right loop. For both of the loops, the transistor is the one thing with the highest resistance therefore it burns off most of the energy stored in bi-filar winding A.
If you have a chance you might want to investigate this again. It looks to me like you should see a high-voltage spike across the transistor when it switches off. That would be telling you that the transistor is being whacked by the discharging coil.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on April 21, 2013, 11:00:03 PM
Hoptoad,
For starters, I corrected my posting and edited it to also include the battery when bi-filar winding A discharges.
This is not possible for a simple reason. Current has to go into the top of bi-filer winding A as per your schematic. It can come from either bi-filer winding B or from the battery. There is no opportunity for current to flow from winding B into the battery.
Note the discharging coil sets up a clockwise current flow in the left loop and a counter-clockwise current flow in the right loop. For both of the loops, the transistor is the one thing with the highest resistance therefore it burns off most of the energy stored in bi-filar winding A.
If you have a chance you might want to investigate this again. It looks to me like you should see a high-voltage spike across the transistor when it switches off. That would be telling you that the transistor is being whacked by the discharging coil.
MileHigh
Indeed you will see a high voltage spike across the transistor when it switches off, if coil B is not connected via a diode as shown.
But with coil B connected via the diode as shown, you will not see a great big voltage spike across the transistor, but you will see current from winding B feeding into the supply, indicated by meters, and also because that's the only way coil B can discharge, when the transistor is off. But don't take my word for it. Do it. Check it with meters. Theory is one thing, practical application is another. Fig 19 has been replicated by a great number of people on this forum and others, and every person who has tried it, reports the same. I_ron (who hasn't posted here for some time) tried it only very recently and reported to me via personal email, that everything I outlined would happen, did in fact happen.
A reduction in current consumption during on time, a surge of current from winding B back into the supply during off time, and an increase in motor torque. Not O/U of course, just a measurable increase in overall efficiency compared to using only a single wire drive coil.
Cheers
Hoptoad:
I'll take your word for it but it would be nice to see the data also. It's a kind of tricky circuit because of the bifilar coil. It's very hard to visualize this stuff in your head once you have more than just a handful of components to look at. Perhaps one day I will try to simulate it with pSpice also.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on April 21, 2013, 11:40:42 PM
Hoptoad:
I'll take your word for it but it would be nice to see the data also. It's a kind of tricky circuit because of the bifilar coil. It's very hard to visualize this stuff in your head once you have more than just a handful of components to look at. Perhaps one day I will try to simulate it with pSpice also.
MileHigh
Please - as I say on my web-site - don't take my word for anything - please try it yourself.
Yes, what actually occurs with fig 19 seems counter intuitive, which is one of the nice things about it. It begs questions to be asked.
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on April 22, 2013, 12:00:18 AM
Please - as I say on my web-site - don't take my word for anything - please try it yourself.
Yes, what actually occurs with fig 19 seems counter intuitive, which is one of the nice things about it. It begs questions to be asked.
Cheers
Wouldn't it be true to say that once the magnetic field is formed the energy is stored not so much in the coil's wire that created it but within the magnetic field itself ?
And then when the magnetic field collapses it's energy can discharge through the second winding and into the battery.
That's the regular way to do it, we can even use a FWBR on the second winding, (which in a Bedini setup or one with a trigger coil would be the third winding)
which the Bedini people call a trifilar setup. It can use a single rectifier or a FWBR.
The point is the magnetic field discharges into the lesser resistance by preference, because the emf from the magnetic field collapse produces current through the lesser resistance first. If the load coil is open then bingo transistor is hit with coil discharge energy in total. Same thing happens if the charge battery is very badly sulfated.
Hoptoad is correct as I see it. I agree try it and see. I like to say that too. :D
P.S. I admit I did not look very well at the drawing.
I can't find the link, is there a link to a circuit drawing or the "pages" ? Please.
Cheers
Farmhand:
Here`s the link: http://www.totallyamped.net/adams/index.html (http://www.totallyamped.net/adams/index.html)
the No19 schematic is in page 6 with a full explanation.
I have used that setup in many experiments with voltages from 4.5 to 12 V at 500mA max.
May be I was lucky or may be it works as said, unfortunately, I cannot show accurate measurements,
as I have got poor equipment. (and very low economic means, but very high spirits).
Hoptoad:
Thanks for your answers, and thanks for those pages, which have been of invaluable help in my learning process.
cheers
Quote from: Farmhand on April 22, 2013, 01:34:06 AM
Wouldn't it be true to say that once the magnetic field is formed the energy is stored not so much in the coil's wire that created it but within the magnetic field itself ?
And then when the magnetic field collapses it's energy can discharge through the second winding and into the battery.
snip...
Exactly. KneeDeep
Cheers
P.S. Exactly the sort of question the circuit begs asking. Sometimes the answer to a question is so obvious the question is never asked.
But, alas, all too often we forget or simply overlook the obvious.
Quote from: conradelektro on April 21, 2013, 05:30:47 PM
Other MOSFETS:
I switched to the AUIRF9Z34N (P-Channel) and the AUIRFZ34N (N-Channel) because they have less resistance when switched on. This produces a little bit higher rpm value (about 10%) for the same power input. Theire 55 V Drain to Source braekdown Voltage is high enough because the drive coil is switched (commutated) cleanly, only small spikes.
Greetings, Conrad
Hi Conrad,
You have very nicely solved the control of the H-bridge by a single Hall sensor instead of the two, using complementary MOSFETs, congratulations.
Would like to suggest two things.
One is using a diode D in series with the positive supply rail going to the H-bridge and connecting a puffer capacitor C across the supply rails of the H-bridge. (I modified your original schematic to show what I mean.) The reason for these small modifications is that the collapsing field of the coil in your original schematic goes back to the power supply and most probably dissipates across its inner resistance but inserting a diode prevents the 'flyback' pulse seeing the power supply and can only go into the puffer capacitor.
The second suggestion would be (after testing the first one) to use Schottky diodes in parallel with the built-in body diodes of all the 4 MOSFETs, (one diode for each MOSFET). The reason is that the spikes from the collapsing fields are steered automatically into the puffer capacitor from both switching phases of the H-bridge (in your original schematic this is also inherently available of course except that it is steered onto the supply rails).
The body diodes when conduct normally have a forward voltage drop very close to 0.55-0.6V as minimum drop, so shunting them with diodes of less forward drop feature increases the captured energy. (Even fast recovery Si diodes like UF4002 etc can help as a start to check this if there are no four Schottky diodes at hand.) By the way you can check the body diodes forward drop by digital multimeter's built-in diode test feature if there is such, just remove the coil and supply rails from the FET bridge. With this feature you can see the resulting forward drop when paralleling an outside diode with the body diode, albeit at about 1mA forward current level only what most diode testers provide. (Obviously, anode goes to anode, cathode goes to cathode when paralleling.)
What else could be done to improve your setup? I already referred to a few pages back to utilize both poles of the electromagnet, unfortunately this is not a simple task. And also, the use of coils with much much less DC resistance to minimize copper loss. This latter can involve the possibility of reducing the supply voltage to the bridge.
Also, I think it might be worth somehow reduce the 50% duty cycle which now inherently comes from the diametrically magnetized ring magnet. However, to achieve lower duty cycle in your present setup, you would have to make a separate disk onto the rotor axle with small disk magnets and fix the Hall (or Halls) over them. This way the duration of the attract-in and the repel-out phases could be controlled more precisely (if needed).
rgds,
Gyula
@Gyula: thank you for the many suggestions, I will test them.
My set up still has some mechanical problems (in spite of the new brass axle). The ball bearings make some strange noise, may be I damaged them a bit during mounting. Now it also became evident that the ring magnet is not balanced. Up to 4000 rpm the vibrations are minor, at the peak rpm of 8400 the noise scares me because everything could fly apart.
But for the moment I leave everything as it is (besides the diodes and the buffer capacitor as suggested by Gyula). I want to try to generated some power with "strange coils".
Please note the rather low "input power" requirements and we will see how much "output power" various strange "allegedly Lenz free" coils will produce.
Greetings, Conrad
@Gyula:
I thought about your suggestion to use both magnetic poles of the coil. But I do not have the mechanical talent to build such a C-shaped core or to modify an existing core in the right way. Therefore I will stay for the time with my most simple design.
Concerning the pulse duration: to do this in a versatile way I will use an Arduino (I have the new Arduino Due), but this will be a future project. The optimal pulse duration for a spinning ring magnet would be 25% N, 25% off, 25% South, 25% off.
Concerning a drive coil with less DC resistance: I built several pulse or Bedini motors in the past and I came up with the high DC resistance relay coils as a drive coil because they seemed to work in a more efficient way than low DC resistance coils. For some strange reason a pulse motor seems to works better with higher Voltage (12 Volt and more). And when going to a higher Voltage the drive coil should have a higher DC resistance (very many turns of wire) in order to keep the current low. There will be higher losses (copper resistance) in the coil, but they seem to be minor in comparison with the efficiency gain of the pulse motor when driven at higher Voltages. I might be wrong, but my (rather crude) tests led me in this direction.
Lenz free coils: Now, good people, let's hear some Lenz free coil designs? Pancake coils with secret ingredients? Coils with embedded magnets?
In my set up such a magic coil only has to produce 0.15 Watt at 3000 rpm in order to go OU. The spinning ring magnet (25 mm diameter, 7 mm hight) is Neodymium NdFeB / N35, so plenty of magnet power. It is difficult to remove tools (screw driver, wrench, pincers) once they are caught by this magnet.
Well, sounds too good.
Greetings, Conrad
Hi Conrad,
Regarding the use of both magnetic poles of a coil, I think it must be designed in advance to have a mechanical setup for supporting that goal, unfortunately, and even then it can still be difficult to build it, using preferably off the shelf cores etc. And to rebuild a certain, already differently working setup can be even more problematic.
Using an Arduino to have variable pulse width or duty cycle gives indeed more versatility, albeit in case of this 25% on-off sequencies (with changing pole polarities) valid for this ring magnet may not warrant its use, strictly speaking. Nevertheless it can give many variations, easy to use and good for many pulse motor types.
I understand the higher voltage-less current approach for the pulsed input coil(s) as you have found in building pulse or Bedini motors. I believe a great number of pulse motors built in this "free energy quest" by many tinkerers have used mainly 12V DC input voltage due to the widespread availability of the car batteries or some multiples of 12V. I also believe that this 12V greatly "defined" the coils more or less 'optimal spectifications' as the wire diameter and number of turns are concerned, to be able to recapture enough energy for recharging again the 12V battery (preferably from the same coil(s) which are the input coils) in a range from say 7 AmperHour to some ten AmperHour capacity. Very few of the replicators have changed input voltage either below or above 12V and even less changed coil specs.
It is the AmperTurns which defines the strength of electromagnets, and many variations exist to have the needed AmperTurns for a job. For relay coils the many thousand number of turns (from very thin wire) involve relatively smaller input current than for instance Bedini style pulse motor coils etc. At the same time many relay types exist with given sizes for certain jobs, this indicates that coils should be 'designed' to fulfill a needed job, preferably in the most optimal way, your approach to vary supply voltage surely helps finding the optimal input power parameters for a chosen relay coil, especially if you occasionally try other types of relay coils. And the non-continuous but pulsed operation of such motors lets using higher input voltages than the original relay coil, mainly destined for a 100% duty operation.
'Lenz-free' coils... is there such? :) Bill Müller may have had such with his stepped winding technics. Pancake coils? It needs to be thoroughly explored how to utilize their interesting magnetic pole positions.
Keep up your excellent work.
rgds, Gyula
Hoptoad:
I think I finally see how the bi-filar coil works in figure 19 for the motor drive coil. It's really quite ingenious.
When the transistor shuts off, bi-filer winding A shuts down completely and current stops flowing through it.
Bi-filer winding B is wrapped around the same magnetic flux as bi-filer winding A and basically "hijacks" the field collapse and takes over the discharge of energy and pumps it into the battery.
To be more accurate, winding A is trying to push current through the transistor but it is blocked. Winding B on the other hand has smooth sailing to pump the energy into the battery so that's the way the discharge goes. So it's almost like a magnetic switching function is taking place. Charge winding A -> discharge winding B. "No rules are broken."
The rule I thought was being broken is if you look at the top of winding A, current has to flow down into the winding when the transistor shuts off because that's how coils work. With this clever configuration that doesn't have to happen, the winding B coil "picks up the slack" and allows everything to work like it is supposed to work.
This circuit could be used on Bedini motors to recycle the pulse energy less the losses that you have to endure with respect to the charging efficiency and subsequent discharging efficiency of the battery itself. No more need for neons. (Ha ha I forgot the spike is supposed to go into the charging battery. I was more focused on the "motoring" aspect.")
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on April 22, 2013, 06:42:20 PM
Hoptoad:
I think I finally see how the bi-filar coil works in figure 19 for the motor drive coil. It's really quite ingenious.
When the transistor shuts off, bi-filer winding A shuts down completely and current stops flowing through it.
Bi-filer winding B is wrapped around the same magnetic flux as bi-filer winding A and basically "hijacks" the field collapse and takes over the discharge of energy and pumps it into the battery.
To be more accurate, winding A is trying to push current through the transistor but it is blocked. Winding B on the other hand has smooth sailing to pump the energy into the battery so that's the way the discharge goes. So it's almost like a magnetic switching function is taking place. Charge winding A -> discharge winding B. "No rules are broken."
The rule I thought was being broken is if you look at the top of winding A, current has to flow down into the winding when the transistor shuts off because that's how coils work. With this clever configuration that doesn't have to happen, the winding B coil "picks up the slack" and allows everything to work like it is supposed to work.
This circuit could be used on Bedini motors to recycle the pulse energy less the losses that you have to endure with respect to the charging efficiency and subsequent discharging efficiency of the battery itself. No more need for neons. (Ha ha I forgot the spike is supposed to go into the charging battery. I was more focused on the "motoring" aspect.")
MileHigh
Glad to see you got it. Sometimes things are so simple it's hard to see the forrest for the trees!
Winding B can feed the collapsing magnetic field energy back to the source battery as shown, or it can be offloaded to another battery.
Cheers
Quote from: MileHigh on April 22, 2013, 06:42:20 PM
snip...
This circuit could be used on Bedini motors to recycle the pulse energy less the losses that you have to endure with respect to the charging efficiency and subsequent discharging efficiency of the battery itself. No more need for neons. (Ha ha I forgot the spike is supposed to go into the charging battery. I was more focused on the "motoring" aspect.")
MileHigh
It doesn't necessarily work as efficiently in a true bedini motor circuit as it does with a hall or optical or even mechanical switching control. Whenever a regenerative coupling to the collapsing field is introduced, it changes the dynamics of the interaction between rotor and coil, influencing the rotor induced signal waveform, sometimes dramatically.
A true bedini circuit derives its transistor base signal voltage / current from the induced flux of the passing rotor magnets via one of the windings of the core/coils.
That's why they often need a small physical kick start on the rotor to make it spin in order to provide a signal voltage / current to the transistor base.
Coupling a recycling output to the main drive winding of the core/coils not only changes the drive coil's discharge time curve, but also by mutual transformer action induces waveform changes to the signal winding. Because the drive coil switches larger currents than the signal winding, it has a dominating influence on the mutual induction between the two windings.
Sometimes there will be a benefit, sometimes there won't. It mostly depends on the inductance / impedance of the coils, which determines whether the recycling circuit discharges its stored energy before the rotor hits the 50% duty cycle marker, between pulses, and whether the signal waveform remains relatively true to the voltage / current polarity induced by the rotor magnets.
Cheers
Quote from: gyulasun on April 22, 2013, 11:07:14 AM
Hi Conrad,
Would like to suggest two things.
One is using a diode D in series with the positive supply rail going to the H-bridge and connecting a puffer capacitor C across the supply rails of the H-bridge. (I modified your original schematic to show what I mean.) The reason for these small modifications is that the collapsing field of the coil in your original schematic goes back to the power supply and most probably dissipates across its inner resistance but inserting a diode prevents the 'flyback' pulse seeing the power supply and can only go into the puffer capacitor.
The second suggestion would be (after testing the first one) to use Schottky diodes in parallel with the built-in body diodes of all the 4 MOSFETs, (one diode for each MOSFET).
rgds,
Gyula
@Gyula: the Diode in series with the poitive rail in front of the H-bridge and the electrolytic puffer capacitor as you indicated on my schematics really helped. As you said the spikes went back to my laboratory power supply.
First I only put the diode in the circuit and I saw the spikes on the scope (measured over the coil). Then I added a 4700 µF electrolytic puffer cap and I saw how it absorbed the spikes.
I still have to get a good Schottky Diode, at the moment I use a BYW29EX-200 (8A, 0.9 V forward Voltage). Since I use little power with the relay coil also a 1N4007 and a 1N4003 worked well.
Concerning your second suggestion (Schottky diodes in parallel with the built-in body diodes of all the 4 MOSFETs): My guess is that these Schottky Diodes should be able to conduct several Ampere?
The only Schottky Diode I could get easily from Farnell which allows 1A forward current and has 70 V reverse Voltage and 0.41 V forward Voltage is this one:
http://at.farnell.com/avago-technologies/hsms-2800-tr1g/diode-smd-schottky/dp/1056832RL
There seem to be a lot of Schottky Diodes for 100 V reverse Voltage and several Ampere forward current, but the forward Voltage will be 0.8 Volt.
I have the 1N5711 Schottky Diode with a very low forward Voltage of less than 0.4 Volt, but it is only for small signals (15 mA max, best for 1 mA or less).
I also have the BAT754C (200 mA, forward Voltage down to 0.2 Volt for very small signals).
Greetings, Conrad
Hi Conrad,
Thanks for the details, have you noticed any reducement in input current draw with this modification?
Diode type BYW29EX-200 are fast ones but due to the high forward current rating the voltage drop is close to a normal Si diode at the current levels your motor draws.
Will return with some diode types (Farnell is good for you or you have other order choices?)
Gyula
PS No need for high current diode types because the relay coil has its own 200-300 Ohm DC (plus its own inductive reactance) so even a some hundred mA rated diode would be good.
Quote from: gyulasun on April 23, 2013, 06:13:36 AM
Hi Conrad,
Thanks for the details, have you noticed any reducement in input current draw with this modification?
Diode type BYW29EX-200 are fast ones but due to the high forward current rating the voltage drop is close to a normal Si diode at the current levels your motor draws.
Will return with some diode types (Farnell is good for you or you have other order choices?)
Gyula
PS No need for high current diode types because the relay coil has its own 200-300 Ohm DC (plus its own inductive reactance) so even a some hundred mA rated diode would be good.
@Gyula: Yes, the current draw of the circuit was reduced by a few mA (e.g. 18 mA instead of 20 mA) and the rpm went up by a few percent (e.g. 75 Hz instead of 70 Hz) for the same supply Voltage and current. Thank you for this very good suggestion, it made the circuit much safer for use with a laboratory power supply.
I would like that the circuit can handle up to 1 Amp current draw (e.g. 10 to 20 Watt) for future lower DC resistance coils.
At the moment I am building a new more solid mechanical set up with two drive coils and ball bearings which have an axle diameter of 5 mm (outer diameter 16 mm, a hint given by TinselKoala). See the attached circuit diagram and drive coil principle (at the right of the schematics). I want to reach more than 10.000 rpm (even if it means more power draw, e.g. 1 Watt to 2 Watt).
The new set up goes a bit in the direction of your suggestion to use both poles of a coil (although I am using two separate coils, as a start).
Farnell is good for me, also CONRAD. Mouser would cost me 20.-- Euro for shipping (instead of 5,40 Euro with Farnell and CONRAD).
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: conradelektro on April 23, 2013, 05:55:12 AM
The only Schottky Diode I could get easily from Farnell which allows 1A forward current and has 70 V reverse Voltage and 0.41 V forward Voltage is this one:
http://at.farnell.com/avago-technologies/hsms-2800-tr1g/diode-smd-schottky/dp/1056832RL (http://at.farnell.com/avago-technologies/hsms-2800-tr1g/diode-smd-schottky/dp/1056832RL)
Hi Conrad,
Be careful with the above diode because the 1A forward current rating is valid for 1 usec pulse mode (from datasheet, page 2). But of course you may test them especially if paralleling them too...
I found these types, maybe the first would be good for your lower resistance coils and the second for the higher ones:
Schottky SB3100 100V 3A VF=0.3V at 100mA and 0.38V at 1A from Fig.2 data sheet: http://www.micropik.com/PDF/SB350.pdf
http://www.conrad.at/ce/de/product/160222/Schottky-Diode-SEMIKRON-Semikron-SB3100-Gehaeuseart-DO-201-IF-3-A-IFAV-3-A-URRM-100-V
Schottky RB160L-90TE25 90V 1A VF=360mV at 100mA and 0.6V typical at 1A http://www.produktinfo.conrad.com/datenblaetter/125000-149999/140674-da-01-en-SCHOTTKY_DIODE_RB160L_90TE25_SOD_106.pdf
http://www.conrad.at/ce/de/product/140674/Schottky-Diode-ROHM-Semiconductor-RB160L-90TE25-Gehaeuseart-SOD-106-IF-1-A
It sounds good to me using 2 coils. In this case the input current draw will probably double for the same input voltage level if you are to compare it to the single coil case because the impedances of the coils will be in parallel i.e. the resultant impedance gets halved.
Just I am curious, whether you have taken a scopeshot from the waveform across the coil after the modification (diode +cap)?
Thanks, Gyula
One power coil counter wound in series wuth it's sister, would only need one transistor. Like Mopozco's TROS motors.
@Gyula: thank you very much for looking up some Schottky Diodes, I ordered them. The scope shots over the drive coil with a diode and an electrolytic puffer capacitor look more or less like the ones from my Reply #1181 on: April 21, 2013, 10:48:15 PM. I will make more scope shots with my new setup which is almost finished.
I could put the two drive coils in series, then the power draw would drop. But it is more realistic to put them in parallel.
In this pulse motor http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEEjlYvZ5OM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEEjlYvZ5OM) I put all drive coils in parallel.
In the attached pulse motor I had the toroid drive coils in series plus a resistor to adjust power draw (resistor values 5 Ohm to 50 Ohm). The toroid drive coils are of course the Steorn design. Strange enough, the toroids worked best in the depicted arrangement. But ordinary drive coils worked better. I could adjust the pulse width with two opto-gates, but it turned out that the pulse width was not very critical (neither for power draw nor for torque), therefore I switched to a Hall sensor (which is much simpler than opto-gates). I was very proud of the drive circuit (see the attached PDF-File).
I still have to try a sensor coil for my recent setup. I am a big fan of sensor coils, pulse width can be adjusted by distance from the passing magnets. Pulse timing can be adjusted by shifting the sensor coil in relation to the theoretically good position.
I built some pulse motors with Reed switches, but for me it looked like the Reed switches were difficult to control and only reliable at very low frequencies and very low power draw. One can build small things that turn slowly with very little power, but for more demanding situations Reed switches were not useful for me. For very low power applications I would now use the transistor 2SK170 or ALD110800 / ALD110900 and a sensor coil instead of a Reed switch, much cleaner.
@Synchro: I am aware of Mopozco's TROS motors, but I did not test them yet. I will try with my new setup (two drive coils). My main concern is not component count but low power draw and clean switching (for long duration tests, nothing should get hot or strained).
Greetings, Conrad
P.S.: my first setup will of course stay as it is for comparisons.
@Conrad: That's a very nice pulse motor of the core effect kind. You have taken advantage of both poles of the rotor magnets, something Steorn didn't manage to do with their simplistic design, and you've also relieved a lot of bearing problems by making the "bump" caused by magnet-core interactions happen symmetrically aiding and in the plane of rotation, rather than radially and in opposition. Your physical layout has several advantages over the "Orbo" configuration. When I made "Orbette 2.0" I was interested in doing a precise replication of Steorn's motor performance, so my core-rotor geometry was set up like theirs, with some additional adjustability. The motor worked well with Hall sensor timing but I needed optical timing for various reasons, and wound up using 2 stacked USDigital optical encoders, one with large segments for pulse timing and the other with lots of tiny lines for data output-- rotor RPM and acceleration data.
Seeing your design is inspirational. I wish I had my lathe and mill here; I'd make one on your plan, to add to my collection. May do so anyway if I can figure out how to make the parts with the necessary precision.
It would be neat to compare the timing and dwell positions that worked best for your layout, comparing the regular coils and the toroidal core coils.
The regular core coils can be made to work in either attraction or repulsion, or in your design even both, depending on pulse polarity vs. rotor mag polarity, but the toroids should only work by core effect, and the polarity of the pulse to the toroids shouldn't matter.
ETA: I meant to also say that the optical commutator can be modified for dwell (pulse width) control very easily. Simply make another disk with the flags (or slots, or holes) , and stack and overlap them. Then your dwell can be controlled by the degree of overlap of the two discs.
Quote from: TinselKoala on April 24, 2013, 02:19:26 AM
@Conrad: That's a very nice pulse motor of the core effect kind. You have taken advantage of both poles of the rotor magnets, something Steorn didn't manage to do with their simplistic design, and you've also relieved a lot of bearing problems by making the "bump" caused by magnet-core interactions happen symmetrically aiding and in the plane of rotation, rather than radially and in opposition. Your physical layout has several advantages over the "Orbo" configuration. When I made "Orbette 2.0" I was interested in doing a precise replication of Steorn's motor performance, so my core-rotor geometry was set up like theirs, with some additional adjustability. The motor worked well with Hall sensor timing but I needed optical timing for various reasons, and wound up using 2 stacked USDigital optical encoders, one with large segments for pulse timing and the other with lots of tiny lines for data output-- rotor RPM and acceleration data.
Seeing your design is inspirational. I wish I had my lathe and mill here; I'd make one on your plan, to add to my collection. May do so anyway if I can figure out how to make the parts with the necessary precision.
It would be neat to compare the timing and dwell positions that worked best for your layout, comparing the regular coils and the toroidal core coils.
The regular core coils can be made to work in either attraction or repulsion, or in your design even both, depending on pulse polarity vs. rotor mag polarity, but the toroids should only work by core effect, and the polarity of the pulse to the toroids shouldn't matter.
ETA: I meant to also say that the optical commutator can be modified for dwell (pulse width) control very easily. Simply make another disk with the flags (or slots, or holes) , and stack and overlap them. Then your dwell can be controlled by the degree of overlap of the two discs.
@TinselKoala:
I built that Steorn replication thing in 2010 during the Steorn Hype. Yes, a magnet pulls itself towards the cores of the two Toroids and would get stuck between the two Toroids. A current pulse into the windings of the Toroids (no matter what polarity) frees the magnet, so that it can travel on. The torque depends on how strongly the magnet pulls itself toward the Toroid cores (strength of the magnet, size and material of the Toroid). Once the current pulse is strong enough to completely "mask" the Toroid core (so that the magnet is not slowed down when leaving the position in between the Toroids), the torque will not increase any more.
In contrast, with ordinary coils one can increase the torque by increasing the current theoretically ad infinitum, because the coil will pull and push the magnet depending on Watts fed into the coil (if the timing is right).
But I never did systematic comparisons. Once I saw the limitation of torque by the core effect of the Toroids I wandered on to other projects.
And I had mechanical problems with the ball bearings. I find it difficult to set ball bearings correctly. When turning the axle to fit into the centre of a ball bearing I either get the diameter too large or too small. If it is too large I ruin the ball bearing when hammering in the axle and when too small the axle rattles.
I found that the motor of a hard disk drive (the bigger the better) makes a good bearing for a disk which then carries magnets for a pulse motor. But balancing is a problem. A disk is a big thing which can produce a lot of force when tumbling.
Now I fiddle again with ball bearings for my latest attempt to make a fast "ring magnet spinner". The first version which I showed e.g. in my
Reply #1194 on: April 22, 2013, 06:40:53 PM, has a rattling axle and it spins up to 9000 rpm with a maximum power draw of about 0.5 Watt. It spins at 2000 rpm with 0.1 Watt.
The thing I am building now is about the same but has two coils (the idea is derived from my Steorn replication, that is why I showed it although it is old news). See the attached photo, the ring magnet and the Hall sensor are not yet mounted. The drive circuit is shown in my
Reply #1202 on: April 23, 2013, 01:34:13 PM. This time I got the axle right but the ball bearings I used seem to have some heavy grease in them, so they resist turning quite strongly. May be I can get the grease out by heating them up a bit. I will report how it goes. This latest design allows me to change ball bearings more easily, so I hope to succeed eventually. I have to look for these model helicopter bearings. I have a collection of ball bearings, but they are low quality and some are decades old.
The white coils I am using for this latest design are from 12 V relays and have 90 Ohm DC resistance, but I can also mount the 260 Ohm DC resistance coils from 24 V relays (as in the first spinner, see my
Reply #1194).
The goal of this "ring magnet spinner" is to test various "Lenz free coils" (if they indeed exist, which I doubt). Success would be a fast "ring magnet spinner" that uses very little power. Torque should not be an issue with a "Lenz free generator coil".
Greetings, Conard
hey tinselkoala,kondralektro,ive often wondered what would happen if we used a steorn setup,using normal inductor coils instead of toroids,and simply short-circuit the coil as the magnet passes by,would this counter the magnetic attraction?any ideas?
Hola conradelektro
I use to submerge the bearings some five minutes in acetone or in thinner to clean the grease.
After clean I use any light mineral oil eg. the one used to lubricate sewing machines.
About rotors, I prefer to use the ones that come in old video players, they act also as flywheels.
cheers
Hi all,
thought i'd drop in and see how it's going.
Nice to see this thread so active :) (just when i'm taking time off the bench !).
@TinselKoala - great to see you here pal :)
Great to see Conrad and Gyula developing Conrads (excellently built) motor.
@ synchro
I know MH can seem to be 'raining on our parade' at times, but he is well-educated in electronics and gives us lots of info and great ideas for testing. Please stop insulting him, he doesn't insult you. MH is like drugs, he should be used not abused ;+}
What a long discussion you've all had on polyfilar coils !
A few points.
1. I wound a straight-wound coil, 1LB of 0.28mm wire, tested it for AUL effects and it performed poorly. It did cause acceleration of the rotor and a decrease in input current but only very slight.
2. I rewound the same coil as a bifilar and the increase in acceleration was 4 times that of the straight-wound coil. The drop in input current was also 4 times as large. Perhaps, like induction, there is a quadratic relationship with capacitance at higher frequencies ? I don't know enough to formulate an answer to this.
So, regardless of classical electromagnetic properties, it is thebehaviour of the coil with regards to AUL effects that is important here, and a bifilar outperforms a monofilar. Hands down.
3. In the preceding discussion on induction you have all had, noone has mentioned another key influence on induction, namely, the physical dimensions of the coil. I wound 2LB of coil on a long former and got less inductance than 2LB of coil on a shorter, wider former. To maximise the inductance of your coil, it's length should be between 0.85 and 0.9 times it's radius.
A final thought, on the usefulness of AUL.
Supposing we build our own, standard generator, just a small one to power, say, a 1 watt bulb.
We power our generator, the bulb lights, hooray.
We then introduce a coil that strongly exhibits AUL effects.
This coil increases the rotor speed to beyond that of the setup with the 'normal' generator coils, it also decreases the input current.
Our rotor is now rotating at a higher speed, outputting more voltage, lighting the bulb more brightly than it was before, and all with less input current at the same voltage and therefore less input power.
That's a useful thing ?
All the best,
DC.
Quote from: ALVARO_CS on April 24, 2013, 12:12:27 PM
Hola conradelektro
I use to submerge the bearings some five minutes in acetone or in thinner to clean the grease.
After clean I use any light mineral oil eg. the one used to lubricate sewing machines.
About rotors, I prefer to use the ones that come in old video players, they act also as flywheels.
cheers
@ALVARO_CS: I will try the acetone treatment on my ball bearings, thank you for the suggestion. I have heard about the rotors from old video players. Old video players have become rare, but I will keep it in mind.
Quote from: DeepCut on April 24, 2013, 03:51:32 PM
Hi all,
A final thought, on the usefulness of AUL.
Supposing we build our own, standard generator, just a small one to power, say, a 1 watt bulb.
We power our generator, the bulb lights, hooray.
We then introduce a coil that strongly exhibits AUL effects.
This coil increases the rotor speed to beyond that of the setup with the 'normal' generator coils, it also decreases the input current.
Our rotor is now rotating at a higher speed, outputting more voltage, lighting the bulb more brightly than it was before, and all with less input current at the same voltage and therefore less input power.
That's a useful thing ?
All the best,
DC.
@DC: A generator (which produces electricity) is generally not driven by an electric motor (which needs electricity). Usually a generator is driven by a Diesel engine, a water turbine or a wind wheel. Would the AUL effect speed up a Diesel engine or a water turbine or a wind wheel?
Quote from: profitis on April 24, 2013, 06:49:51 AM
hey tinselkoala,kondralektro,ive often wondered what would happen if we used a steorn setup,using normal inductor coils instead of toroids,and simply short-circuit the coil as the magnet passes by,would this counter the magnetic attraction?any ideas?
@profits: I do not really know, but I suspect that shorting the coil while the magnet is passing the coil will cause a strong pull or drag on the magnet. Nothing beats a test, but it seems difficult to design a circuit which will do the driving and the shorting of the coil automatically (unless one uses a microprocessor to control each of the four MOSFETs in the H-bridge according to some program which uses the Hall sensor for timing).
Greetings, Conrad
Hi Conrad,
Some comments on sensor coil and reed switch: yes, sensor coil can be small and handy and easy to explore its best position. Question is what you drive with it? say you drive the base-emitter of a bipolar transistor then I think a reed switch can also do that job in the same way when you use a few kOhm resistor in series with it which also serves as a base current injection to the transistor anyway so the current can be small via the reed. And you can find the same good position for the reed but I agree that many times a reed may need a separate control disk with small magnets on it to work reliable. On control disk I have referred to you already at a Bedini motor (zero force motor 2nd version, see second video link below) and he used reed switch, at rotor speed I estimate at least to be several thousand rpm. Of course a separate control disk needs some more job and material to build and anything you use is fine with me, :)
Would like to show you a video on Bedini's so called 'zero force motor'. It seems very simple, at least this first version he showed a few years ego at energetic forum (but later he deleted it). See this link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kpDMMcNQxc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kpDMMcNQxc) someone uploaded it again.
You can see a rotor with some cylinder Neo magnets, all like poles out and the coil is positioned tangentionally to the rotor. He says it is a no Lenz, no backemf motor, a more advanced version of this can also be seen on youtube but it has a ring shape stator with coils on the ring, its link is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TICXxP1jI4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TICXxP1jI4) Unfortunately, the very little info is what could be guessed from these videos, no further details have been given.
The coil position as shown in the first video above i.e. turning it sideways instead of the 'usual facing magnet' position was tested also by Naudin, you may have seen it in the right hand side scope shot here: http://jnaudin.free.fr/images/magconfig.gif (http://jnaudin.free.fr/images/magconfig.gif) (and you can read about his findings in this link: http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/mromexp.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/mromexp.htm) )
So what I would suggest is first to explore what waveform your present ring magnet would induce with its changing poles in such sideway positioned coil (because the interesting waveform shown on the right hand side is always made by a single pole, (only the voltage polarity flips) either a N or S but not by suddenly changing poles your ring magnet presently has.
Probably the induced waveform you may see will be different from that. I editied your earlier magnet-coil position drawing to show 2 coils tangentially fixed wrt the rotor magnet above and below it (on the left and the right hand side of the ring magnet) or I considered the two coils either at one side or both sides of the ring (in this latter case coil length may be an issue). I show you all this because both pole ends of the drive coils are utilized. The ON time should be figured out of course (probably 25% is good).
These are only suggestions, of course I do not mean in any way to 'influence' your own way what kind of setups or circuits you build.
rgds, Gyula
PS If there is a television and video repair service near to your location, you could inquire about faulty VCR heads (I mean even rotors with some aging problem in their bearings) because they are replaced to new ones and the old one is not renewed) such rotors can still be very useful for tinkering.
Hi DeepCut,
On your few points:
1) it would be important to know that the 1LB coil you mention was present already physically in the setup but was not shorted when you measured the normal input current and RPM? or you measured the input current and RPM without the 1LB coil, logged those data and then you brought it into the setup and shorted it?
2) it would be good to know whether the same wire lenght (that the earlier 1LB coil had) was used to make the bifilar coil?
3) Yes I agree there is the so called Brooks coil shape which insures the biggest inductance to get from a given length of wire (you can google as Brooks coil to see the geometry ratio) but for generator coils the maximum or too high inductance coil is not always the best choice due to the increasing losses, for motor coils it could be a choice.
On your final thought:
if the answer to the question in the 1st point above is that the 1LB coil was not present first when you measured the input current and RPM and then introducing it and shorting it caused a decrease in input current with respect to the earlier input current, besides an increase in RPM, then yes it would be a useful thing. It is a question whether it could already give enough extra output for a possible looping to self run but the efficiency would certainly improve.
rgds, Gyula
thanx conradelektro.im more a electrochemist than electrician but im looking for evidence of a 2nd law thermodynamics violation amongst electromagnetic systems as i have found plenty evidence in electrochemical systems.could you or perhaps anybody else here tell me if you have ever verified(to yourselves) that the kickback energy on any coil inductor has ever been measured to be greater/larger than input energy? Many thanks
Quote from: profitis on April 24, 2013, 07:14:03 PM
thanx conradelektro.im more a electrochemist than electrician but im looking for evidence of a 2nd law thermodynamics violation amongst electromagnetic systems as i have found plenty evidence in electrochemical systems.could you or perhaps anybody else here tell me if you have ever verified(to yourselves) that the kickback energy on any coil inductor has ever been measured to be greater/larger than input energy? Many thanks
No I never have. When a coil is not in a stronger external polarized field I don't see how it could. I mean if the surroundings are net neutral (fluctuating around zero point), then
we feed a coil with current and it alone is what polarizes the surroundings, then when the current is stopped suddenly, we get back only what we put in with losses because that is all there is there to get.
But if the surroundings are pre-polarised with a field strength or density exceeding that produced by the coil then when the current is stopped it may just tap some energy from the external magnetic field. This is not OU it is tapping an external field, to exceed the strength of the field created by an electromagnet would not be easy and may well affect the coils or the cores parameters, though in my head it might be possible. The field would have to be artificial no natural magnetic field (such as that of the planet) would exceed that of an electromagnet. I think it could be possible but to what effect and to what end I cannot say. Maybe I'll try some experiments with that idea. I have no doubt it has been tried and experimented with before. But in what way is the question. If I find anything interesting I'll be sure to patent it immediately. ;D Kidding.
Transformers with magnets inside them and so forth come to mind. If I do the experiments I will make definitive measurements and hide nothing. Better to think for a while first.;)
A pulse motor can be made to charge it's supply as the magnet approaches under attraction but that slows the rotor down as per Lenz law. At some points in the video below it charges the supply (which has reverse blocking diodes behind a capacitor so the motor could charge the supply cap but not the supply battery, the setup was charging a charge battery in series with the supply battery (indicated by the 24 volt charge output level) the rotor magnets charged the supply cap to almost 24 volts before powering the coils, but the supply was only 12 volts.
Motor was slow because it was driving a universal motor shaft which I mounted the rotor on, the motor underneath caused a lot of unnecessary
drag, I'm working on a free spinning pulse motor design now which will have a horizontal and rotating shaft that can be loaded.
See the wave form in this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mRVjbXNLBs
Cheers
Farmhand:
I have an important point for you and feel free to verify it for yourself. All the talk you read about putting magnets inside coils and adding external biasing magnets to pulse motors or putting magnets inside transformers is not going to give you anything extra. it may be that adding an extra magnet to a pulse motor will give you better performance, but it won't be for the reasons that people think. There is a perception that adding a magnet inside a coil may give it an extra "kick."
The reason this is a futile endeavour is deceptively simple: Coils only respond to changing magnetic fields. When you have a magnet in the presence of a coil that is static and not moving, then the magnet "disappears" from the viewpoint of the coil. So all non-moving magnets in pulse motor or transformer or related experiments are simply "not there," they are invisible to the operation of the circuit.
To many this seems counter-intuitive, but that's the way Mother Nature works!
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on April 25, 2013, 12:40:27 AM
Farmhand:
I have an important point for you and feel free to verify it for yourself. All the talk you read about putting magnets inside coils and adding external biasing magnets to pulse motors or putting magnets inside transformers is not going to give you anything extra. it may be that adding an extra magnet to a pulse motor will give you better performance, but it won't be for the reasons that people think. There is a perception that adding a magnet inside a coil may give it an extra "kick."
The reason this is a futile endeavour is deceptively simple: Coils only respond to changing magnetic fields. When you have a magnet in the presence of a coil that is static and not moving, then the magnet "disappears" from the viewpoint of the coil. So all non-moving magnets in pulse motor or transformer or related experiments are simply "not there," they are invisible to the operation of the circuit.
To many this seems counter-intuitive, but that's the way Mother Nature works!
MileHigh
I'm referring more to a polarizing field, not so much putting magnets on cores. I did say I have no evidence, it's just a thought. I might experiment with it.
Mainly I was explaining why I think nothing extra can come from normal coil operations.
It's already been shown that what seems like the way mother nature works to you is not always the case. eg. the bifilar winding (B) discharging the energy from a magnetic field created by winding (A). This is a simple concept but you could not see it ?
My reply was post 1190, some before and some after. I get it and have for some time. Just because we don't talk the same lingo as you doesn't mean we know nothing.
If anything it is how you were told mother nature works, mother nature needs no words.
Cheers.
Quote from: MileHigh on April 25, 2013, 12:40:27 AM
When you have a magnet in the presence of a coil that is static and not moving, then the magnet "disappears" from the viewpoint of the coil. So all non-moving magnets in pulse motor or transformer or related experiments are simply "not there," they are invisible to the operation of the circuit.
To many this seems counter-intuitive, but that's the way Mother Nature works!
"So all non-moving magnets in pulse motor or transformer or related experiments are simply "not there," they are invisible to the operation of the circuit."
No, thats not how mother nature works silly. ;)
Irving M Gottleib Regulated power supplies 4th edition Page298 Magnetically biased chokes and transformers. ;)
Mags
So MileHigh, am I to assume that you think two superimposed magnetic fields with matching polarization orientation will not interact ?
No one is saying the coil will be excited by the external field. Why would you imply that ?
Cheers
Edited: to add person post was directed to.
Quote from: Farmhand on April 25, 2013, 01:17:36 AM
So am I to assume that you think two superimposed magnetic fields with matching polarization orientation will not interact ?
No one is saying the coil will be excited by the external field. Why would you imply that ?
Cheers
Well if you have a backing magnet that is of like field to the rotor mag, the field of the backing mag will be in and around the coil when the rotor mag is not. As the rotor mag approaches, it pushes the backing mag field to the opposite side of the coil relative to the approaching rotor mag. It should be a much denser field fluctuations in the coil. And hey, if the backing magnet is set just right, maybe its field is doing all the work in the coil and the rotor magnet is just manipulating that field within the coil from a distance. So maybe that means less lenz effect on the rotor because its the backing mag that is affecting the coil more than the rotor mag. ;D
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on April 25, 2013, 01:30:11 AM
Well if you have a backing magnet that is of like field to the rotor mag, the field of the backing mag will be in and around the coil when the rotor mag is not. As the rotor mag approaches, it pushes the backing mag field to the opposite side of the coil relative to the approaching rotor mag. It should be a much denser field fluctuations in the coil. And hey, if the backing magnet is set just right, maybe its field is doing all the work in the coil and the rotor magnet is just manipulating that field within the coil from a distance. So maybe that means less lenz effect on the rotor because its the backing mag that is affecting the coil more than the rotor mag. ;D
Mags
Yes Mags, My bad that reply was meant for MileHigh. Anyway that could be possible as well. But it would be harnessing the energy of the permanent magnet. If that's cheap to do and works then go for it. But I think core saturation might be a problem with backing magnets, I really don't know because I haven't studied that or experimented with it. Same with polarizing fields, I haven't experimented with it either.
Also even if it may reduce Lenz drag on the rotor, the amount of energy transferred from the rotor to the coils will be in line with Lenz law effects because the energy transferred from the magnet would reduce the amount of energy transferred from the rotor and therefore the associated Lenz drag would be reduced as a result of that..
Cheers
Magluvin:
QuoteWell if you have a backing magnet that is of like field to the rotor mag, the field of the backing mag will be in and around the coil when the rotor mag is not. As the rotor mag approaches, it pushes the backing mag field to the opposite side of the coil relative to the approaching rotor mag. It should be a much denser field fluctuations in the coil.
But that doesn't happen if you are implying "denser field fluctuations" will mean a higher voltage/current output from the coil. That's the point I am making. The coil only sees and reacts to the approaching rotor magnet. The backing magnet may as well not be there. Feel free to do some tests.
I haven't checked your link yet but I suspect it may have to do with an external magnet affecting the ferrite core of an inductor. You can imagine that it reduces the ability of the core to store magnetic flux in a volume. That will affect the coil because the core affects the coil. So in this case the presence of a magnet has an indirect once-removed effect on the coil.
MileHigh
Quote from: gyulasun on April 24, 2013, 06:32:25 PM
Hi Conrad,
Some comments on sensor coil and reed switch: yes, sensor coil can be small and handy and easy to explore its best position. Question is what you drive with it? say you drive the base-emitter of a bipolar transistor then I think a reed switch can also do that job in the same way when you use a few kOhm resistor in series with it which also serves as a base current injection to the transistor anyway so the current can be small via the reed. And you can find the same good position for the reed but I agree that many times a reed may need a separate control disk with small magnets on it to work reliable. On control disk I have referred to you already at a Bedini motor (zero force motor 2nd version, see second video link below) and he used reed switch, at rotor speed I estimate at least to be several thousand rpm. Of course a separate control disk needs some more job and material to build and anything you use is fine with me, :)
Would like to show you a video on Bedini's so called 'zero force motor'. It seems very simple, at least this first version he showed a few years ego at energetic forum (but later he deleted it). See this link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kpDMMcNQxc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kpDMMcNQxc) someone uploaded it again.
You can see a rotor with some cylinder Neo magnets, all like poles out and the coil is positioned tangentionally to the rotor. He says it is a no Lenz, no backemf motor, a more advanced version of this can also be seen on youtube but it has a ring shape stator with coils on the ring, its link is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TICXxP1jI4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TICXxP1jI4) Unfortunately, the very little info is what could be guessed from these videos, no further details have been given.
The coil position as shown in the first video above i.e. turning it sideways instead of the 'usual facing magnet' position was tested also by Naudin, you may have seen it in the right hand side scope shot here: http://jnaudin.free.fr/images/magconfig.gif (http://jnaudin.free.fr/images/magconfig.gif) (and you can read about his findings in this link: http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/mromexp.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/mromexp.htm) )
So what I would suggest is first to explore what waveform your present ring magnet would induce with its changing poles in such sideway positioned coil (because the interesting waveform shown on the right hand side is always made by a single pole, (only the voltage polarity flips) either a N or S but not by suddenly changing poles your ring magnet presently has.
Probably the induced waveform you may see will be different from that. I editied your earlier magnet-coil position drawing to show 2 coils tangentially fixed wrt the rotor magnet above and below it (on the left and the right hand side of the ring magnet) or I considered the two coils either at one side or both sides of the ring (in this latter case coil length may be an issue). I show you all this because both pole ends of the drive coils are utilized. The ON time should be figured out of course (probably 25% is good).
These are only suggestions, of course I do not mean in any way to 'influence' your own way what kind of setups or circuits you build.
rgds, Gyula
PS If there is a television and video repair service near to your location, you could inquire about faulty VCR heads (I mean even rotors with some aging problem in their bearings) because they are replaced to new ones and the old one is not renewed) such rotors can still be very useful for tinkering.
@Gyula:
Again, great suggestions. I think I can do some tests with this "lengthwise coil arrangement". I just have to bend a suitable "coil holder" from aluminium and mount it near my ring magnet spinner.
I see the advantage of a control disk with small strategically placed magnets. May be my building skills advance, then I will dare to go into more complicated designs.
But as always, there are more ideas than time and capability to build them. I collect your suggestions and will go back to them when testing, advancing and redesigning my set up.
I do not mind corrections, new ideas and suggestions.
I have this Commutation Encoder Module with Codewheel AEDB-9340-2000 (180 positions) http://www.avagotech.com/docs/AV02-0075EN (http://www.avagotech.com/docs/AV02-0075EN). One day I want to build a pulse motor controlled by a microprocessor (Arduino) and this Encoder together with a transistor H-Bridege. That would give endless control possibilities (pulse width, timing, commutation, shorting).
I found a VCR on ebay, if I am lucky I get it for a few Euros. (And of course I dumped two VCRs a few years ago, but my house would be full if I hoarded everything.)
Greetings, Conrad
thanx farmhand.the reason why i ask is because the physicist called steven.j.smith(google steven j.smith magnetothermodynamics) has analysed the thermodynamic cycle of a simple paramagnetic(temporarily magnetised only while current runs) inductor core with coil and has found that when you suddenly break the current the temperature of the paramagnetic material core drops momentarily below its curie point thus at that instant it changes from a paramagnet into a ferromagnet thus re-enforcing the collapsing magnetic field and giving an extra boost to the kickback current pulse.
milehigh,if its true what you said then could you perhaps tell me where this man steven j.smith is wrong as his theory supports a re-enforcing of the magnetic field at the moment the switch is opened via curie point transition.
Wrong Coils:
Version 2 of my ring magnet spinner runs, but the white coils are obviously of the wrong kind. The power draw of Version 2 with two white coils is much higher than of Version 1 with one black coil. And this is not only the lower DC resistance of two white coils in parallel (white coils each 90 Ohm, the black coil in Version 1 has 265 Ohm). Much more current for the same rpm (comparison Version 2 with two white coils and Version 1 with one black coil). The factor is at least 4 times more power requirement for the same rpm.
Please look at my Reply #1181 on: April 21, 2013, 10:48:15 PM for Version 1 of the ring magnet spinner.
I will mount two black coils (each 265 Ohm DEC resistance) in Version2 for comparison. But it will take till tomorrow.
The ball bearings in Version 2 (inner diameter 5 mm, outer diameter 16 mm) run very smoothly and quietly, no rattling and almost no vibrations at 5000 rpm. But they still drag a bit. I will give them the acetone treatment (suggested by ALVARO_CS) after I have measured performance of Version 2 with two black coils (in order to have a good comparison with the white coils under the same drag).
Attached are also some scope shot specially for Gyula. They show the effect of the 4700µF buffer capacitor. The diode between power supply and H-bridge was always in place. The scope shot is always over the parallel coils.
Remark: Sorry, this is all about making a ring magnet spin and a circuit for that. I have not yet advanced to "Lenz free generator coils". But I want to have a nice and low power ring magnet spinner before going into the very difficult field of "Lenz free coils". The reason is, I see so many magnet spinners (on YouTube) which use a lot of power. How can one ever hope to get a self runner with a power draw of several Watts just for making the dammed thing spin? Which "magic generator coil" will ever produce several Watt? I have shown a ring magnet spinner (Version 1) which spins at 8400 rpm with less than 0.5 Watt or at 3000 rpm with less than 0.15 Watt, see my Reply #1194 on: April 22, 2013, 06:40:53 PM. And I hope that I can beat that with Version 2.
In the mean time (while I am building my spinner) the good people who claim to have a "magic coil" should at least show careful input and output measurements (INPUT for driving their spinner and OUTPUT from the magic coil). I do not demand that they disclose their magic, just the measurements. Skycollection, Thane Heins, synchro1, how about that?
Greetings, Conrad
Hi Conrad,
Just a quick observation: the distance of the white coils from the ring magnet seems to me much less than the distance with the earlier type coil. Also, the cross section area of the core of the white coils seems to me also higher than the other coil. So these two factors may mean a higher attraction force i.e. a higher input power to defeat the higher attraction force?
Thanks, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on April 25, 2013, 11:15:34 AM
Hi Conrad,
Just a quick observation: the distance of the white coils from the ring magnet seems to me much less than the distance with the earlier type coil. Also, the cross section area of the core of the white coils seems to me also higher than the other coil. So these two factors may mean a higher attraction force i.e. a higher input power to defeat the higher attraction force?
Thanks, Gyula
@Gyula: I had to move the white coils rather close to the magnet to get it to turn. I had the white coils at the same distance as the black coil in Version1 (i.e. 20 mm), but the magnet did not spin. So I found the 7 mm distance by moving the coil by hand closer and farer, till the spin was at a maximum for a given input power.
And yes, the end of the core of the white coil is a bit strange, it is enlarged like the head of a rivet. May be that spreads the magnetic field at a disadvantage to the push action.
We will see what happens with the black coils.
Version 2 also works with only one coil (it does not matter which one, they have opposing magnetic polarity). And it works with the coils in parallel and in series. Of course, "just one coil" or "coils in series" makes it turn slower and has less power draw.
Greetings, Conrad
Hi Conrad,
Okay I understand the positioning. Do you happen to have an L meter to check the relay coils inductance? No problem if you do not, just it would be helpful to know for the black and the white coils the mH values because it may also explain the possible force they can exert on the magnet at a given input current. (The higher the L value, the higher the force, assuming the same current.)
Well, the enlarged head end of the white coil actually may 'increase' flux connection (so to speak), not neccessarily a disadvantage.
Thanks for the scope shots on this newer setup. I have the impression that the very narrow spikes are cut by the immediate supply voltage change just after the switch-off, I mean some of the collapsing energy may get cut, so is lost from the recovery possibility. This is why the duty cycle would be good to control i.e. making it less than 50%, perhaps it would not influence too much the rpm.
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on April 25, 2013, 12:49:25 PM
Hi Conrad,
Okay I understand the positioning. Do you happen to have an L meter to check the relay coils inductance? No problem if you do not, just it would be helpful to know for the black and the white coils the mH values because it may also explain the possible force they can exert on the magnet at a given input current. (The higher the L value, the higher the force, assuming the same current.)
Well, the enlarged head end of the white coil actually may 'increase' flux connection (so to speak), not neccessarily a disadvantage.
Thanks for the scope shots on this newer setup. I have the impression that the very narrow spikes are cut by the immediate supply voltage change just after the switch-off, I mean some of the collapsing energy may get cut, so is lost from the recovery possibility. This is why the duty cycle would be good to control i.e. making it less than 50%, perhaps it would not influence too much the rpm.
rgds, Gyula
@Gyula: Eventually I will try a trigger coil which will allow quite easily (by moving it closer and farer from the spinning magnet) to control the duty cycle. With two drive coils, the trigger coil has to be on the side of the spinning magnet, because the trigger coil should be where one of the drive coil is. I do not want to wind the trigger coil over the drive coil because I want to move the trigger coil into different positions.
Duty cycle is probably not very important for the speed, but it might dramatically cut power demand (may be by half).
I will eventually redo Version 1 mostly like Version 2, but with the axle sticking out a few centimetres on one side. Then I can try many set ups, many drive coils and various control sensors (control disk with little magnets, Hall sensor, trigger coil, Reed Switch like you said combined with a transistor, even opto-gates).
Greetings, Conrad
Skycollection dynamotor power measurements"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3qXaRNEQyE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3qXaRNEQyE)
Quote from youtube:
"THE INPUT WATTS ARE : 12 VOLTS X 0.38 = 4.56 WATTS AND THE OUTPUT WATTS THREE PANCAKES ARE : 17 VOLTS X 0.26 = 4.42 WATTS".
That's 96.875% efficient. Close to unity. He could do as well just placing one pancake output coil over the pancake pulse coil like JLNaudin's "Gegene".
He can improve the test by using three resistive loads across the coils with three true-RMS multimeters reading the RMS voltage. In a lab you have those decade resistor boxes. The ideal would be to have three decade resistor boxes, one per output coil. Then you could put the motor through its paces and see how it does with different loads. I love his build style but you don't see the output measurement.
One thing to remember about pancake coils as pick-up coils is that the inner coils would normally cut less changing magnetic flux as compared to the outer coils. So by design they inherently will pick up less power as compared to a circular coil.
Quote from: conradelektro on April 25, 2013, 02:05:53 PM
@Gyula: Eventually I will try a trigger coil which will allow quite easily (by moving it closer and farer from the spinning magnet) to control the duty cycle. With two drive coils, the trigger coil has to be on the side of the spinning magnet, because the trigger coil should be where one of the drive coil is. I do not want to wind the trigger coil over the drive coil because I want to move the trigger coil into different positions.
Duty cycle is probably not very important for the speed, but it might dramatically cut power demand (may be by half).
I will eventually redo Version 1 mostly like Version 2, but with the axle sticking out a few centimetres on one side. Then I can try many set ups, many drive coils and various control sensors (control disk with little magnets, Hall sensor, trigger coil, Reed Switch like you said combined with a transistor, even opto-gates).
Greetings, Conrad
Hi Conrad, I see you use photo interrupters/switches as well. Some circuitry can be arranged to give manual pulse width control with a pot (independent of the trigger pulse width), as well as retriggering to accelerate up to speed as a Bedini type setup does. I put some drawings in the COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS thread, I've put together a very simple new frame, rotor and coil assembly so I can refine the circuit.
I wonder is there a more appropriate thread for discussing just basic pulse motors and the driving arrangements of different kinds. Would be good to pool idea's.
I'm not sure where to post about pulse motors and their driving circuits. :-\
Nice work by the way.
Cheers
P.S. Does anyone have a 3D rendering of the magnetic field shape of a diametrically magnetized tube magnet ?
..
The Marinov Slab :
(Not a "free energy" candidate but one that exhibits some other controversial behavior: it's a N3L violator. In my dreams.)
Quote from: Farmhand on April 26, 2013, 06:50:15 AM
Hi Conrad, I see you use photo interrupters/switches as well. Some circuitry can be arranged to give manual pulse width control with a pot (independent of the trigger pulse width), as well as retriggering to accelerate up to speed as a Bedini type setup does. I put some drawings in the COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS thread, I've put together a very simple new frame, rotor and coil assembly so I can refine the circuit.
I wonder is there a more appropriate thread for discussing just basic pulse motors and the driving arrangements of different kinds. Would be good to pool idea's.
I'm not sure where to post about pulse motors and their driving circuits. :-\
Nice work by the way.
Cheers
P.S. Does anyone have a 3D rendering of the magnetic field shape of a diametrically magnetized tube magnet ?
..
@Farmhand: I saw your circuits in the COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS thread. Interesting, so many ways to do it. Yes, we should share different concepts and designs. Why not post your design in this thread. Everybody who wants to test "magic generator coils" needs a way to drive the rotor or magnet spinner. Specialised threads run dry very soon. This thread will stay alive till people stop claiming "magic generator coils" which will last a few more months.
Remark: I know, one could turn a magnet rotor with any conventional motor, even by hand. But building ones own drive circuit and method is more interesting.
@TinselKoala: I am intrigued by your Marinov Slab. What is N3L violation? Does the rotor have magnets? What is the drive principle? May be you can point to some information. Any way, it looks awesom, probably alien technology which you hide from the world. But the men in black will get you or we will steal it from you.
I want to point to a motor driver principle described by DadHav http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8b4xlCKn3LQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8b4xlCKn3LQ) (John Havrilla). It does not need any trigger, the drive coil itself is the trigger. I only post the most simple version for one drive coil (please watch the video, great ideas). DadHav drives a window motor from a capacitor for a long time. I have to try that with my ring magnet spinners. May be it works with MOSFETs (the base has high resistance, no resistors needed, Q6 is doing the driving, Q5 the sensing and triggering).
Greetings, Conrad
I see your point Conrad, Pulse motors circuits, novel generator coils and fancy coil shorting circuits go together.
Please forgive the frame ect. I just whipped it up from three pieces of wood and some screws. :-[ The main thing is it runs very smooth and stable so seeing differences will be fairly easy. I do intend to build an improved version after I work out some things, at present the magnets are quite far from the core and there are only two magnets north pole out, diametrically magnetized neo tubes 12 x 12 mm. I'll set up a gen coils to try with this type of rotor. The two boards on the left are unused as yet except for circuit supply voltage regulators.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Sv539Nxfek
I wanted a circuit setup with adjustable pulse width while the motor is running, the re-trigger is mainly there for coil shorting/load switching experiment purposes. ;)
The external shutdown if pulsed from the picaxe should be able to limit speed or shut down when a low supply voltage level is sensed ect. The picaxe can run boost converter for input voltage control, and switch loads maybe.
Drive pulses about 3 mS in the video. RPM about 1380 or so.
Quote from: Farmhand on April 26, 2013, 10:28:28 AM
I see your point Conrad, Pulse motors circuits, novel generator coils and fancy coil shorting circuits go together.
Please forgive the frame ect. I just whipped it up from three pieces of wood and some screws. :-[ The main thing is it runs very smooth and stable so seeing differences will be fairly easy. I do intend to build an improved version after I work out some things, at present the magnets are quite far from the core and there are only two magnets north pole out, diametrically magnetized neo tubes 12 x 12 mm. I'll set up a gen coils to try with this type of rotor. The two boards on the left are unused as yet except for circuit supply voltage regulators.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Sv539Nxfek (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Sv539Nxfek)
I wanted a circuit setup with adjustable pulse width while the motor is running, the re-trigger is mainly there for coil shorting/load switching experiment purposes. ;)
The external shutdown if pulsed from the picaxe should be able to limit speed or shut down when a low supply voltage level is sensed ect. The picaxe can run boost converter for input voltage control, and switch loads maybe.
Drive pulses about 3 mS in the video. RPM about 1380 or so.
@Farmhand: For such a big rotor your machine really runs smoothly, well balanced.
Not a criticism, just a statement. With about 13 Volt you are using about 0.4 Ampere, which calculates to about 5 Watt. This is a value I see with most pulse motors of the size like yours on YouTube.
I think we should try to get the power demand down. Torque is not an issue in case one believes in finding a "magic generator coil" that produces electricity but does not slow the rotor down by much as e.g. SkyCollection shows with his magic pancake coil.
In case one just wants to spin a rotor (and is not concerned about torque) the mechanical factors are dominant (bearings, balancing the rotor).
Pulse motors are very weak (little torque for the Watts put in), but they could be very efficient if one just wants to spin a freely rotation rotor (which does not have to produce torque). But then the drive circuit becomes important. And this is what I am working on.
Greetings, Conrad
Yes I agree Conrad, The input power is too high, the rotor magnets need to be a bit closer to the drive coil core, and the drive coil itself is just a test coil I had laying around, I didn't even bother to remove the diodes that are attached to it, so I drew them in the drawing hehe. I need a better coil and core which I'll do before I try a closer magnet placement. I don't want the drive core too close to the magnets since they are neo's. I'm thinking of using three drive coils in series, one where the one is now and another at each side in just the right place to pinch the north pole of the diametric tube, I had a probe around with a generator coil and there is a very strong field point just to the sides of the north side of the cylinder. I'll post a drawing very shortly of what I mean. That should give the best squeeze for the power. Really put the pinch on the magnet. :) Hoping then the drive pulse can be shorter.
The way it is now the field of the drive coil seems to be just bumping the rotor magnet field. And doesn't exert the correct balance of repulsive force for input power because of the distance being a bit too far..
The tube magnets I think have distorted shaped field and I think the field lines go across the hole to the south pole at the edges. I'm thinking for gen coils it could allow for some different effects as well.
Getting the drive power down with good rotor speed is important I think. Thanks for the input.
Oh and I think the mosfet I'm using is damaged by current through my own misadventure. It's getting warm when it should be cold and the wave form looks off on conduction.
Cheers
I now have a comparison between the black and the white coils used in Version 2 of my ring magnet spinner. One sees from the measurements that the black coils have about double efficiency in comparison with the white coils (see attached picture).
Version 2 has mechanical problems, the ball bearings drag. But this drag is the same for the white coils and the black coils, so the comparison is valid.
I will give the ball bearings an acetone treatment and will tray to repair the rattling of Version 1, because Version one was very much more efficient than Version 2 (in terms of rpm per Watt).
Of course, when just free spinnig a ring magnet power draw depends very much on the mechanical friction of the set up. But the drive coil (I recommend a coil with a lot of windings i.e. high DC resistance) and the circuit (which I still try to advance) are also important factors for the power draw.
My aim: spin a ring magnet with very high rpm and very little power.
Greetings,
Conrad
My magic black drive coil from a 12V relay, just in case someone wants to use a similar coil. (Note, this is not a magic generator coil, just a magic drive coil).
I am not a sales person of www.conrad.at (http://www.conrad.at), but I got it from them. Any similar type will do, the coil should be longish with a DC resistance of 250 to 300 Ohm.
It will not produce a lot of torque in a pulse motor, but it allows efficient driving.
The housing and the metal bar coming from the back of the coil to the contacts in the front has to be removed by help of a fine hack saw. I damaged the first coil, but then I saw how to do it (use a vice to hold the relay when working on it).
Greetings, Conrad
@Farmhand:
A question: Won't your neo's deteriorate by driving them in "repulsion" continually? If they do "wear out", then it would be disappointing to have to replace them periodically.
truesearch
@Farmhand: I like the Three-Coil-Drive-Arragement! Another nice idea which I will try one day.
Greetings, Conrad
For the people who are interested, Version 1 of my magnet spinner did 8400 rpm with less than 0.5 Watt.
The drive circuit can be seen in my Reply #1202 on: April 23, 2013, 01:34:13 PM.
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: truesearch on April 26, 2013, 03:54:12 PM
@Farmhand:
A question: Won't your neo's deteriorate by driving them in "repulsion" continually? If they do "wear out", then it would be disappointing to have to replace them periodically.
truesearch
I don't know but I doubt it would do anything to them that sticking them on a fridge door wouldn't do anyway. If the energy leaves the magnet it must go somewhere and if there is no heat chances are it would go to rotation energy or recovery energy.
Nothing lasts for ever. :)
Cheers
[color=rgb(255, 114, 0) !important]Skycollection[/color] and his behaviour are very consistent with capitalism. Everybody tries to outsmart everybody else (this is called competition) and tries to get as much money as he can (it is called good business). Well, if one believes in that mindset, one has to do exactly as [color=rgb(255, 114, 0) !important]Skycollection[/color] does. He thinks he is on to something, so he tries to make money from it in contrast to handing it out for free to everybody (who in turn would try to make money disregarding [color=rgb(255, 114, 0) !important]Skycollection[/color]). According to capitalistic doctrine he tries to protect his "invention" (in whatever stupid way).
I WILL ANWSER YOU ABOUT THIS....: DO NOT CONFUESE AND DON´T CONFUSE PEOPLE....! I NEVER RECEIVED ANY MONEY FROM USA BECAUSE PEOPLE LIKE YOU ARE WAITING FOR THE "REPLICATION" YOU DON´T WORK, YOU AND MANY PEOPLE LIKE YOU ARE WAINTING FOR THE "REPLICATION"
i have any obligation to share information because i never received DONATIONS, i have to buy magnets, wire, resin, cammera, time and effort to build a beautiful pancake coils, but i am not living in a donating program, this is not my profetion, i have my own business program and is not the electronics, electronics is only my fun...!
if you want to know how i am wonding my coils, i can share in a program or in a conference that offer me some economic support, and don´t wait that other people work and show you how replicate the work...!
saludos, from mexico, jorge
Quote from: skycollection on April 26, 2013, 06:31:11 PM
[color=rgb(255, 114, 0) !important]Skycollection[/color] and his behaviour are very consistent with capitalism. Everybody tries to outsmart everybody else (this is called competition) and tries to get as much money as he can (it is called good business). Well, if one believes in that mindset, one has to do exactly as [color=rgb(255, 114, 0) !important]Skycollection[/color] does. He thinks he is on to something, so he tries to make money from it in contrast to handing it out for free to everybody (who in turn would try to make money disregarding [color=rgb(255, 114, 0) !important]Skycollection[/color]). According to capitalistic doctrine he tries to protect his "invention" (in whatever stupid way).
I WILL ANWSER YOU ABOUT THIS....: DO NOT CONFUESE AND DON´T CONFUSE PEOPLE....! I NEVER RECEIVED ANY MONEY FROM USA BECAUSE PEOPLE LIKE YOU ARE WAITING FOR THE "REPLICATION" YOU DON´T WORK, YOU AND MANY PEOPLE LIKE YOU ARE WAINTING FOR THE "REPLICATION"
i have any obligation to share information because i never received DONATIONS, i have to buy magnets, wire, resin, cammera, time and effort to build a beautiful pancake coils, but i am not living in a donating program, this is not my profetion, i have my own business program and is not the electronics, electronics is only my fun...!
if you want to know how i am wonding my coils, i can share in a program or in a conference that offer me some economic support, and don´t wait that other people work and show you how replicate the work...!
saludos, from mexico, jorge
@Skycollection: May be it is the language barrier, but with the paragraph you cited, I in fact defended you. In our world only very few people give away something of value for free. So, I understand that you want some reward for your work. And you may do as you wish, I am not demanding anything from you.
Having this said, I also think that you probably have noting to sell. The functioning of your indeed beautiful pancake coils is most probably explicable by known science. But I am not skilled enough in electronics to explain it.
I am following "OU discussion forums" for some years and all the "beautiful inventions" and all the "claims of having found something special" have all turned out to be illusions. So, statistically you have nothing special. But I will be glad if we see in the future that you have indeed found something new.
I have a personal opinion about inventions:
Every invention is based on the knowledge of others. The inventor only makes a tiny little step, like all the people before him. All knowledge was gradually accumulated over the last 40.000 years. And one can never find out who really invented something. The patent law gives the invention to the person who files the patent first. But that does not mean that nobody else has already shown this idea or talked or written about it before. I know that most people like to see "inventions" as something special, I just do not follow this line of thinking. In an ideal world everybody should share all knowledge. And in a way it even happens like this in our complicated world. Since ever peolple have taken the ideas from others and have based their ideas on it. All the patent offices in the world can not change that substantially. All important "inventions" or "findings" were never successfully protected by patents. Patents cover only "details" which can always be circumvented in the end. And to make money from an "invention" you need access to funding, access to a market and access to the law in many countries. Think, how many people have that?
So, for me it is always extremely funny when someone in an OU forum claims an important finding and talks about keeping it secret in order to make money from it. It just does not work like this. You will see.
But by all means, I do not urge you to give away your secret. But please allow me to be sceptical; sceptical about the "invention" and sceptical about "the business angle".
Many will ask, why I am loitering in the OU forums? Well, its is extremely interesting. For me it is boring to build "known things". In the OU forums many strange ideas come up and many strange people make their appearance. I always say, that I build things which do not work, because all my life I had to build things which had to work. Now, in my pension, I am allowed to build non working and useless things. That is generally called freedom.
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: TinselKoala on April 26, 2013, 07:10:58 AM
The Marinov Slab :
(Not a "free energy" candidate but one that exhibits some other controversial behavior: it's a N3L violator. In my dreams.)
Will you explain what controversial behaviour it exhibits?
Cheers
Conrad, you mentioned capitalism in my work and i think is a mistake becuase i have a good work in my country, and i don´t need wire, resin, magnets because i can buy them, the important to share information not means that i have the "obligation" to share with other countries that are attacking me with bad commentaries. I AM NOT USSING PATENTED DEVICES, FOR EXAMPLE THE BIFILAR PANCAKE TESLA COIL, I AM USING MY OWN CONFIGURATION OF PANCKE COIL.
In other works, i would like to share information if the CONDITIONS ARE SAFE AND GOOD, not attacking with bad videos like ZEROFOSIL that delete HIS BAD VIDEO, this is the kind of people that want to share information "ATTAKING" WITH BAD INTENTION..?
SALUDOS
JORGE
Those who can, do.
I am thankful you are able.
Now you can enlighten your brother and share the light.
But no, you want to leave us in the dark, instead of sharing your blessings.
There's only a handful of people following that are also able to keep up and even give back what they learn with their various setups. It's not like talking to a few will affect the available market for your devices. there's billions to serve, and hundreds to provide. That is assuming you're not fooling yourself into thinking you have what you seek.
Conrad, Have you tried using a charging circuit in your arrangements ?
Like the setup Tesla shows in the "Electrical Igniter for Gas Engines" patent http://www.google.com/patents?id=iAVhAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=1#v=onepage&q&f=false
They see use in Tesla coil primary circuits ect.
I put one on the input to my motor and got good results from it, the drawing shows my exact setup, and the scope shots show the results.
I was able to get up to almost 19 volts in the 200 uF supply cap to discharge through the motor coil.
It seems that cap gets fully discharged and recharged to 19 in fairly quick time.
Anyway I get better performance with less input power and the drive coil gets a capacitive discharge from 18 or so volts, more bang ! .
As the frequency gets higher the voltage also rises in the supply discharge cap.
The charging inductor can also restrict current because of it's inductance and it exerts a force with it's core as well but if that can be used while retaining the effect is another question. ;)
Cheers
P.S. Maybe a wave form from the charging inductor itself might be interesting, i'll get one. :)
Edit: Inductor current is taken across a 0.1 ohm resistor between the supply and the inductor, the inductor voltage was probed between the diode and the inductor.
@skycollection
You are being criticised because you act unfairly.
We all know that without the advice of GotoLuc you would never have made those coils.
We all know that Luc got his info from Thane Heins.
Credit where credit is due.
If you behave fairly toward others, they will behave fairly toward you.
Quote from: skycollection on April 26, 2013, 07:47:56 PM
Conrad, you mentioned capitalism in my work and i think is a mistake becuase i have a good work in my country, and i don´t need wire, resin, magnets because i can buy them, the important to share information not means that i have the "obligation" to share with other countries that are attacking me with bad commentaries. I AM NOT USSING PATENTED DEVICES, FOR EXAMPLE THE BIFILAR PANCAKE TESLA COIL, I AM USING MY OWN CONFIGURATION OF PANCKE COIL.
In other works, i would like to share information if the CONDITIONS ARE SAFE AND GOOD, not attacking with bad videos like ZEROFOSIL that delete HIS BAD VIDEO, this is the kind of people that want to share information "ATTAKING" WITH BAD INTENTION..?
SALUDOS
JORGE
Quote from: hoptoad on April 26, 2013, 07:29:48 PM
Will you explain what controversial behaviour it exhibits?
Cheers
This motor is a multi-turn analogue of the "Warlock's Wheel" aka Siberian Coilu of Stefan Marinov. If you are familiar with Jeffrey Kooistra's work at Mallove's Infinite Energy Magazine laboratory, with his version of the Warlock's Wheel, you'll begin to see the possibilities.
Hi Conrad,
Very good tests, they show the importance of AmperTurns by using drive coils with very high number of turns. Of course this increases AC impedance but it seems the tradeoff is still on the positive side when comparing rpm and power draw with lower impedance coils.
Yes the drive circuit shown by DadHAv is interesting, I have not seen it, it is worth testing.
I will be away for some days and return about May 2.
Keep up the good work.
Greetings,
Gyula
Quote from: conradelektro on April 26, 2013, 03:46:35 PM
I now have a comparison between the black and the white coils used in Version 2 of my ring magnet spinner. One sees from the measurements that the black coils have about double efficiency in comparison with the white coils (see attached picture).
....
Quote from: TinselKoala on April 27, 2013, 08:39:18 AM
This motor is a multi-turn analogue of the "Warlock's Wheel" aka Siberian Coilu of Stefan Marinov. If you are familiar with Jeffrey Kooistra's work at Mallove's Infinite Energy Magazine laboratory, with his version of the Warlock's Wheel, you'll begin to see the possibilities.
Thanks for the reply, although I'm not familiar with the work described or the people you've named above. I'll have to do some research.
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on April 27, 2013, 07:21:00 PM
Thanks for the reply, although I'm not familiar with the work described or the people you've named above. I'll have to do some research.
Cheers
There is some good information here, in Jeffery's article in Analog:
http://www.analogsf.com/0806/altview.shtml
In the Marinov Slab motor, the special "secret" winding of the coils simulates the current paths in the original "ring stator" of the Siberian Coilu/Warlock's Wheel. Since the moving ring stator and the magnet armature both accelerate in the _same direction_ in the Warlock's Wheel, and this same effect occurs with the fixed stator coils in the Slab (although masked by the "immobility" of the frame) ... one may be tempted to imagine a violation of Newton's Third Law of Motion (N3L). The armature accelerates in one direction .... but there isn't an opposite back reaction against the stator. Apparently.
Quote from: TinselKoala on April 27, 2013, 08:14:54 PM
There is some good information here, in Jeffery's article in Analog:
http://www.analogsf.com/0806/altview.shtml (http://www.analogsf.com/0806/altview.shtml)
In the Marinov Slab motor, the special "secret" winding of the coils simulates the current paths in the original "ring stator" of the Siberian Coilu/Warlock's Wheel. Since the moving ring stator and the magnet armature both accelerate in the _same direction_ in the Warlock's Wheel, and this same effect occurs with the fixed stator coils in the Slab (although masked by the "immobility" of the frame) ... one may be tempted to imagine a violation of Newton's Third Law of Motion (N3L). The armature accelerates in one direction .... but there isn't an opposite back reaction against the stator. Apparently.
Thanks again. Cheers
Quote from: gyulasun on April 27, 2013, 02:49:21 PM
Hi Conrad,
Very good tests, they show the importance of AmperTurns by using drive coils with very high number of turns. Of course this increases AC impedance but it seems the tradeoff is still on the positive side when comparing rpm and power draw with lower impedance coils.
Yes the drive circuit shown by DadHAv is interesting, I have not seen it, it is worth testing.
I will be away for some days and return about May 2.
Keep up the good work.
Greetings,
Gyula
Hi Gyula, I know ampere turns are important but we must respect the frequency current restriction of the coil.
For instance if the coil has too much inductance it can't pass much current in very short pulses, which means longer "on" times which ultimately restricts the frequency the coils can be switched at as well as the current. I think we need to be smart and work out how much inductance is too much by calculating the intended switching frequency of the coil.
As well in my humble opinion I believe as low a resistance coil as possible is best as long as it has as much inductance as possible (turns) this way we can use capacitor discharge methods as I showed in my last post to get as short as possible "on time" and the fastest rate of rise of current in the drive coil.
With the resonant charging circuit (with "de-q-ing" diode) the increased voltage cannot return to the supply and because of the added inductance of the charging inductor the drive coil mainly gets the energy in the supply discharge capacitor and not much current through from the supply, especially when on times are small. In order to get very high frequencies from a (pseudo synchronous motor) the drive coils must be able to pass enough current in short pulses.
I just tried going from using three strands in parallel of 0.5 mm wire about 7.3 mH each I think all three together had just over 1 Ohm resistance to using two in series that had just over 6 Ohms resistance and I guess about 14 mH inductance. The result was the two in series restricted the current so much the motor wouldn't run fast even with the increased voltage in the supply discharge capacitor. The way my coil and rotor magnets are arranged the magnets only just attract to the core. With the rotor I have it can spin the shaft rotor and a squirrel cage from a fan motor for flywheel weight up to 1300 rpm with just about 250 mA from the 12 volt battery and I only have two magnets on a 140 mm rotor it should have three or four magnets, which would increase the frequency more, even though the frequency is only quite low, even at 1800 rpm the frequency with two magnets is only 60 Hz. The inductance we want, but the resistance is debatable in my opinion. I'll be going the route of higher voltages to the drive coil and short "on" times, a variable voltage supply is the way to go, I'll use a boost converter to vary the input voltage and a resonant charging circuit to provide a capacitor discharge at a further increased voltage. I like the difference in sound the charging circuit has made now the setup purrs.
Last night I setup the adjustable timing mount for the optical sensor so I can advance and retard the timing now. I hope to wind a new drive coil tonight I think I might wind either a nice neat coil from 0.7 wire or just use some twisted stuff I have which is four strands of 0.5 mm wire and longer than the one I'm using now. My inclination is to wind the drive coil very neatly so as to get as many turns as possible as close to the core as possible. But with twisted wire the coil ends up much bigger than a neatly wound one because of the air gaps.
Cheers
I AM NOT USING THE PATENTED CONFIGURATION OF NIKOLA TESLA THEREFORE THERE IS NOTHING TO CLAIM...! I NEVER USED INFORMATION FROM ANYBODY, I DON´T UNDERSTAND IN ENGLISH.
Quote from: Farmhand on April 27, 2013, 05:45:10 AM
Conrad, Have you tried using a charging circuit in your arrangements ?
Like the setup Tesla shows in the "Electrical Igniter for Gas Engines" patent http://www.google.com/patents?id=iAVhAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=1#v=onepage&q&f=false (http://www.google.com/patents?id=iAVhAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=1#v=onepage&q&f=false)
They see use in Tesla coil primary circuits ect.
I put one on the input to my motor and got good results from it, the drawing shows my exact setup, and the scope shots show the results.
I was able to get up to almost 19 volts in the 200 uF supply cap to discharge through the motor coil.
It seems that cap gets fully discharged and recharged to 19 in fairly quick time.
Anyway I get better performance with less input power and the drive coil gets a capacitive discharge from 18 or so volts, more bang ! .
As the frequency gets higher the voltage also rises in the supply discharge cap.
The charging inductor can also restrict current because of it's inductance and it exerts a force with it's core as well but if that can be used while retaining the effect is another question. ;)
Cheers
P.S. Maybe a wave form from the charging inductor itself might be interesting, i'll get one. :)
Edit: Inductor current is taken across a 0.1 ohm resistor between the supply and the inductor, the inductor voltage was probed between the diode and the inductor.
I did use the back EMF from the drive coil to charge a cap/accumulator or to light some LEDs in some of my pulse motors, but the "charging inductor" is news for me and I will test it. Thank you for the scope shots.
At the moment I am redesigning my ring magnet spinners with a slab of Teflon (just having a hole for the axle) instead of a ball bearing.
Greetings, Conrad
I was asked to provide a schematic for my simple SB thread spool coil pulse motor circuit with the precision ceramic bearing that yielded those dumfounding OU results! Here's what it looks like:
Synchro1:
I am assuming that you are calling your setup OU because of the very high RPM you observed. You mentioned that it did a "jump up" in RPM. Note that TK explained how it's easily explainable how an excitation frequency of X can make a rotor turn at 2X or 4X speed.
If I recall you also mentioned that you weren't able to measure any current going into the setup when it was turning at the extra high speed.
I can suggest the following: You might have a 10,000 or 20,000 uF capacitor in among your parts. So connect the big capacitor in parallel with your battery and try to get your motor to spin at the extra high speed. Put a voltmeter across the capacitor.
Assuming that you can do this then once the motor is spinning at the extra high speed disconnect the battery and let it run on the big capacitor only. You will see the capacitor voltage start to drop.
So with this first test step you can confirm that the motor does indeed draw current and consumes power. This suggests a logical second test. Do exactly the same thing but this time after four seconds disconnect the capacitor from the motor. So you end up with the capacitance, the start voltage, the end voltage, and the time interval. That gives you enough information to calculate the power consumption of the motor.
MileHigh
@Milehigh,
Thanks for the advise. That's an approach I plan to try.
Conrad if you're using AC excitation then a charging inductor might not be much use to you. I got a good increase in speed for the same drive pulse width by using the charging inductor as a motor coil, it would seem that the phases are a bit different of course, I'll investigate the differences in phase between the motor coil current and the charging inductor current, even though the coils are in series the motor coil current is first, the inductor current only flows when the discharge capacitor goes below supply voltage but I'm not certain when it stops or if there are changes in phase due to rotor speed or timing ect.
Just as with most things as the rotational speed increases the optimum timing for the coil to fire before the magnet is dead center varies. I won't call it top dead center because it is not an I.C.E., so the top has nothing to do with it. ;) Nothing moves up and down like the piston to be at top dead center. Anyway the inductor current is a bit after the motor current so placement is important, directly opposite might not be the best position. I found if I place the charging inductor at about 20 to 30 degrees after the motor core it has good effect when the motor is already spinning but it does not aid in start up torque there. If I place it directly opposite the motor coil at 180 degrees then it does add start up torque and increase the rpm for the same PW but the max rpm is less than if it is added at 30 degrees while the motor is already spinning.
I'll hold off where I think the best placement is until after I scope the currents.
I made a new motor coil from two strands of what looks like about 0.6 mm wire, 65 meters each and made the old motor coil the charging inductor for now, I organised the wire so I can make another coil the same.
Basically it seems the charging inductor can be used as a series drive coil as well, and after the first switching of the drive coil the voltage it gets is increased and the phase of the charge inductor current is then lagging the drive coil currents, or so it would seem on first glance. Now if I can get the drive coil to discharge into a cap for the charging inductor to draw from, then the power draw will decrease as well, but then there will be no charge battery. With very low input power a charge battery is almost pointless anyway unless it is small, or desulfation is wanted. When I get the motor coils and rotor arrangement I want I'll build a more solid motor with places for generator coils. Then I'll go for the resonant generator coils with switched loads.
Cheers
P.S. Drawing shows basic idea. :) Disregard the little rectangles drawn on the rotor they mean nothing they were meant to be rubbed out (just reflector strips).
Of course the idea can be expanded to include more sets of two coils.
I think it might be time to have a look in Tesla's invention book. ;D http://ia600302.us.archive.org/16/items/inventionsresear00martiala/inventionsresear00martiala.pdf
Try biasing your solenoid drive coils by placing a small NdB magnet on the core end away from the rotor. Try both polarity orientations of the bias magnet while the motor is running.
If you are using mechanical reed switches, their performance (timing, durability, jitter, etc) can be improved by using a tiny magnet, fixed in position, near the reed, usually on the opposite side from the rotor magnet passage. Again, experiment while the motor is running, moving a small magnet around the reed switch. You can also extend the life of your expensive reed switches by using a small ceramic capacitor directly across the switch. Of course... this will usually also kill any "ou" effect from the switch.
Attached is the best scope shot I could get, I had trouble getting the wave form to stay in place. I guess it could be synced with the drive pulse maybe.
Anyway there is a difference in phase, one waveform is inverted because I put both scope grounds to the capacitor with one 0.1 Ohm current sense resistor from the charging coil to the cap and and the other 0.1 Ohm resistor from the cap to the drive coil. With the scope shots the yellow trace is the charging inductor and the blue trace is the main drive coil. The main drive coil trace (blue) is inverted because of the way the scope probes are attached. The phases are the same even if the charging coil is not near the rotor.
Tinsel, I'm using an optical sensor and a circuit to process the signal into a variable width pulse independent of the signal pulse, narrower or wider pulses than the optical sensor reads are possible, I also have the sensor mounted so I can adjust the timing. I'm using two parallel mosfets to switch the coil which has two windings.
I figure if I use a charging circuit I may as well use the inductor to help drove the rotor. :) Also the drive coil discharge would seem to be almost in phase with the charging inductor current. Which could be handy.
Also attached is a picture on one idea for using the charging coil just after the main drive coil. And a drawing with the resistor arrangement I used to see the phases, ( the coils are in a different position on the rotor but the circuit is the same).
Cheers
Anyone want to see a quick video clip of how it works to speed up the rotor ?
Sorry for the awfull picture:
Maybe work better like this (magnets are radial), it's like the earth free spinning on itself and around the sun
I made my Version 1 of the ring magnet spinner a bit more sturdy. The flimsy and rattling ball bearings were replace with Teflon slab which just have a hole for the axle.
I think I can still tweak it a bit and the Hall sensor has to go underneath the ring magnet because I want to place a "magic generator coil" on top.
The most useful setting seems to be 12V which results in about 3000 rpm for 0.5 Watt.
The most difficult part is the mechanical precision which is till bad in my Version 1 and still worse in my Version 2, see my Reply #1239 on: April 26, 2013, 09:46:35 PM-
Version 1 was better with the rattling ball bearings, see my Reply #1243 on: April 26, 2013, 10:25:47 PM.
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: PiCéd on April 29, 2013, 03:33:24 PM
Sorry for the awfull picture:
Maybe work better like this (magnets are radial), it's like the earth free spinning on itself and around the sun
Here's a rotating magnet rotor motor like the one you designed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKz1Y3UayHw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKz1Y3UayHw)
I did some thinking and I think I'll go with a setup something like in the attached drawing. Both coils should be working at around the resonant frequency when the 330 uF cap I have now is considered with them. 80 Hz is 2400 rpm with two magnets. I'll make the second coil just like the first one so I have two the same. I might use some dressed shelf timber 290 mm wide for the sides so there is a big flat area to support generator coils and I'll make it with a removable bearing block in one side so the rotor can be removed through the side. I can place "shelves" so generator coils mounted on wooden mounts can slide in.
If the generator coil is resonant at three times the working frequency of 80 Hz then there will be harmonic oscillations at 240 Hz to work with.
Concerning the drive coil if it has 12 mH inductance and I dump a 330 uF cap through it then it will be 'resonant' at 80 hz not truly resonant but the coils should be responsive, trying to dump the 330 uF cap through the 12 mH coil at faster rates I think will show less responsiveness. Let's say if I made the generator coil resonant at say 40 Hz then if it gets excited at a faster rate than that it would be working past it's resonant frequency which would restrict the current through the coil and reduce the power it could produce. So the idea is if it is resonant at three times the working frequency that can't happen. Then I can switch the loads attached to the generator coil for effect.
We should remember that part of my input is reclaimed to the charge battery or otherwise which is connected now to the discharge cap so that only one diode is in the discharge path.
I'm calling it a Dual Resonant Pulse Motor, it easily reaches and exceeds 2400 rpm with the second coil in place. Now to build a new frame. :)
EDIT: ( Actually I'll call it a Two Phase Dual Resonant Pulse Motor. :D )
Wave forms look cool. ;)
Yellow trace is the capacitor in the charging circuit.
Blue trace is the mosfet drain.
Here's the video clip.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1_KlgJ09Bs
synchro1, yes him and Th3Generat0r.
Jorge demononstrates a COP of 4x OU with 4 Pancake "Orbo Toroid" hybrid power pickup coils:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a28DqHF5tGM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a28DqHF5tGM)
and again to measure output voltage with a load. on:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1wwb9VkeTI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1wwb9VkeTI)
Adam's attraction to the ferrite toroids coupled with masking power pulse pancake coil recovery! Jorge may have perfected the Stoern Orbo.
I have done what I am willing and capable, Version 1 of my ring magnet spinner will be the basis for testing magic coils.
Better motor builders will be able to do produce a better contraption. Try to beat my Version 1 (less power demand, higher rpm) and please show us your results.
See the attached schematics, scope shots (over the two parallel drive coils) and power demand measurements (on the photo). This ring magnet spinner self starts (with this commutating drive circuit).
The magic coil will be placed above the rotor, but it will take some time.
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: synchro1 on April 30, 2013, 11:32:37 AM
Jorge demononstrates a COP of 4x OU with 4 Pancake "Orbo Toroid" hybrid power pickup coils:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a28DqHF5tGM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a28DqHF5tGM)
and again to measure output voltage with a load. on:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1wwb9VkeTI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1wwb9VkeTI)
Adams attraction to the ferrite toroids coupled with masking power pulse pancake coil recovery! Jorge may have perfected the Stoern Orbo.
It is an impressive contraption, very nicely built. I like the idea to combine drive coils (toroids) and generator coils.
What I can see from Jorge's very crude measurements is a result around unity. Nevertheless very interesting. It is difficult to make precise measurements in this very dynamic system.
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: synchro1 on April 30, 2013, 11:32:37 AM
Jorge demononstrates a COP of 4x OU with 4 Pancake "Orbo Toroid" hybrid power pickup coils:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a28DqHF5tGM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a28DqHF5tGM)
and again to measure output voltage with a load. on:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1wwb9VkeTI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1wwb9VkeTI)
Adam's attraction to the ferrite toroids coupled with masking power pulse pancake coil recovery! Jorge may have perfected the Stoern Orbo.
Synchro, The second video is a different load (a battery) and the left meter is the input current 0.53 Amps the meter is set to read Amps, and the input power is set so that the current is 0.53 Amps so it looks like the 53 volts from before when he measured volts. That's what it looks like to me, the right meter is the charge current, the left meter is the input current (no voltage shown).
The first video the output voltage was not measured under load, so that was pointless.
He seems to be trying to make out he has OU when he hasn't. Why not just measure the voltage of the output when loaded by the Lamp ? Makes no sense to me.
In my books his credibility is blown. Looks nice though.
My guess is about 45 % efficient.
Cheers
@Farmhand,
Jorge's a bit slippery alright. I can't vouch for any of his flimsy claims. I like the polished quality of his videos. Here's what he had to add to the youtube comments on his COP 1.79 OU video two:
Skycollection,
"Yes, input watts is 12 volts x 0.53 = 6.36 watts and output watts 52 volts x 0.22 = 11.44 watts. thanks for watching".
For Jorge's new clips, there simply is no logical reason for using toroidal coils that I can think of. In theory, you are supposed to try to reason things like this out in your mind before even building something. Just pure trial-and-error building is not where you want to be. You want to apply your knowledge when you undertake to build something. Except for the unremarkable Steorn "disappearing core" pulse motors that were demoed at the Waterways presentation, I can't think of a single logical application for using a toroidal coil in a pulse motor.
Quote from: MileHigh on April 30, 2013, 05:47:07 PM
For Jorge's new clips, there simply is no logical reason for using toroidal coils that I can think of. In theory, you are supposed to try to reason things like this out in your mind before even building something. Just pure trial-and-error building is not where you want to be. You want to apply your knowledge when you undertake to build something. Except for the unremarkable Steorn "disappearing core" pulse motors that were demoed at the Waterways presentation, I can't think of a single logical application for using a toroidal coil in a pulse motor.
"I can't think of a single logical application for using a toroidal coil in a pulse motor."
I can. ;D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrtGzxOKpwQ
And the first solid state orbo, The Orbonbon. :o ;D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSgGFzfDiYE
The dime size orbo was not very efficient as it produced more heat than rotation. ;D But all that can be remedied by using a larger core for more attraction and more turns of finer wire. And the rotor will run faster. ;) I just thought it was a novel idea to demonstrate the tiny toroid working.
Attraction to the cores to provide rotor motion is not really different than a core of a 'universal motor' if the path of the magnet is set up as a loop like a normal motor. The 'disappearing core' is not a joke in any manner. TK's Orbette worked well also. ;) And all could be better if the designs were developed to do better. ;) The Orbo coil/core demonstrates a very useful magnetic field switching device, and I think it has been demonstrated fairly well, for what has been done so far. Might not seem like much if you have not built one, but when comparing with other experiments, it has its merits. ;)
Mags
Quote from: conradelektro on April 29, 2013, 04:20:28 PM
I made my Version 1 of the ring magnet spinner a bit more sturdy. The flimsy and rattling ball bearings were replace with Teflon slab which just have a hole for the axle.
I think I can still tweak it a bit and the Hall sensor has to go underneath the ring magnet because I want to place a "magic generator coil" on top.
The most useful setting seems to be 12V which results in about 3000 rpm for 0.5 Watt.
The most difficult part is the mechanical precision which is till bad in my Version 1 and still worse in my Version 2, see my Reply #1239 on: April 26, 2013, 09:46:35 PM-
Version 1 was better with the rattling ball bearings, see my Reply #1243 on: April 26, 2013, 10:25:47 PM.
Greetings, Conrad
Hi Conrad, Yes I agree with these setups we want very low mechanical drag as well as low windage. My rotor pushes a lot of air, in a similar way to a Tesla turbine, the disc throws off air all round and quite strong too. Other things that reduce the possible speed are rotor not balanced ( mine needs a re-balance ), misaligned bearings ( with my wooden frame I can manipulate it to align the bearings while running for least drag, but the next setup will be built more precisely and with some adjustment on one side for bearing alignment, also flexible coil mounts can "give" when the coil repulses the magnet and vibrate, in some cases that could actually aid in rotation of the rotor but would ultimately cause vibration in the whole setup and if a vibration can aid, it can hinder as well. Unwanted vibration is why in my opinion opposing forces are best and why I need to make a second set of coils for the opposite side of the rotor more coils will mean better efficiency and more torque as well. Because of my larger rotor my magnet speed is about 15 meters a second at 2400 rpm if my calculation is correct. But the frequency is low 80 Hz. The magnets are at 120 mm diameter.
My motor coil is actually more like 12.8 mH so with the 330 uF it's resonant frequency is more like 77 Hz which is 2310 rpm, so with a second set of coils it should be most efficient
at 2310 rpm or so and develop the most torque at a speed just below 2300 rpm. I think if I was to run the motor at increasingly faster speeds over it's resonant speed, the input would rise a lot for little speed increase.
Conrad I see you are using square wave AC to drive the spinner ( H bridge ), that's then actually a "permanent magnet AC motor" not really a pulse motor if there is not an appreciable time break between input voltage alternations and no coil discharges or harnessing of the energy released when the magnetic field of the coils collapse. No big deal, just my opinion but to be a pulse motor the duty needs to be less than 100 % regardless if AC or DC is used. My duty is about 40 % or less. With lower resistance and slightly less inductance or higher voltage input it could be less.
Last night I re-familiarized myself with the picaxe program and it's input and output configuration so I can setup the boost converter for control of the input voltage I should be able to get up to 30 volts input so the voltage in the capacitor to dump through the drive coil could get to 50 or 60 volts then which will help to overcome resistance and shorten the pulse width.
Cheers
P.S. I quickly wound a test generator coil of about 70 mH and it produces about 20 volts.
Oh and I can run the setup with up to 0.8 or 0.9 A input current from the 12 volt battery and the mosfets don't even get warm.
..
Quote from: Magluvin on April 30, 2013, 08:54:31 PM
And the first solid state orbo, The Orbonbon. :o ;D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSgGFzfDiYE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSgGFzfDiYE)
Also, in case it wasnt noticed, at 2:50 in the vid I insert a diode in the circuit that captures the collapse of the toroid coil and it is added to the output. And this collapse is not altered by the pickup coil loaded or not, nor does the pickup loaded or not affect the input to the toroid coil. So if the pulse freq and PW is proper for the toroid, as it is still an inductor, we can collect a lot back that was used, and the rotor will still run the same. ;)
Mags
Hi Mags, I think the first post in this thread linked below explains why a toroid can leak significant flux when used in a pulse motor. The reason toroids are considered efficient is because they tend not to "leak flux". If they are made to leak flux that goes out the window so a core with a break in it or a solenoid may work better, maybe not it depends on the situation and what is wanted.
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2061.msg31233;topicseen#msg31233
When pulsing coils with not much inductance switch heating can be a problem, also the coil collapse should be directed to discharge into at least a few volts above the supply voltage, in my opinion it should discharge into double the supply voltage.
Cheers
Quote from: Farmhand on April 30, 2013, 09:32:23 PM
Hi Mags, I think the first post in this thread linked below explains why a toroid can leak significant flux when used in a pulse motor. The reason toroids are considered efficient is because they tend not to "leak flux". If they are made to leak flux that goes out the window so a core with a break in it or a solenoid may work better, maybe not it depends on the situation and what is wanted.
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2061.msg31233;topicseen#msg31233 (http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2061.msg31233;topicseen#msg31233)
When pulsing coils with not much inductance switch heating can be a problem, also the coil collapse should be directed to discharge into at least a few volts above the supply voltage, in my opinion it should discharge into double the supply voltage.
Cheers
Hey Farmhand
I suppose some flux leaks. But decent cores are pretty good before saturation. In order for the Orbo to work efficiently, one would want to power the coil to the point before saturation.
Ever open a car audio amplifier? The power supplies use them. My Soundstream Reference 700 has a toroid cor that is about 2in outer dia and the amp can pull near 50amps @ 14.4v continuous(well, 60khz pwm) and peak beyond, and all that power goes through that toroid transformer. Well most of it. ;) If the core were to be very leaky or getting saturated, this would be reflected in the audio as the transfer from the primary to the secondary would suffer severely. Its quite a bit of energy these toroids can handle for their size.
The output from a field collapse in voltage depends on if there is a load to capture it, and how heavy the load is. Unloaded 12v could produce 90v during collapse. But if you use a snubber diode across the coil to feed the collapse back into the coil, there wont be a higher voltage and the collapse will happen slower than if just bipped into a cap or lighter loads. Set up a 12v relay for buzz mode and measure the peaks. Or touch the ends of the coil with wet fingers. :o :o ;D Then if you put a capture diode to a resistor from the coil of the relay, depending on the resistor value, the peak voltage will differ.
Like in a switching supply. If there were no regulating of the output, say we disable regulation, the output would be quite high when the output cap is full with no load. Some use a resistor to always load the output a bit. Not just to self discharge the cap.
The oldschool Soundstreams used 'loosely' regulated supplies so the rail voltages were 37v +/- for 50w rating vs a fully regulated Precision Power for the same rated power the rails were 20v +/-. The loosely regulated supply offers more headroom for those dynamic peaks and still able to hold 20v +/- during a continuous output. But music is not continuous power most of the time.
Mags
Was editing my previous post and a new one popped up all in grey quote box. Must have hit quote instead of modify. Never deleted a post. Can that be done in edit?
Mags
The toroid-coil Orbo is a core-effect pulse motor, not an attraction, repulsion, or combo motor. All toroidal coils leak some flux, but the Orbo would work just as well with a "perfect" toroid coil with zero flux leakage. The whole point of the Orbo cycle is to drive the toroid core to saturation, at which point its attraction to an external magnet is _less_ than when it's not saturated. Flux leakage from the magnetizing current in the coil windings plays no role at all. This can be easily demonstrated by reversing the polarity of the current in the toroid. A normal pulse motor will have to be retimed to operate properly with reversed current, but an Orbo core-effect motor will not even notice the difference and will run just the same with either polarity, or even AC of high frequency, to the toroid windings. In fact, the better your toroid coils (least flux leakage) the better your Orbo will run.
And sure, the collapse from a toroid coil is perfectly usable in the usual way, to charge external batteries or capacitors. Nothing to do with how the Orbo rotor is actually driven, though. Steorn's claim of OU included the claim that the approaching rotor magnet transferred some KE back into the toroid (by changing its saturation level on the B-H curve) and that this energy would add to the normal collapse spike from the electrical energy to the toroid shutting off. It sounds plausible.... too bad that the energy transferred "into" the coil from KE is some of the same energy that was put "out" of the coil and into the rotor on the last cycle.
Quote from: Magluvin on April 30, 2013, 11:11:28 PM
snip...
The oldschool Soundstreams used 'loosely' regulated supplies so the rail voltages were 37v +/- for 50w rating vs a fully regulated Precision Power for the same rated power the rails were 20v +/-. The loosely regulated supply offers more headroom for those dynamic peaks and still able to hold 20v +/- during a continuous output. But music is not continuous power most of the time.
Some of the "real old school" audio "Amps" cranking out 500W RMS Rock N Roll, with a 50-75V +/- supply rail, are still in hot demand, and many are still in use. Early Marshall and Vox Amps spring to my mind. For the Rock N Roll set, high powered valve amplifiers never died, they've just become the highly priced sought after jewels of the few.
Sorry ..... off topic ..... Cheers
Quote from: Farmhand on April 30, 2013, 09:00:10 PM
.........
Conrad I see you are using square wave AC to drive the spinner ( H bridge ), that's then actually a "permanent magnet AC motor" not really a pulse motor if there is not an appreciable time break between input voltage alternations and no coil discharges or harnessing of the energy released when the magnetic field of the coils collapse. No big deal, just my opinion but to be a pulse motor the duty needs to be less than 100 % regardless if AC or DC is used. My duty is about 40 % or less. With lower resistance and slightly less inductance or higher voltage input it could be less.
Cheers
.........
@Farmhand:
The circuit I posted in my
Reply #1272 on: April 30, 2013 can drive the ring magnet in "pulse mode" and in "attraction mode", depending on the polarity of the two drive coils (polarity can be changed by switching the wires of the coil). "Pulse mode" works better and uses less power for the same rpm. But torque seems to be higher in "attraction mode" (with more power used for the same rpm).
In "pulse mode" the coils should be farer away from the ring magnet than in the "attraction mode" for the same rpm, which seems to explain the higher torque in "attraction mode". "Attraction mode" would be the conventional commutating DC motor drive principle. If one does the commutating with a transistor H-Bridge it could be called an AC drive mode.
The ring magnet spinner only turns in one direction in both modes because the right polarity of the ring magnet has to be in front of the coil with the opposing polarity (in attraction mode) or the same polarity (in pulse mode) when the Hall sensor switches on the current trough the coils.
The circuit works with a ring magnet. I will only work well with a rotor having N S N S magnets facing the coils in case the magnets follow each other very closely.
I will try the conventional pulse motor circuits (only one transistor) with my Version 1 in order to have a comparison.
Greetings, Conrad
Comparison H-Bridge driver and single transistor driver for Version 1 of my ring magnet spinner:
I went back to a single transistor circuit with a Hall sensor for spinning the ring magnet in my Version 1.
The single transistor circuit is slightly more efficient than the H-bridge, but can only spin the ring magnet up to 5200 rpm. See the circuit, scope shots and photo (with the measurements).
It is not worth while to go from a single transistor circuit to an H-Bridge for a simple ring magnet spinner. May be that is useful information for experimenters who want to build a ring magnet spinner.
Comparison tests in the making: trigger coil instead of the Hall sensor in a single transistor circuit, DadHav's circuit with two MOSFETs.
Greetings, Conrad
Some progress:
Using two drive coils (opposing magnetic polarity at opposite sides of the ring magnet) in the one transistor circuit with Hall sensor makes it a little bit more efficient and allows to reach 7200 rpm with Version 1 of my ring magnet spinner. Power demand listed on the drawing.
I do not show scope shots because they are in principle the same as in my post above.
Note (look at the power demand lists in my post above for comparison), the power demand for 7200 rpm went down from 1.2 Watt (H-Bridge with two coils) to 0.72 Watt (one transistor circuit with two coils). And Version 1 does now 5000 rpm for 0.4 Watt or 3000 rpm for 0.2 Watt.
When trying a trigger coil, I have to place it next to one of the drive coils, may be in a 90° angle (like the axle) to the ring magnet.
Greetings, Conrad
I've made an improvement as well, I've got the input power down for the the rpm as well as shorter pulse width. Pulse width is just under 3 mS. Also I setup the boost converter with a max voltage of 20 volts and three settings for current. Still improving things and I have a new idea to reuse all reclaimed inductive energy with only one battery.
With two magnets the 360 degrees is split into two 180 degree cycles, if the drive coil has a duty of 25% that is 45 degrees so that should be the difference in phase, the charging inductor should be at about 45 degrees phase angle to the drive coil to get two phases from one pulse. I need to design a new signal processing circuit that retains 25% duty at all speeds. Then it will have more torque. At present at the lower speeds the duty is less and less.
Acceleration Test 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yukaj0QQzN0
Considering it is really a single coil motor made to use the charging inductor as a second phase it is fairly efficient and responsive. With a second Twin coil arrangement it will have a fair bit of torque, I think this would work well for a pushbike motor-generator, with a larger rotor mounted on the bike's rear hub which has about 18 magnets as closely spaced as possible. If the bike wheel did say 5 revolutions per second and the rotor had 18 magnets that would be a frequency of 90 Hz. And with a 27 inch wheel that has a diameter of about 2.2 meters that is 11 meters a second or 39 kph. ;D
Would be helpful for reducing effort and going faster.
And if the circuit was switched off, then the diode after the battery is bypassed it would generate and charge the battery when rolling down hill or braking. A "swing in" generator coil could also be used so that it is out of the way when not in use.
It's a case of "Have TIG welder and plasma cutter. Will build crazy bike". I've got a history with powered push bikes. some years ago I installed a 2.5 hp two stroke victa lawn mower engine on a mountain bike, it had a direct "cylinder" friction drive to the rear wheel, the drive roller was mounted directly on the crankshaft. It did over 70 kph, and accelerated very well. ;D The sound of a 70 kph lawn mover really freaked out the neighborhood dogs though. hehehe.
Cheers
P.S. I would like to plot the acceleration and torque curves of this setup. A fixed timing point can be used with good effect so accelerating it is just a matter of input voltage control. It does have a "power band" or "torque band" so to speak.
Prototypes are not meant to be pretty. I don't understand people spending big time and big bucks on unproven prototype setups, it's not smart in my opinion, "pretty is, as pretty does" so Mr Gump would say. (referring to "Skycollection's pretty setups")
EDIT: Timing effect video clip. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtgPwqJOZJk
..
Here I did a comparative test between the pulse motor with a fan blade on it
and a Small Purchased AC Fan rated to 15 Watts but only used 13 Watts when warmed up.
Pulse motor wins. :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5orxI__rFsU
The pulse motor moves a lot more air for less power. I have another small fan
which is a bit bigger rated to 18 Watts, I'll see if I can outdo that one next.
Cheers
@Conrad: Why in the world are you using a P-channel mosfet in that circuit? The equivalent or even better rated N-channel mosfet would be cheaper and more "logical" in that single-transistor "high side switch" circuit, wouldn't it?
I did an experiment few years back and got some results of which I don't understand. There seem to be motor guys here so I will try to explain it, maybe it is usefull to someone.
I put two strong neodiym magnets on a flat disk, both faced the same way 180 degrees apart. This disk was placed on a rod which was connected to electric drill. Drill had trigger based power control, I press little and the motor spins little, I press hard and motor spins faster. Next I put lots on neodium magnets in a tube, two sets of magnets. One set all S faced and the other set all N faced. There was a slit between the magnets where the disk could rotate.
I placed the disk so that all magnets were repelling all the time: tube S - S N - N tube. So it was difficult to hold there. Then I started the drill. It had a hard time rotating the disk at lower speed. I gradually increased the rpm's and I could hear the motor doing lots of work because the magnets were so strong. But after a certain level of rpm was reached the motor sound dropped significantly and disk accelerated. As if the magnets were repelled more when magnet in the disk was moving out from the tube than when it was coming in.
Is this normal ? Is this the same as delayed lenz effect using magnets only ?
What if there would be electromagnets added on the sides of the tube, at the end of core right next to slit where disk rotates ? They would create reverse polarity and if they would be equal in power as the tube magnet the net force seen by the disk would be nullified. Disk would then rotate without drag generating power to coils.
@Jack Noskills,
Can you upload a sketch?
Quote from: TinselKoala on May 02, 2013, 07:46:31 AM
@Conrad: Why in the world are you using a P-channel mosfet in that circuit? The equivalent or even better rated N-channel mosfet would be cheaper and more "logical" in that single-transistor "high side switch" circuit, wouldn't it?
@TinslKoala: the P-channel MOSFET is used because the Hall sensor A1101 is South Pole sensitive and switches from High to Low.
http://www.allegromicro.com/~/media/Files/Datasheets/A110x-Datasheet.ashx
From the data sheet: The output of these devices switches low (turns on) when a magnetic field (south polarity) perpendicular to the Hall element
exceeds the operate point threshold, BOP. After turn-on, the output is capable of sinking 25 mA and the output voltage is VOUT(SAT). When the magnetic field is reduced below the release point, BRP , the device output goes high (turns off). The difference in the magnetic operate and release points is the hysteresis, Bhys, of the device. This built-in hysteresis allows clean switching of the output, even in the presence of external mechanical vibration and electrical noise.
One could have used an other Hall sensor which switches from Low to High or a second transistor in between.
I will use the equivalent N-channel with a trigger coil in my next test coming soon.
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: Magluvin on April 30, 2013, 11:11:28 PM
Hey Farmhand
The output from a field collapse in voltage depends on if there is a load to capture it, and how heavy the load is. Unloaded 12v could produce 90v during collapse. But if you use a snubber diode across the coil to feed the collapse back into the coil, there wont be a higher voltage and the collapse will happen slower than if just bipped into a cap or lighter loads. Set up a 12v relay for buzz mode and measure the peaks. Or touch the ends of the coil with wet fingers. :o :o ;D Then if you put a capture diode to a resistor from the coil of the relay, depending on the resistor value, the peak voltage will differ.
Like in a switching supply. If there were no regulating of the output, say we disable regulation, the output would be quite high when the output cap is full with no load. Some use a resistor to always load the output a bit. Not just to self discharge the cap.
Mags
Well in my opinion using a snubber is not as good as discharging the inductive energy to a few volts above the supply voltage in most situations like pulse motors and such. I've done plenty of experiments that showed me this. Try a snubber diode on a Bedini, ie. use the energizer as normal to charge a second battery, then fit it with a snubber diode, take away the charge battery and start it up without adjusting anything, see what happens. In my experience the motor runs slower and requires a wider pulse width is less efficient and less powerful. Depending on what result you want or are happy with will depend on what you do.
I'm fairly sure I can clearly demonstrate the effect with the motor I am experimenting with now. Should I ?
Cheers
Quote from: Farmhand on May 02, 2013, 04:50:50 PM
Well in my opinion using a snubber is not as good as discharging the inductive energy to a few volts above the supply voltage in most situations like pulse motors and such. I've done plenty of experiments that showed me this. Try a snubber diode on a Bedini, ie. use the energizer as normal to charge a second battery, then fit it with a snubber diode, take away the charge battery and start it up without adjusting anything, see what happens. In my experience the motor runs slower and requires a wider pulse width is less efficient and less powerful. Depending on what result you want or are happy with will depend on what you do.
I'm fairly sure I can clearly demonstrate the effect with the motor I am experimenting with now. Should I ?
Cheers
"Well in my opinion using a snubber is not as good as discharging the inductive energy to a few volts above the supply voltage in most situations like pulse motors and such. I've done plenty of experiments that showed me this."
I actually find it the other way around. ;)
The snubber causes the coil to keep itself energized for a short period of time( same magnetic polarity, just decreasing) after the input to the coil is removed. And I have demonstrated this. ;) I have to look through my YT vids to see if I have it there. If not I have the vid or will reproduce the experiment.
If the original timing for turn on is very close to TDC, the snubber may slow things down because it is holding the attraction field(if set up in attraction) past TDC.
But in the case of push, the snubber should extend the push beyond switch/transistor turn off. Instead of storing the collapse energy into a cap or other load, the energy is stored in the rotor. ;) in this case one would want to switch on at or just after TDC.
Romero was using this snubber on his primaries before he produced the Muller. ;) Its here somewhere.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on May 02, 2013, 06:39:24 PM
I actually find it the other way around.
The snubber causes the coil to keep itself energized for a short period of time( same magnetic polarity, just decreasing) after the input to the coil is removed. And I have demonstrated this.
Also if sending the collapse current to a load, the magnetic field presence is extended longer, being that current is still flowing through the coil. ;)
Looking for the vids now.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on May 02, 2013, 06:39:24 PM
"Well in my opinion using a snubber is not as good as discharging the inductive energy to a few volts above the supply voltage in most situations like pulse motors and such. I've done plenty of experiments that showed me this."
I actually find it the other way around. ;)
The snubber causes the coil to keep itself energized for a short period of time( same magnetic polarity, just decreasing) after the input to the coil is removed. And I have demonstrated this. ;) I have to look through my YT vids to see if I have it there. If not I have the vid or will reproduce the experiment.
If the original timing for turn on is very close to TDC, the snubber may slow things down because it is holding the attraction field(if set up in attraction) past TDC.
But in the case of push, the snubber should extend the push beyond switch/transistor turn off. Instead of storing the collapse energy into a cap or other load, the energy is stored in the rotor. ;) in this case one would want to switch on at or just after TDC.
Romero was using this snubber on his primaries before he produced the Muller. ;) Its here somewhere.
Mags
Like i said it depends on what you want, I want as short as possible "on times" so a snubber is counter productive to me. you can't start the next pulse until the first event is over. Snubbers are for switching relays or loads like Regular DC PM motors and stuff in my opinion. Each to their own. The point is I gave an "opinion" and then you made out I was wrong which was impossible anyway because it was my "opinion", I did state that. I'll show a test as well then. I've got a fixed "on" time and adjustable timing so to leave everything the same and make the snubber change will show any effect at all. I might need to turn it off to make the change so I'll probably use a pull starter to get back up to speed quickly for the video. My motor doesn't like to run below 1000 rpm without changing the pulse width or the timing. I'll keep discharging my coils to a higher voltage be it a capacitor or a battery. Even using a 12 volt globe as a load like a snubber slows the motor and no change I make can make it perform like when the coil is discharged to a higher voltage. We need to work with what actually happens in our own setups. Anyway I'll make another clip, I don't want to be misunderstood because of my way of explaining things or whatever reason.
When the coil discharges current doesn't flow through it current flows "from" it, If current flowed through it then a current could be scoped into the coil from the rail when the switch is "off", my intuition tells me that when the switch is "off" no current enters the rail end of the coil because the switch is off, it is the halting of the current that causes the
field to collapse. "Through" and "From" are quite different. Also if current was flowing through the coil it would create a magnetic field, I don't think this is the case. After the switch closes the magnetic field only gets less I think.
How would a person detect and measure a spike in the magnetic field strength, density or size as a result of the collapsing field ?
Cheers
All:
When a coil discharges current always flows through it. Current flowing "from" the coil is all a question of your point of view I guess.
If the coil discharges into a snubber diode then you might be tempted to say that current flows "through" the coil. If the coil discharges into a charging battery you might be tempted to say that current flows "from" the coil. In reality for both cases current flows through the coil and through the load. If the load is "close by" like a snubber diode or "far away" like a charging battery, the exact same process is taking place -> when a coil discharges you observe decreasing current and corresponding decreasing magnetic field, and you can ignore the voltage completely.
QuoteHow would a person detect and measure a spike in the magnetic field strength, density or size as a result of the collapsing field ?
Interesting question. For starters there is no spike in the magnetic field strength when the coil discharges. I would suggest that a simple current sensing resistor in series with the coil will do the job. The faster the current decreases the higher the voltage the coil will generate.
You have to keep in mind that the famous high voltage back-EMF spike is a result of the action that the current is doing. That's not literally true in the sense that any energy discharge from any electrical device by definition is a combination of voltage and current. However, capacitors are thought of as voltage-based devices with variable current, and inductors are thought of as current-based devices with variable voltage - and that is literally true.
For a coil, the voltage is a function of the rate of change of current.
For a capacitor, the current is a function of the rate of change of voltage.
This is carved in stone and if you can "grok" that it helps you analyze how circuits work and interpret your scope captures.
Anyway, you guys seem to be having a lively discussion and I may be able to catch up later.
MileHigh
A few more comments that I am sure some of you are aware of.
It's impossible to open a switch and stop the current flowing in a coil. Of course you know that you get a high-voltage back-EMF spike when you do this. The thing to keep in mind that decreasing current is flowing through the coil when you do this - the main point being that current is still flowing.
So what that means is that the classic line, "the battery is charging from 'pure potential' and no current (or 'almost no current')" is pure bunk. By definition current is flowing. In fact it's the flowing current that is creating what is mistakenly referred to as the "pure potential."
When the switch contacts open the air instantly ionizes and conducts electricity and keeps the current flowing. So if just before the switch opens thee is one amp flowing through the coil, just after the switch opens there is still one amp flowing through the coil.
MileHigh
A suggestion for controlling the pulse timing for a pulse motor:
Let's suppose you have a pulse motor with two rotor magnets 180 degrees apart and only a single drive coil. You can use the the side of the motor that is opposite the drive coil to trigger the timing.
All that you need is two Hall sensor and associated circuits, one to initiate the pulse and the other to end the pulse. Let's call them the start and stop angles. So you can move the Hall sensors around and have complete and absolute control over the start and stop angles for the pulse.
All that you need to do is connect your Hall sensor signals to a set-reset flip-flop. Then the output of the flip-flop will fire the transistor that energizes the coil.
This is really not rocket science and judging by the discussion around here lately the skills are available to do this.
Finally, you simply can't do something like this and fly blind. I have already discussed how you could put a sensor coil 180 degrees away from the drive coil and connect that up to one of your scope channels so that you have a timing reference to work with. That way as you change the angle of your start and stop points for the energizing of the coil, you will be able to see that in real time on your scope. You leave one scope channel on the sensor coil and you move the other scope channel around to look at the logic level that fires the drive coil, or the voltage across the drive coil, or the current through the drive coil, etc.
Think about this: Just hold the non-turning rotor in your hand and switch on the drive coil with pure DC. Feel the torque on the rotor as you move a rotor magnet past the drive coil. We are taking as low tech as possible here, your measuring instrument is your hand! At what angle do you feel the most torque on the rotor? That's your "sweet spot" angle. Armed with that knowledge, you try to make the start and stop Hall sensor angles to be before and after the sweet spot angle. The closer the start and stop angles are to each other, the shorter time the drive coil is energized. Just play around and find the right start and stop angle to give you a "satisfying" rotor RPM and power consumption.
That's the key for getting the most efficient pulse motor when you define efficiency as highest RPM for least power input. At least that's what it looks like to me. You can do all of this with absolute and complete control with two lousy Hall sensors and a twenty-five-cent SR flip-flop.
MileHigh
Quote from: Farmhand on May 02, 2013, 11:06:34 PM
Like i said it depends on what you want, I want as short as possible "on times" so a snubber is counter productive to me. you can't start the next pulse until the first event is over. Snubbers are for switching relays or loads like Regular DC PM motors and stuff in my opinion. Each to their own. The point is I gave an "opinion" and then you made out I was wrong which was impossible anyway because it was my "opinion", I did state that. I'll show a test as well then. I've got a fixed "on" time and adjustable timing so to leave everything the same and make the snubber change will show any effect at all. I might need to turn it off to make the change so I'll probably use a pull starter to get back up to speed quickly for the video. My motor doesn't like to run below 1000 rpm without changing the pulse width or the timing. I'll keep discharging my coils to a higher voltage be it a capacitor or a battery. Even using a 12 volt globe as a load like a snubber slows the motor and no change I make can make it perform like when the coil is discharged to a higher voltage. We need to work with what actually happens in our own setups. Anyway I'll make another clip, I don't want to be misunderstood because of my way of explaining things or whatever reason.
When the coil discharges current doesn't flow through it current flows "from" it, If current flowed through it then a current could be scoped into the coil from the rail when the switch is "off", my intuition tells me that when the switch is "off" no current enters the rail end of the coil because the switch is off, it is the halting of the current that causes the
field to collapse. "Through" and "From" are quite different. Also if current was flowing through the coil it would create a magnetic field, I don't think this is the case. After the switch closes the magnetic field only gets less I think.
How would a person detect and measure a spike in the magnetic field strength, density or size as a result of the collapsing field ?
Cheers
"Like i said it depends on what you want, I want as short as possible "on times" so a snubber is counter productive to me. you can't start the next pulse until the first event is over."
Well then use a shorter pulse and get the rest through the snubber. ;) That is if your pulse is meant to provide motive force to the rotor.
"Snubbers are for switching relays or loads like Regular DC PM motors and stuff in my opinion."
Actually some relays that are meant for very fast action wont use the snubber. But general purpose would. I have seen resistors used. They require a bit more to run, but the resistor limits the freewheel current enough for the contacts to open in a timely fashion and absorb the emf produced
Like I said before, we can use the collapse to charge a cap, through a diode, or just keep the coil active longer with the snubber and the collapse energy is stored in the rotor by pushing longer than the input.
"Each to their own. The point is I gave an "opinion" and then you made out I was wrong which was impossible anyway because it was my "opinion", I did state that. I'll show a test as well then."
Well your opinion was based on facts from your experiments and I was just pointing out that possibly your experiments needed further tinkering to see otherwise.
Didnt mean for it to come out badly. ;)
"I've got a fixed "on" time and adjustable timing so to leave everything the same and make the snubber change will show any effect at all."
What I had found was that I could shorten the pulse if I added the diode across the coil and run the same speeds. Are you running repel or attraction?
"When the coil discharges current doesn't flow through it current flows "from" it, If current flowed through it then a current could be scoped into the coil from the rail when the switch is "off", my intuition tells me that when the switch is "off" no current enters the rail end of the coil because the switch is off, it is the halting of the current that causes the
field to collapse."
When I say 'through', Im talking about the wire of the coil. Like if you wound the coil say 4 layers leaving the 2 leads extended out, then add another 4 layers with those leads accessible also. Now there should be 2 wires coming out of the middle of the coil, between the 2 layers. Connect those to leads to a current measuring shunt resistor. Now the coil is very similar to an 8 layer coil with a little added resistance. If you apply a scope across the resistor and operate the coil, there will be voltage across that resistor and it is an indicator of current flowing through the coil. No? ;) Just explaining my 'through'. ;D
"When the coil discharges current doesn't flow through it current flows "from" it, If current flowed through it then a current could be scoped into the coil from the rail when the switch is "off", my intuition tells me that when the switch is "off" no current enters the rail end of the coil because the switch is off, it is the halting of the current that causes the
field to collapse. "Through" and "From" are quite different. Also if current was flowing through the coil it would create a magnetic field, I don't think this is the case. After the switch closes the magnetic field only gets less I think."
Well if there is no path for the 'current' to flow when the switch is off, the collapse is near instantaneous because relatively no current can flow 'through' the coil because it has no where to go. The speed of that collapse induces very high potential at the ends of the coil . Like a neon transformer will spark to your finger just from one end of the secondary with the other end open. Electrons are being compressed and decompressed from end to end of the coil(open secondary) 'wire'. This is current flow back and forth through the open secondary, how ever small it is without anywhere else to go till we load it, is current flow.The AV plug charging a cap from an open end of a secondary is a good example. ;)
This can be seen in a sim easily enough where the snubber keeps current flowing in the coil, in the same direction as the input after switch off, and the collapse is slower because of Lenz. Less Lenz, faster collapse. ;) When the coil is loaded during collapse, much more current flows during the collapse, thus lenz effect against the collapse and slowing it down. And the reason the collapse produces current is that the field lines are 'cutting' the windings. General Generator action.
Here is an example. If we have a transformer that we only pulse the primary with dc, we will see an output to a load that coincides with the input. But if we put a diode on one lead of the secondary in series with the load so that current cant flow like the diode less example, the secondary wont show output till the primary pulse has stopped. Then the secondary will show output to the load, and it happens because of the collapse from the primary pulse, not the build. ;)
Here is a strange one that some dont know. A simple pulse motor with a diode to a cap from the coil to collect collapse. Then try the diode in either direction. If the input to the motor is say 5v, how did we get more to the capture cap, with the diode either way? Its not from generator action, thats for sure. ;) And its not from the input. ;) ;)
One way, the diode will charge the cap from the input while charging the coil from the input pulse. The diode in other direction will only collect the collapse. But both ways will provide high voltage to the cap. In the direction where the cap charges from the pulse while powering the coil, there is loss there in the charging of the cap directly from the input while the switch is on, but after that the cap is higher and the rest comes from collapse.
How can the collapse charge in both directions? If the field collapses without a load(diode and cap) on the coil, the field goes into a complete reversal, peaks in the other direction and then that second collapse is sent through the diode to the cap, because that second collapse in the opposite direction does produce the polarity for the diode to conduct.
The reason that the field of the open coil can go into complete reversal is the fact that the coil does have a tiny capacitance, along with its inductance, it oscillates. ;) Very high freq oscillation, but still oscillation.
Im not here to mess with you. ;) Just help. ;D
Mags
Well can you measure current into the coil "rail end" during the discharge ? OR is the energy returning to the supply which is connected to the coil at the rail ?
If the coil discharges through itself then where does the energy go ? I think the snubber returns the inductive energy to the supply. We ought to be able to measure current into the coil during the coil collapse if what you say is true, lets do it.
Just making the pulse shorter does not work to keep the same force on the rotor. My rotor is both attracted to the core and repulsed, it can run both ways but really it's the same, the coil negates the attraction or it adds torque itself same thing different magnitude.
Anyway endless argument is pointless, I disagree on several points. But I'm not here to argue either.
I wasn't asking for help, I'm fine.
Cheers
Farmhand:
If a coil self-resonates the energy is dissipated in the wire of the coil. If you put a reverse-biased diode across a coil, a.k.a.; a "snubber," when the transistor switches off all of the energy is dissipated in the diode and the wire of the coil. If there is still a bit of "push" left in the coil to help the rotor along like Magluvin does, then some of the coil energy goes into the push.
The true bifilar trick that we discussed a while back is one way to pump the coil energy back into the source battery.
I encourage you guys to keep exploring. For example, you get your pulse motor running, so what next? How about measuring your RPM per input watt and seeing how that changes as the speed increases. In theory it should start going down as the rotor pushes harder against the air friction. Or how about hooking up your pulse motors to a generator so you get some useful output from it. How about trying to come up with some sort of metric so that you can compare different pulse motor builds. This is very much of an apples vs. oranges game.
A tough one is to try to measure the moment of inertia of your rotor. That's the key to figuring out the mechanical power required to keep the rotor turning at a given RPM. Then you can compare the average electrical input power to the mechanical power required to spin the rotor. I know I am shooting blanks but what the hell. This is the kind of stuff that I did in junior college in the 1970s using strip chart recorders.
MileHigh
Sorry about another reply. :-[ It's an interesting subject but a bit off topic here. Anyway I had arguments with "trained" folks on these forums about how it is said that coils work on current not voltage. In my opinion it's energy not necessarily either current or voltage but the effect of a certain voltage on a certain resistance will result in a certain current.
I argued that if a coil is switched to ground like with a low side switch then with the closed loop current theory current must flow immediately to ground and through the battery at the same magnitude it is leaving the battery. But I was told that there is a delay because of the inductance, I was told that for a small period as the magnetic field is building there is no current leaving the coil but there is current entering the coil. And so I figure when the coil discharges the same thing happens in reverse.
My original argument was that "electron current may occur" or "measured current" but the charge would be stripped from the current to build the field.
So that we would have a current of "electrons bumping each other" and a current which is the flow of charge or charges which is independent of the electron movement but the electron movement is the "footprint" or "wake" of the charges. ie. a big boat going fast makes a big "wake" and even if the boat was invisible the wake could be seen and measured to determine the size of the invisible boat. ;) The energy of the charges would be related to the magnitude of the current, which is related to the potential of the applied voltage that caused it, and the resistance it faces. So the energy is in the flow of charges not the flow of electrons, flow = current. The coil in my opinion works on the flow of charges not the flow of electrons so much although they flow together It is complicated. But it's all just my opinion. I said at the time of the argument with the other person that I would like to test that and see that there is no flow of current from the coil negative when the magnetic field is building, which would be similar to testing to see that there is no current entering the coil during the coil field collapse.
Cheers
P.S> Going by the argument that current enters the coil while the field is building but no current leaves the coil while the field is building, it should be possible to switch a coil to ground an open the switch again before any current at all flows to ground through the switch. Is it possible ? That's the question. In that case current would leave the battery positive but none would enter the battery negative. To me it doesn't make sense. Because that is not supposed to be possible. If a diode is between the battery positive and the coil
and the coil discharges back to the coil then no current could flow to the battery negative.
..
Yep.
The MoI of the rotor can usually be calculated quite accurately from the geometry and the material densities involved, and then the power dissipation required to turn the rotor at any given RPM can be determined by timing unpowered rundowns. A chart recorder (or a modern DSO that has a long-duration "chart recorder" mode) is a definite asset for this kind of work.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJavCZX_-PI
Alternatively, a known load like a model airplane propeller can be used to determine the power dissipation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2koW-oC5hJs
If somebody wants to be really adventurous there is an interesting observation they could try making on their scope.
You pulse a coil and you can observe the exponential rise in current through the coil. Nothing new there.
But can you see something different happening when you pulse a coil to keep a rotor turning? The answer is yes, you should see that the current rises more slowly than expected - possibly??? - or possibly something else happens. Note that the instantaneous voltage across the coil times the instantaneous current though the coil is the instantaneous power being pumped into the coil. And the instantaneous power over the time that you are pulsing the coil represents the total energy you put into the coil. That's the energy that you see when you get the back-EMF spike. Or is it?
You know intuitively that when the drive coil is making the rotor turn, that means that the coil is exporting energy and transferring that energy into the spinning rotor. Therefore, you have to expect that when you pulse the coil and pump power into it, and the coil is driving the rotor, that _some_ of the instantaneous power must be going into the rotor, somehow. Can you observe this phenomenon with your scope?
So since you know that the coil is exporting energy to the rotor, that means that something must be different in the current waveform for the coil when it is driving the rotor. You know this because the voltage waveform is a constant, so the current has to change. Again, can you observe that on your scope? Is there a way for you to develop a test that definitively shows that the the waveforms that you are observing for the coil clearly show that the coil is driving the rotor. It's almost like there should be some observable "phantom" energy that you put into the coil, but you can't get it back in the back-EMF spike because some coil energy made the conversion over to rotational mechanical energy in the rotor.
Just some ideas in case anybody wants to open up some new territory.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on May 03, 2013, 03:39:22 AM
If somebody wants to be really adventurous there is an interesting observation they could try making on their scope.
You pulse a coil and you can observe the exponential rise in current through the coil. Nothing new there.
But can you see something different happening when you pulse a coil to keep a rotor turning? The answer is yes, you should see that the current rises more slowly than expected - possibly??? - or possibly something else happens. Note that the instantaneous voltage across the coil times the instantaneous current though the coil is the instantaneous power being pumped into the coil. And the instantaneous power over the time that you are pulsing the coil represents the total energy you put into the coil. That's the energy that you see when you get the back-EMF spike. Or is it?
You know intuitively that when the drive coil is making the rotor turn, that means that the coil is exporting energy and transferring that energy into the spinning rotor. Therefore, you have to expect that when you pulse the coil and pump power into it, and the coil is driving the rotor, that _some_ of the instantaneous power must be going into the rotor, somehow. Can you observe this phenomenon with your scope?
So since you know that the coil is exporting energy to the rotor, that means that something must be different in the current waveform for the coil when it is driving the rotor. You know this because the voltage waveform is a constant, so the current has to change. Again, can you observe that on your scope? Is there a way for you to develop a test that definitively shows that the the waveforms that you are observing for the coil clearly show that the coil is driving the rotor. It's almost like there should be some observable "phantom" energy that you put into the coil, but you can't get it back in the back-EMF spike because some coil energy made the conversion over to rotational mechanical energy in the rotor.
Just some ideas in case anybody wants to open up some new territory.
MileHigh
I agree MileHigh and thanks for the info Tinsel, I have done a rough test to show less energy recovered when a rotor is loaded more, more load on the rotor less energy recovered. The coil does give energy to the rotor, the rotor does not get spun with no expenditure of energy after recovery even considering losses in other areas like diodes and resistance.
I can show on my scope with this motor that when I put the charging coil in place the voltage it produced into the cap for the drive coil is less, just a bit but it is clear. I'll find the video and note the time of it. I did show it I think. People don't see it though. The recovered energy is less because the coil gives energy to the rotor.
Cheers
Farmhand:
The person you quoted:
QuoteBut I was told that there is a delay because of the inductance, I was told that for a small period as the magnetic field is building there is no current leaving the coil but there is current entering the coil.
That's a metaphysically wrong statement. Current entering one side of the coil is equal to the current leaving the other side of the coil.
I will mention this and you might get the analogy (I have said it a million times before). A coil stores energy. A flywheel also stores energy. So imagine the current through the coil is going around in circles through the coil. That's just to help you remember the analogy: The current flow through a coil is analogous to the the rotational speed of a flywheel. Then part two of the analogy is that the voltage across the coil is like the torque on the flywheel.
Then for dramatic effect: The analogy is absolutely real, they are essentially identical.
So, any circuit that you can dream up with a coil I can explain to you how a flywheel can fit into that circuit. (We are excluding transformer coupling between coils here, but everything else is fair game.)
What this really means is that an inductor is juts an electrical version of a flywheel, and by the same token, a flywheel is just a mechanical version of an inductor.
This takes the "magic" out of coils and brings them into the real world. Anything a coil can do a flywheel can do, period.
If you are lost and you can't make the connection or envision a thought experiment, then let me give you a starting point. What about the infamous back-EMF spike. How the hell does that relate to a flywheel?
Please think about it for a few days.
MileHigh
OK found it, from 7:20 in the linked video, first we see the cap voltage at 23.6 volts, then I move the charging coil away from driving the rotor and the cap voltage increases
to 26 volts at 8:06, the pulse width remains constant, but the rotor slows when the charging coil is moved away and the cap voltage rises. When the charging coil helps to drive the rotor energy is transferred to the rotor by the from coil/core/field.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1_KlgJ09Bs&list=UUBXqDE_ub_PAQRA9LfStmtA&index=4
Cheers
P.S. This is the waveform from my current setup at low speed with double pulses. I have changed the circuit a bit so that the charge battery is in series with the charging coil after the diode. It discharges into two levels looks like. Just looking at one event waveform. Can you see what is happening ?
Quote from: TinselKoala on May 02, 2013, 07:46:31 AM
@Conrad: Why in the world are you using a P-channel mosfet in that circuit? The equivalent or even better rated N-channel mosfet would be cheaper and more "logical" in that single-transistor "high side switch" circuit, wouldn't it?
@TinselKoala: your statement made me think and try a N-Channel MOSFET with my Hall sensor.
( Version 1 of my ring magnet spinner, see e.g. at http://www.overunity.com/11350/confirming-the-delayed-lenz-effect/msg359105/#msg359105 (http://www.overunity.com/11350/confirming-the-delayed-lenz-effect/msg359105/#msg359105) )
My Version 1 of the magnet spinner works also with a single N-Channel MOSFET, but it is slightly less efficient because the Hall Sensor is about 55% High and 45% Low per turn of the ring magnet. So, in the N-Channel version the current flows a bit too long (in comparison with the P-Channel version).
But in practice that does not matter much, one would use the N-Channel MOSFET because it costs less and has a lower on-resistance.
I also played with a trigger coil:
The MOSFETs are not suitable for a trigger coil because they need up to 5 V at the base to switch on completely. It works with a trigger coil, but only at high rpm and the thing is difficult to start. I have to try a trigger coil with an ordinary NPN transistor (which switches on e.g. at 1 Volt at the base).
Greetings, Conrad
@Conrad: thanks for the response and the experiment... but....
The N-channel mosfet is usually installed with the drain towards the positive rail and the source (source of electrons) to the negative rail. In other words, use the bottom schematic, not the top one, but put the N-ch mosfet in with the Source pin to the negative rail and the Drain pin to the low side of the load, and the high side of the load to the positive rail. The mosfet, when on, will conduct in both directions, but you may see a difference in turnon times with the arrangement I suggest. I doubt if it will make a significant difference in your pulse motor, but it's normal practice with N-ch mosfets to connect the Source pin to the common negative (ground) rail of the circuit.
The 5.6 K pullup resistor value may also be increased, or even changed for a pull-down (connect to negative rail instead of positive) for significant effects on the circuit performance. I usually use a pulldown, connecting the gate to the source right at the mosfet pins with a suitable resistor like 100K.
ETA: Never mind, I'm seeing things again I guess, since the bottom diagram now looks correct to me. But consider the resistor function and experiment with a pulldown instead of a pullup.
Also, you could use a bipolar transistor with a pickup coil and use its output to trigger the mosfet...
Sorry Mags I know you only want to help. OK guys, this is the arrangement of my motor circuit, showing the current sense resistors I have in place at the moment. Any suggestions ? I'll need to scope the current into the coil at the same time as I scope the drain waveform I guess ?
To explain the operation, after the first pulse the charging coil discharges into C2 which charges it to about 20 volts when 12 volts supply is used, then on the next pulse the capacitor C2 discharges through the motor coil, then the charging coil recharges the capacitor C2 and the cycle repeats. So the charging coil is lagging in phase to the motor coil and the motor coil supply (C2) goes to almost Zero volts, if I use a snubber there it will try to charge the capacitor C2 which is at zero volts and that is no good, it doesn't work well like that.
In the circuit how it is configured now when the motor coil is discharging it still aids to charge the capacitor "C2" because the charge battery is in series with the charging coil then C2, doesn't it ? That is where the charging coil discharges into. But if I try to connect directly the flyback diode to the capacitor C2 or even directly to the charging coil some performance is lost. I've already done the experiments but informally. Mags I can show you if you wish.
The drawing might explain help explain the wave form shown above.
Cheers
P.S. I wasn't able to draw a 45 degree coil quick enough, so I drew it how I made it originally before I used the charging coil to aid the rotation, and showed point "A" and "B" for where the charging coil can be placed.
Ok there's the shots, the top two are the snubbed ones with diode connected back to the coil and the bottom two are the way the drawing is. The pulse width remained the same and snubbed the frequency was quite a bit lower as can be seen. My conclusion is it's better to discharge the inductive energy into a higher voltage.
Yellow trace is the current through a 0.1 Ohm resistor (R2) and the Blue trace is the drain of the mosfet with the scope grounds together.
Bottom left shot is a false trigger, I'll try to get a better one and fix the picture. The pulse width is fixed at 3.16 mS and I do not change it, I can video it if necessary.
Oh please note that I had to change the volts per division for the blue trace in the bottom shots from 10 to 20 to fit it in.
My discharge voltage and current wave forms fit together like hand in glove, so Mag's you were right in that way for my setup I think, but it was to my benefit anyway so I'm stoked with the wave forms of the motor, I wonder what the peak currents and power were for the charging/aiding coil. :) The input power varied very little.
However with the snubber the current in the coil stops immediately.
..
Quote from: TinselKoala on May 03, 2013, 07:31:27 AM
@Conrad: thanks for the response and the experiment... but....
The N-channel mosfet is usually installed with the drain towards the positive rail and the source (source of electrons) to the negative rail. In other words, use the bottom schematic, not the top one, but put the N-ch mosfet in with the Source pin to the negative rail and the Drain pin to the low side of the load, and the high side of the load to the positive rail. The mosfet, when on, will conduct in both directions, but you may see a difference in turnon times with the arrangement I suggest. I doubt if it will make a significant difference in your pulse motor, but it's normal practice with N-ch mosfets to connect the Source pin to the common negative (ground) rail of the circuit.
The 5.6 K pullup resistor value may also be increased, or even changed for a pull-down (connect to negative rail instead of positive) for significant effects on the circuit performance. I usually use a pulldown, connecting the gate to the source right at the mosfet pins with a suitable resistor like 100K.
ETA: Never mind, I'm seeing things again I guess, since the bottom diagram now looks correct to me. But consider the resistor function and experiment with a pulldown instead of a pullup.
Also, you could use a bipolar transistor with a pickup coil and use its output to trigger the mosfet...
@TinselKoala: you are not seeing things, I changed the drawing a bit later because I noticed the error with the Drain of the N-Chanenel MOSFET (error was only in the drawing, a copy paste error). I will try the pull down 100K resistor at the base of the MOSFET. But I am not sure whether my Hall sensor needs a pull up resistor for clean switching.
Trigger coil and MJE13007:
I did some tests with a trigger coil (the trigger coil and the two drive coils are identical).
The efficiency is about the same as with these circuits http://www.overunity.com/11350/confirming-the-delayed-lenz-effect/msg359277/#msg359277 (http://www.overunity.com/11350/confirming-the-delayed-lenz-effect/msg359277/#msg359277) ,
but I can go up to 30 V which gives me 10800 rpm for 1.5 Watt.
But the vibrations are very strong at 10800 rpm , so, I will stay at 6000 rpm for future magic coil tests. (The mechanical problems are not easy to solve; one needed to balance ring magnet and axle, the ball bearings have to be fitted very precisely; all this is beyond my skills).
The trigger coil has a draw back. Starting the ring magnet spinner is not easy because the trigger coil needs to generate about 2 Volt to start things going. One can start by holding the trigger coil closer to the ring magnet and then when it span up one places it further away to avoid drag. This is of course not practical, so, a Hall sensor might be better.
I will try the transistor MJE13007 with the Hall sensor (needs a resistor to limit the base current from the hall sensor output).
Greetings, Conrad
@Farmhand: thank you for posting the very clear circuit diagram. Interesting, the position of your charging coil corresponds to the optimal position of the trigger coil in my last test (see my above post).
Greetings, Conrad
Skycollection's new toroid core input comparison:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rfv6sWSk9QY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rfv6sWSk9QY)
Farmhand:
In your schematic, are the charging coil and the motor coil on the same core? You have the same designation "MC1" for both coils.
I can only make some general comments. The lower traces show that when the MOSFET switches off that there is an "orderly discharge" of the coil energy through the D2 diode and into B2. The upper traces show a near-instant drop off in the current so that is generating a voltage spike across the coils.
Certainly you see the classic exponential rise in the current through R2 and the coils when the MOSFET switches on because of the property of inductance.
I have to confess I see what looks more or less right in the blue traces but by the same token I am confused and am not sure where you have the ground probes.
QuoteTo explain the operation, after the first pulse the charging coil discharges into C2 which charges it to about 20 volts when 12 volts supply is used
That's what it looks like and I have no doubt that you observe 20 volts across C2. Here is the thing to ponder: Let's say when the MOSFET switches off that there is one amp of current flowing through the charging coil and the motor coil. Look at the junction of R1, R2, and C2. By definition, just after the MOSFET switches off one amp has to be flowing through R1 and one amp has to be flowing through R2. That leaves no current to flow into C2. Therefore at first look, all of the current that flows through the charging coil has to flow through R1 and R2 and onwards, and it does not flow into C2.
So what I am suggesting to you is that it merits further analysis, if you are up to it. Trust me, I am not trying to give you a hard time. It's simply hard to see all of the subtleties.
Here is what I would do if I wanted to figure out exactly what was going on: I would do the old sensor coil trick. I would hook up one scope channel to a separate and isolated sensor coil to get an independent timing reference for the cycling of the motor. Then, you can put the second scope channel _anywhere_ in the circuit. So your are free from any constraints of where you put your ground probe. You can look at all of your CSRs, and look at the voltage across C2. Looking at the voltage across C2 allows you to _derive_ the current through C2 because you know that the current through C2 is simply proportional to the rate of change of voltage across C2.
This is a lot of work, no doubt, and you probably aren't going to go there. In the end what you can get is a timing diagram that actually describes the operation of the circuit. You can line up scope captures with some image editing software so that you end up with somewhere between say five and a dozen traces that show you exactly what is going on. How C2 gets charged up will be answered with that exercise. I did all this in electronics labs more than 30 years ago. There is a tangible sense of satisfaction and accomplishment when you do this.
MileHigh
The charging coil is a separate coil with a separate core this is clear in a couple of the video's, the MC1 label was a mistake it should be MC2.
This is the way wave form at the Cap C2 looks. I've already showed it. The cap fills to almost double the supply then discharges and refills again.
It's a classic "de-q'd" charging cap wave form. If there was no "de-Q-ing" diode the 20 volts or so would return to the supply before the next bang if the charging circuit is not at full resonance. It's the same wave form I get at the charging cap of my Tesla coil circuits. And it would be the wave form as would be produced by the Tesla IGNITER FOR GAS ENGINES patent device (if it had a "de-q-ing" diode). The purpose was to get a higher voltage into C2 to dump through the motor coil. I'ts not perfect but it works way better than with just the one Motor coil and the charging coil 12 inches away on the bench. So it's a win win for me. I'm happy to go ahead and develop it further.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi227.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fdd168%2FToey1%2FSupplydischargecapacitor.jpg&hash=a321ca4dd17338bf894f3fe50aafbebf2dd315a4) (http://s227.photobucket.com/user/Toey1/media/Supplydischargecapacitor.jpg.html)
In the four shots picture the two scope grounds are together at the motor coil end of R2, one probe goes to the other side of R2 and the other goes to the drain, I've described that as well.
I'd like to go on and make a generator coil but if there is any wave form in particular you would like to see, i'll do it if I can. I'll remove the de-q-ing diode and get a shot from the cap C2 probed at C2 with the ground on the circuit ground, I did mean to do that.
I apologize for editing posts my computer is occasionally shutting down so I gotta save or possibly lose.
I've found a couple of ways to do away with the second battery but none work quite like the battery to give a neat looking current wave form.
The battery has low resistance but has 12 volts of built in "counter emf". I think the only best way is to keep a cap at 12 volts somehow while allowing the spike to build the voltage in the cap then dump it through the charging coil every now and then maybe once every few rotations or something. Or use a small cap so it can be dumped every bang.
Milehigh if you look back in the thread you will find a comparison of the currents through the two coils.
EDIT: AS you can see the cap C2 drops to Zero volts, if the cap C2 is at 20v and the supply is at 12 volts when the mosfet is switched on the current flows from C2 through the Motor coil before the current in the charging coil can start to flow because of C2's higher voltage, there is some time when current flows through both at the same time but the start of the current is delayed in the charging coil. This is evident in the current wave form comparison.
The idea is to use short pulse widths and higher input voltages with the correct LC relationship to secure the correct difference in current phases.
Cheers
..
QuoteSkycollection's new toroid core input comparison:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rfv6sWSk9QY
It's apparently a good idea, a coil with a toroid in the middle of.
In other way, I see that the output voltage decrease with the rotor accelerate, the amperage must do the same thing.:(
Milehigh, Here's the voltage and current wave forms. For the scope shots the yellow is the motor coil and Blue is the charging coil. EDIT: And for the voltage measurements the scope grounds were at the circuit ground the probes at the positive ends of the coils. The thing is there is only 12 volts applied to the charging coil, because of the diode and the the way it works after the charging coil discharges into the cap the positive end of it becomes at the voltage of the charging cap it discharged into. you can see the 12 volts battery voltage applied to it drop slightly under load then rise in volts to the same as the capacitor C2. Because the motor coil has over 20 volts applied to it the current moves quicker and starts just before the charging coil current, the charging coil current ends as is shown in the scope shot 6 mS after the motor coil current ends and looks like the motor coil current starts 12 mS before the charge coil current, (my charge coil has less inductance it should be the same as the motor coil and will be soon). The delay in the peak current seems to be about 12 mS.
We can see the voltage applied is practically in sync to begin with, but the inductor voltage curves down as the motor coil discharges the capacitor C2.
The frequency of the motor was higher when the current wave forms were taken, it was 74.63 Hz. So the phase delay can be calculated from that being there is two magnets on the rotor.
I thought it was obvious. There is a definite delay in the phase of the currents and it can be manipulated by known means and utilized easily enough. :) Even if there was no delay the charging coil could still aid the rotation, it's just a matter of placement. I'll do some calculations and see if I can find the phase angle delay and such things.
To see the divisions better just download the pic and view blown up a bit maybe if anyone wants to be accurate.
The delay in the phase of the currents is related to the pulse width in a way but also due to voltage over inductance and resistance effects as well as the return current from the discharge of the motor coil.
Well that's all based on if I'm reading the scope correctly.
Cheers
P.S. I got a reading of the phase and shots below, with a duty of 30% "on" time for the mosfet I get a phase difference of 40 degrees which is about where my coil is. The setup is using 400 mA and running at 2500 rpm. I added a 1 uF capacitor between the charging coil positive where the charge current return is and ground to catch the voltage spike as shown. ;)
..
Here is an example of an advantage. This is a shot of the capacitor C2 voltage and the boost converter PWM bursts at 5 kHz 20% duty to keep the input voltage to 17 volts or so. We can see that the voltage of the capacitor C2 is now about 24 volts and now does not reach zero volts. Because there is not enough time due to reducing the pulse width.
Boost converter is voltage controlled by the 14M2 picaxe chip and the duty changed by a voltage divider on an analogue digital converter input to it. I'm writing new code but it's tough going when I have to teach myself new things while doing other stuff.
Cheers
Quote from: PiCéd on May 04, 2013, 06:27:10 AM
It's apparently a good idea, a coil with a toroid in the middle of.
In other way, I see that the output voltage decrease with the rotor accelerate, the amperage must do the same thing. :(
At no time did Skycollection measure any output voltage in his last video. The air core pancake as power coil alone consumed 18.36 watts but produced only 2800 r.p.m. The Toroid Pancake hybrid power coil used only 5 watts but produced 4800 r.p.m. That's roughly 6 times as efficient as a power coil. The magnetic ferrite toroid allows the unit to run as an Adams attraction motor. Stark difference.
QuoteAt no time did Skycollection measure any output voltage in his last video.
Mh, sorry I I wanted to talk about this video when skycollection speak with Flux4Energizer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a28DqHF5tGM&list=UUWqI0GXGprm81g3gkVa5v_w&index=2
Skycollion said he measured out the voltage of the output.
Quote from: PiCéd on May 05, 2013, 05:52:20 AM
Mh, sorry I I wanted to talk about this video when skycollection speak with Flux4Energizer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a28DqHF5tGM&list=UUWqI0GXGprm81g3gkVa5v_w&index=2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a28DqHF5tGM&list=UUWqI0GXGprm81g3gkVa5v_w&index=2)
Skycollion said he measured out the voltage of the output.
Right. I noticed Skycollection's youtube respnonse to Flux4's question:
"Yes you right, i measured with the load on and the voltage out drop dramaticaly, i will continue with more experiments and thanks for your advices and positive commentaries. Do you have any idea how to prevent it from falling THE OUTPUT ..?"
Here's a circuit for a single battery pulse motor folks.
How it works is the spike charges the capacitor C3 briefly because of the
inductance/impedance of the coil L1, C3 has the least impedance I think ( capacitors in parallel will help lower the cap impedance),
then after C3 is charged the inductor L1 discharges C3 into C2 to be reused.
In my setup the inductive spike charges C3 to about 25 volts for about 400 microseconds
before C3 discharges through L1.
D4 is a blocking diode so that the rotor magnets don't try to charge C2.
Doing this has greatly improved my motor I can run it from 300 mA at 1900 rpm
right up to 1.7 amps Amps for 3500 rpm, my mosfets don't have heat sinks
and stay cool at 300 mA input they feel cold. Performance is a fair bit
better than when there is a charge battery. But the charge battery can still be
used with this return circuit just by putting the battery in series with the flyback diode. ;)
The inductive energy return still catches the 50 volt spike and makes it 400 uS wide then put's it in C2.
Works a treat and very simple.
And some wave forms.
Cheers
Farmhand:
I think that you are doing an amazing job in advancing the art of reusing pulse motor inductive energy to get better performance. I apologize in the sense that I can't get totally "plugged in" to what you are doing. It takes time and energy and full commitment to do that. If I was a builder I would try to replicate what you are doing myself.
I will comment briefly on your posting #1319 and the waveform captures and associated schematic.
I think that you are on the right track and what I have to say will hopefully be in accord with what you are saying but I will put it in my own terms. Nor am I necessarily going to be correct in my analysis. When the MOSFET switches on the motor coil starts to conduct current. Like you state, that current is supplied by C2, so we see the voltage on C2 drop. If the MOSFET was on for a very long time, then the charging coil would have to start to conduct. In looking at your current waveforms, it looks to me like the MOSFET switches off when current in the motor coil reaches its peak. Then the motor coil current starts to decrease. When it's doing this it's charging B2 and working in tandem with B1 to get the current flowing through the charging coil. Then it looks like the inductive energy in the charging coil keeps the current flowing to charge up C2 back to 20 volts after the current has stopped flowing through the motor coil.
Something like that. So it looks like the pulse width on the MOSFET is narrow enough to turn C2 into a major agent with respect to where the currents flow. I could probably explain the voltage spike on the charging coil if I did more analysis and I had my own setup.
You are coming up with some great little circuits. Even though they are fairly simple looking circuits the analysis is not trivial at all and the diodes can complicate the analysis because of their switching capabilities. I will just repeat what I said before but put a different spin on it. The low-tech way to document the analysis of the circuit would be to get a notebook that has graph paper. Start with the pulse waveform that drives the MOSFET switch and sketch it in pencil. Then probe around the circuit and document all of the voltages and currents that you think need to be documented relative to the initial pulse waveform. Just sketch them in in pencil lined up below the pulse waveform and develop a picture of what is going on. In your circuit the width of the pulse is critical in determining how it behaves.
When you are a digital or analog design engineer you are supposed to record every single signal on your board design and put it into a test log book. In the modern era you have application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs) which are basically custom silicon so you can't see what going on on the die itself. So all of the waveforms inside the integrated circuit are simulated with Spice software and the models for the gates and propagation delays, etc. A software design rule checker can check to make sure that the signals inside the integrated circuit are respecting the requirements for the design. Nonetheless, engineers will have long meetings where they look at the various signal plots for what's going on on the silicon die and verify for themselves that they are comfortable with what the software simulation is saying. So they effectively do a "virtual test log" and look at all of the critical signals to make sure they are okay.
Great job!
MileHigh
Yes Milehigh, That is how it works. :) I was beginning to think no one got it, but you nailed it pretty much. ;D Thanks
I could see it working in my head no problem. The uses of "resonance" in time delays is actually quite simple.
Well what I call resonant effects anyway, that is coils take time to charge and so do capacitors, they shift phase ect.
The last drawing with the inductive return is a thing many people have been trying to do, the answer was simple,
usually the answer is a capacitor, a coil a diode or all three. :) With all the complicated circuits I've seen to do it I must say
I don't see why it needed to be difficult. Doing the hard yards to understand resonance in Tesla coils has taught me much.
The motor is working very well now and I've learned to use it fairly well so as to keep the phases correct for the rotational speed.
I'm beginning to be able to hear when the motor is "singing" and running efficiently. The torque is impressive for what was originally
a single coil motor with a charging circuit now it is much more efficient, faster and has a lot more torque, with another set of coils on
the opposite side of the rotor it would be faster and more powerful because the "on" times can be shorter if desired due to the
greater forces exerted on the rotor, the two charging coils could swing on an see saw arrangement to adjust the angle of both
charging coils in unison in a "four" coil setup. And it could be done by mechanical or manual or controlled by a servo and the picaxe.
Same with the pulse timing that can also be varied by a servo and picaxe to move the photo reflector or by software in the picaxe
I don't like the software approach to the pulse timing because of the code required and using hardware pulse processing it's much quicker.
For low frequency motor coils that's ok but my micro's are only the beginner ones and I have to teach myself how to code from scratch by
using the picaxe manual and intuition.
Here is sample of some some code I wrote for a 10 power level boost converter the battery alone and 9 levels of boost, the levels can be voltage controlled levels or current control levels for input power control. if the boost is controlled by the voltage level of C2 then the picaxe can work to keep the motor at a constant speed under load so that the pulse width and timing need not be changed when a load is added. The voltage is sensed from a voltage divider and the PWM switched off to limit voltage, I'm working on the automatic down or up staging to change levels based on the sensed voltage.
I's all open source the code the circuit and the idea. For those wanting others not to use their idea's or the idea's of others without giving credit, they now must give credit to me if they use my idea's. the others need not :). As far as I am aware no one is doing just what I am doing here. The "two phases from one motor" is my design and the "inductive energy return" method I just showed is my idea as well. :)
Innovation won't come from copying other people's work and thinking.
main0:
readadc B.5,b5
if b5 => 120 then boost4
if b5 => 40 and b5 < 120 then boost3
if b5 < 40 then boost0
goto main0
boost0:
do
pwmout B.2, off
readadc B.5,b5
if b5 => 40 then boost1
pauseus 20
loop
boost1:
do
readadc C.4,b4
if b4 => 46 then pwmout B.2, 49, 0 endif
if b4 < 45 then pwmout B.2, 49, 20 endif
readadc B.5,b5
if b5 < 40 then boost0
if b5 => 60 then boost2
loop
boost2:
do
readadc C.4,b4
if b4 => 48 then pwmout B.2, 49, 0 endif
if b4 < 47 then pwmout B.2, 49, 30 endif
readadc B.5,b5
if b5 => 90 then boost3
if b5 < 60 then boost1
loop
boost3:
do
readadc C.4,b4
if b4 => 50 then pwmout B.2, 49, 0 endif
if b4 < 49 then pwmout B.2, 49, 40 endif
readadc B.5,b5
if b5 => 120 then boost4
if b5 < 90 then boost2
loop
boost4:
do
readadc C.4,b4
if b4 => 52 then pwmout B.2, 49, 0 endif
if b4 < 51 then pwmout B.2, 49, 50 endif
readadc B.5,b5
if b5 => 150 then boost5
if b5 < 120 then boost3
loop
boost5:
do
readadc C.4,b4
if b4 => 54 then pwmout B.2, 49, 0 endif
if b4 < 53 then pwmout B.2, 49, 60 endif
readadc B.5,b5
if b5 => 170 then boost6
if b5 < 150 then boost4
loop
boost6:
do
readadc C.4,b4
if b4 => 55 then pwmout B.2, 49, 0 endif
if b4 < 54 then pwmout B.2, 49, 70 endif
readadc B.5,b5
if b5 => 190 then boost7
if b5 < 170 then boost5
loop
boost7:
do
readadc C.4,b4
if b4 => 56 then pwmout B.2, 49, 0 endif
if b4 < 55 then pwmout B.2, 49, 80 endif
readadc B.5,b5
if b5 => 210 then boost8
if b5 < 190 then boost6
loop
boost8:
do
readadc C.4,b4
if b4 => 58 then pwmout B.2, 49, 0 endif
if b4 < 57 then pwmout B.2, 49, 90 endif
readadc B.5,b5
if b5 => 230 then boost9
if b5 < 190 then boost7
loop
boost9:
do
readadc C.4,b4
if b4 => 59 then pwmout B.2, 49, 0 endif
if b4 < 58 then pwmout B.2, 49, 100 endif
readadc B.5,b5
if b5 < 230 then boost8
loop
If we all ignore the fake OU claiming "Guru's" with agenda's and work together, we could advance in leaps and bounds. But I am always trying to explain that I do not care what Thane says or Utkin or Don Smith, what they say is obviously not true if we investigate properly. The argument I get at times is madness, people talk at me in a condescending way like I know nothing.
We are all capable of the same things if we use our own hard work to do the experiments it will pay off in the end.
When I get a generator coil set up it should be a piece of cake to get an accelerating rotor under load using resonance principals
and load switching.
Thanks for the compliment MH, appreciated. :)
Cheers
P.S. Milehigh, With this arrangement I think I can actually show that when the rotor is loaded or accelerating under certain
conditions the inductive energy voltage spike completely disappears because the energy is all given to the rotor. I see it on the scope. The statement made by some that the mechanical energy is free and all the energy put into the coil can be recovered
without loss due to driving the rotor is a flat out lie in my opinion. the people making these statements are either misinformed
deceptive, or just lying to forward their own agenda's, likely hype and money. Time for them to fess up, prove it or risk their reputations. Well that's my opinion anyway.
As far as all the diodes go with respect to power dissipation, the 1N5822 Shottkey diodes are great, three 1N5822 diodes should dissipate less power than just one FR307 fast recovery diode, the flyback diode sees too much voltage to use a 1N5822 there I think they are rated at 40 volts from memory, I could use a better diode there though it only needs to handle 1 Ampere or so.
..
Quote from: Farmhand on May 06, 2013, 02:28:54 AM
snip...
If we all ignore the fake OU claiming "Guru's" with agenda's and work together, we could advance in leaps and bounds. But I am always trying to explain that I do not care what Thane says or Utkin or Don Smith, what they say is obviously not true if we investigate properly.
snip...
If by leaping and bounding you mean the enabling of simple, cheap and easy to build, highly efficient motors and or generators, then I agree wholeheartedly. If however you mean O/U, then I simply wish you luck.
The Gurus want to mystify things that are easily explained to maintain their Guru status and further their own agendas, such as touting for "research funds".
I've never made it a secret that I don't believe O/U can be found in simple pulse motors and or generators. But high efficiencies are always something to strive for. Higher efficiencies using cheap abundant materials and simple production methods are needed everywhere.
It is not enough to seek out new energy sources, while existing ones dwindle. In the meantime we must redesign our existing infrastructures and consumer goods with more efficient energy saving ones. We also need to "redesign" our consumerist mentality.
One day the great pie in the sky "O/U" may happen, but in the meantime we all need to consume less instead of dreaming big about all the wonderful things we could do with limitless energy. By all means dream, but also do something practical to lessen energy expenditure.
Any research which endevours to improve on things, O/U or not, is a good thing. For those who seek O/U, good luck.
In the meantime, consume less and continue to improve on things.
Good work Farmhand, keep on keepin on ....... KneeDeep .... Nature is a minimalist.
Back to coils, I have a question. What happens if we take a pancake coil bifilar or not and place it in close proximity to the rotor magnets, so that the spiral windings are in the same "plane" as the rotor (circle to circle) and the spiral coil is a band of windings right next to the side of the diametrically magnetized tube magnets, so that the magnets rotate right next to the spiral coil windings continuously ? Nothing ? What if I shield part of the coil from the magnetism ? So that the coil gets pulses of magnet flux in the windings ? I might try that. ;D That will be my idea as well, I'll call it "PLANAR FLUX GATING". If it works that is. hehehe, I'll make a drawing. ;) Maybe it has already been done.
Cheers
Hi Farmhand,
Well, a drawing could help indeed. If I understand your proposed setup correctly the pancake coil and the rotor disk would look like a figure of 8 from the side (or putting it otherwise like two normal bicycle wheel) i.e. they both are in the same plane, right?
Now my understanding is that a pancake coil (which has just the thickness of the wire diameter it is wound from) has one of its magnetic poles in the middle center and the other at the outside circumference all around and you swap them by changing the current direction.
This would mean that if the outside circular edge of a pancake is say N all around then a diametrically magnetized ring or tube magnet will either attract or repel the pancake edge, depending on just which pole the diametrical magnet faces the edge. Nevertheless, an interesting setup it would look for sure.
Hi Conrad,
I have just gone through your recent tests and sorry to hear the mechanical problems the high rpm (>10000) cause. I tend to think that using magnetic bearing instead of the normal good quality ones would help solving the problem but it would involve more cost for the 'bearing' magnets from one hand and it would not really solve the uneven mass problem of the ring magnet.
Thanks for diong those tests.
Greetings,
Gyula
Hi Farmhamd,
Get a large ring magnet, angle it about 24-25 degrees but make the shaft axially symmetric. When it spins it should look like a wobbling plate with forced precession. Place your coils so they align to the same plane of the shaft but through the center of the magnet. As the magnet wobbles it's plane will cut the coil generating power. I've tested this before it works, not OU but interesting.
Prof. Eugene Butikov has a really informative site on precession physics.
http://faculty.ifmo.ru/butikov/index.html
This is the Java applet shown in the picture and setting.
http://faculty.ifmo.ru/butikov/Applets/Precession.html
Playing with the applet will show you a lot clearer the motion of the precession and fixed axis.
Have fun and keep experimenting.
Edit: Forgot to mention to select "List of Examples" and select the first option "Spherical".
Quote from: gyulasun on May 06, 2013, 02:52:45 PM
Hi Farmhand,
Well, a drawing could help indeed. If I understand your proposed setup correctly the pancake coil and the rotor disk would look like a figure of 8 from the side (or putting it otherwise like two normal bicycle wheel) i.e. they both are in the same plane, right?
Now my understanding is that a pancake coil (which has just the thickness of the wire diameter it is wound from) has one of its magnetic poles in the middle center and the other at the outside circumference all around and you swap them by changing the current direction.
This would mean that if the outside circular edge of a pancake is say N all around then a diametrically magnetized ring or tube magnet will either attract or repel the pancake edge, depending on just which pole the diametrical magnet faces the edge. Nevertheless, an interesting setup it would look for sure.
Greetings,
Gyula
Hi Gyula, No not like that like this sketch attached. The spiral coil face to face with the rotor and with shielding at spacings around the spiral coil, the shielding could be windings of a coil or otherwise, but the objective is to shield the spiral coil from the flux so that it gets pulsations of flux and the windings are in the same plane as the rotor and the same size but only a band next to the magnets. The shield could be maybe windings of a series coil fed either DC or even just a load resistor connected to the shield winding would cause the rotor magnets to induce into the shield windings taking the flux from the spiral then between the shields the spiral coil gets flux, I have no idea if the arrangement would cause induction into the spiral coil or not but it would see pulsations of flux if the shields were effective. The shields could be just a material to block magnetic flux if there is such a material.
Cheers
P.S. I was able to produce acceleration under load and short circuit immediately again, and fairly spectacularly as well. And it's fairly quiet. However shorting the generator coil is pointless there is no output and when acceleration under load is observed the load power is small compared to the input. ;) So far anyway.
..
Hi Farmhand,
Thanks for the drawing, it is clear now. Regarding the "shield", unfortunately you would have to use copper windings in series in a pattern as you drew and indeed either DC bias or pulse those windings or terminate with a load resistor because if the shields are not made of ferromagnetic material but passive metal plates then maybe eddy currents may have a "shielding" effect. And if the "shield" is a ferromagnetic material, then your tube magnets would attract to it of course (maybe causing eddy losses too) but in general this passive ferromagnetic shield would not cause much loss or drag and would prevent flux entering the pancake coil part it covers. Unfortunately I do not know any material (metal or non-metal) which blocks flux while it has no magnetic attraction to a permanent magnet.
All in all, only an actual test can give answers whether such setup has any advantage.
I understand your valid questions on Thane's acceleration under load setups. Years ago Thane was active on his thread of this forum on that topic and showed several videos he deleted since then from youtube but I do not recall scope shots you ask. I know he has again appeared occasionally on this forum and has again a youtube channel albeit with less number of videos. I think what you have found by your tests has given you an impression and answer on what really happens so you may wish to step over it. I do not think there is any secret Thane may keep under a 'shield'...
rgds, Gyula
Hi Gyula, I apologize for including that rant in my reply to you, I should not have done that, I should keep my opinion on that to myself from now on. I'm sure most folks know my opinion already on that, I'll remove that little rant. :-[ I'm seeing almost the exact same behavior as in those other video's as from almost any setup I try it with.
Anyway I want to keep sharing my idea's and I don't know where to post on this particular forum about it. I know most will see them on other forums if they are interested but I like to share, I'm not sure if for example Conrad looks at the other forums, and I'm not going to post much on EF.
I got side tracked from the generator making today by the rain, and while I was tinkering I decided to try adding some more magnets to the rotor in a certain way which was a good idea, I think I've projected the field of the magnets more towards the coil core but also made the field bigger, I haven't looked with the gen coil sniffer yet to see the effect the filed has on a coil, but it not only improved the performance in speed and torque it also now needs very little timing adjustment through a wide range of speed. Still there is only two poles on the rotor both north out. The voltage to the charging coil is about thirty volts after boosting but the input power is measured at the battery. I can now get 4450 rpm with a 2 mS pulse width and 12.6 volts 2 amps input, with 1.2 mS pulse width I get about 4000 rpm with about 1.6 amps, it will spin the rotor at 2200 rpm with a 2.6 mS pulse width for 200 mA at 12.6 volts so that's 2.52 Watts at 2200 rpm. But under acceleration it can use up to 2.4 amps and accelerates quickly now, much quicker than before. :) And it's pretty quiet too, adding the extra magnets the way I did it made it quieter as well.
I'll make a quick sketch of the rotor and how I arranged the magnets. :)
Thanks for the reply.
Cheers
Hi Farmhand,
No problem on the 'rant' on Thane, he really did not care much about the input power consumption at the time he showed the acceleration under load effect. And later with his BITT transformers he argued that making the input power factor near zero the Watt-Hour meter would not measure input power anyway so he thought he had achived COP > 1 ...
I assume you stacked some magnets 'in series' on the rotor, this way the flux at the ends facing the coils become more narrow hence stronger for induction or interaction. I believe that bringing more and more flux from permanent magnets into a system has benefits. I would show you an old thread where a member demonstrated with a simple experiment the advantage of using stronger magnets at a fixed input power. (Of course the focus of the flux by magnet stacking is also a good step if you really did that because eventually it also increases flux.) This is the post by Ian, includes a 10 minute video http://www.overunity.com/1754/pulse-motor-video/msg35080/#msg35080
His idea of using more and more coils in series and also in parallel combinations so that the resultant coil inductance and DC resistance remains the same as for any of the single coils sounds good (albeit it would not insure excess output), efficiency would increase for sure. Back then I toyed with the idea of using a rotor disk of 30-40 cm OD and fixing many small but strong magnets on it while the many stator coils would be arranged like Ian described, using a moderate number of windings of thicker wire but I did not have the mechanical means for the bigger rotor mechanics. While I do not fully agree with Ian on all his statements as a final outcome, the more flux involved can give more output torque for sure versus the single same coil - single same magnet setup (albeit the COP > 1 is still a question with it).
rgds, Gyula
Farmhand:
Yes the mechanical energy is not free. That comment is often made by the luminaries with respect to a standard pulse motor. You need to have a mechanical load on the rotor to get mechanical out, so the statement is not valid. I use the visualization of a "power pie." The battery source power pie is sliced up into different thickness slices. Bearings, wind resistance, a generator coil load, etc. The pie is really a heat pie when you think of it, because in most cases, heat is the end game. Unless you are charging a battery or winding up a spring or something similar.
For diodes, the forward voltage at the current of interest is your guide to your slicing.
For your drawing in posting #234, two comments. It should work better if you rotate both rotor magnets by 90 degrees, say north pointing at the spiral coil for both. Also if your magnetic shield does a full wrap-around of the spiral coil, then you are bypassing flux around both the outside and the inside of the spiral coil. You don't want to bypass flux around the inside of the coil, because then the coil sees the changing flux, which is what you want to avoid. So the magnetic shielding would have to be "U" shaped. In other words, remove the inside corners of the magnetic shields, leaving you "U" shapes that bypass flux to the outside of the spiral coil. I hope this description makes sense to you without a diagram.
MileHigh
Thanks guys, Gyula the rotor drawing is attached. I think i made the projected part of the field more kinda half circle shaped it seems more out and also wider cogging is reduced but the magnet attraction to the core is more, when I place the generator core it will help to smooth the cogging as well. I thought if I made the field more projected alone like with stacking it would make more noise due to cogging. But it make lots less and goes faster and speeds up quicker. I can speed it up pretty fast now. I think the field is projected more but is wider and more rounded (effectively) the extra magnets don't seem to attract to the core themselves directly. :)
Milehigh I think I get what you're saying about the shielding and I think you're right, it might be more trouble than its worth right now. I can't change the way the driving magnets face but I can add some 10 mm cylinder magnets normally magnetized on the rotor maybe. I'll put that idea away for now. Hopefully my wire for new cores will be ready soon.
I did notice that when the frequency duty of my setup gets high the motor coil "current" does not go to zero even though the mosfet is on for 2.4 mS this is an odd discovery which kinda means the motor coil works in continuous mode rather than discontinuous mode as referred to in boost converters. Still the mosfets could run all day switching an amp each and the inductive energy under control. My boost converter is putting some noise in the circuit but not enough to affect the switching. The current through the charging coil looks very good, it rises sharply and drops at the same rate, the motor coil current rises less sharply and drops off quicker but then at almost no current it continues for a bit then drops off again. For now the input voltage is limited because of the 40 volt rated diode in the boost converter.
Cheers
EDIT: I meant to say in the last paragraph that (the motor coil "current" does not go to zero even though the mosfet is only "on" for 2.4 mS), so I changed it, sorry I was tired. :-[
Oh and also in the last schematic I posted the capacitor (C3) can be connected to the circuit ground with similar or better effect, when it discharges it can only discharge to the voltage level of the supply anyway so it doesn't go below the supply voltage when connected to the circuit ground, only at start up it is less,.
Quote from: Farmhand on May 07, 2013, 11:00:01 PM
I did notice that when the frequency duty of my setup gets high the motor coil "current" does not go to zero even though the mosfet is on for 2.4 mS this is an odd discovery which kinda means the motor coil works in continuous mode rather than discontinuous mode as referred to in boost converters.
snip..
EDIT: I meant to say in the last paragraph that (the motor coil "current" does not go to zero even though the mosfet is only "on" for 2.4 mS), snip..
Try connecting a 100K - 500K ohm or higher resistor between the gate of Q1 and the negative battery supply rail. That may help to determine if the mosfet is switching fully on
and off. If the gate voltage of Q1 is floating, that may be the culprit, and a resistor will remedy the problem. (if it is a problem ).
Also, the rotor magnet/s is/are counter inducing a current in one direction through the motor MC1, via D2 D5 L1 and D4. In the circuit you've shown on the previous page, you can pull Q1 out of the circuit, and spin the rotor up to speed by another means, and you will get current through MC1 via the path I just outlined.
I notice also in the same circuit that any collapsing emf from MC1, during off time (from the supply) discharges through the same path.
http://www.overunity.com/11350/confirming-the-delayed-lenz-effect/dlattach/attach/123297/image// (http://www.overunity.com/11350/confirming-the-delayed-lenz-effect/dlattach/attach/123297/image//)
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on May 08, 2013, 05:33:12 AM
Try connecting a 100K - 500K ohm or higher resistor between the gate of Q1 and the negative battery supply rail. That may help to determine if the mosfet is switching fully on and off. If the gate voltage of Q1 is floating, that may be the culprit, and a resistor will remedy the problem. (if it is a problem ).
Also, the rotor magnet/s is/are counter inducing a current in one direction through the motor MC1, via D2 D5 L1 and D4. In the circuit you've shown on the previous page, you can pull Q1 out of the circuit, and spin the rotor up to speed by another means, and you will get current through MC1 via the path I just outlined.
I notice also in the same circuit that any collapsing emf from MC1, during off time (from the supply) discharges through the same path.
http://www.overunity.com/11350/confirming-the-delayed-lenz-effect/dlattach/attach/123297/image// (http://www.overunity.com/11350/confirming-the-delayed-lenz-effect/dlattach/attach/123297/image//)
Cheers
Don't worry the mosfet is switching off ok I have a 10 k resistor from gate to circuit ground. I can show the gate signal wave form if you like. If they were not turning off they would be getting warm but they are not. They switch dead clean, they are driven by a TC4420 driver chip. :)
The continuous current is because of the coil not fully discharging I think, I need to speed it up a bit more.
Wouldn't it take a south pole magnet on the rotor to induce a current the way you describe ?
The inductive collapse is discharged first into C3 then C3 discharges through L1 back to MC2 (charging coil) in my motor, between the diode D1 and MC2.
I can see the inductive spike go up to about 25 volts for 400 us or so in C3 when the capacitor C2 is at 12 volts.
The shot below shows it with no battery, the spike is only 25 volts but it is in the capacitor C3 and then it discharges to the point at L1-MC2 in my motor, also that cap C3 in my motor is no longer in series with the battery, it's negative is connected to the circuit ground now.
Cheers
P.S. OH and the current in the motor coil does stop if the motor is not running hard. as you can also see by the attachment. I could run the motor all day with 2 amps input and no heat sinks on the two switching mosfets, they just get a bit warm, which is also evident by the scope shots I think.
The resonant frequency of C3-L1 is 10 kHz it needs to be (higher frequency) and I think I'll use both a bit less capacitance and a bit less inductance, then the coil should discharge it's energy
quicker, hopefully anyway, if not I'll do the opposite. ;D
EDIT:, actually I just checked and there is a weak south pole between the two north poles, the south poles are very weak though they don't attract anything much but a compass.
Still it might be possible the souths could induce a current that way. The north poles would try to charge the supply I think.
EDIT: 2, ( I was a bit confused the inductive spike charges C3 to about 25 volts when there is only 12 volts in capacitor C2, a fourth capacitor can be placed were L1-MC2 meet and as long as it isn't too big the spike remains. I tried 1 uF there). But it makes little difference because of C3 and L1. Sorry for the confusion, I modified the post to read right. It's a new circuit, I'm still making changes. I've got a much better sketch to explain things, generator coil as well. :)
Also below is a shot showing the voltages at the capacitors C2 and C3, and the currents through the coils when running at a reasonable speed. In a way (after the first pulse) C2 is the supply for the motor coil, when running the switch turns on and C2 discharges through MC1, then the switch turns off as the supply charges C2 through MC2 and at the same time C3 is discharging the inductive energy just previously released to it from MC1, into MC2, then the capacitor C2 is charged with a higher than supply voltage ready to discharge through MC1 when the switch is turned on again, because C2 is at double the voltage of the supply and MC2 impedes the current flow, C2 fully discharges through MC1 before any significant current can flow through MC1 from the lower voltage supply feeding MC2. Only 12 volts is applied to MC2 whereas over 20 volts is applied to MC1.
That's how it works in normal operation, and the difference in phase between MC1 and MC2 currents can be used as two driving phases of current. :)
..
Farmhand:
Note that a pulse motor is primarily a "pulse circuit." i.e.; You are analyzing what happens before, during and after some kind of pulse event and for a pulse motor it's a regular repeating sequence of pulse events. The RC and L/R time constants come into play, which you see in your scope captures. The component values determine what the time constants are, and you could optimize events so that they do what you want them to do and they are presumably "friendly" relative to the expected or measured speed of the rotor.
For example, it might be that energizing the main drive coil "too long" results in it burning too much energy like a resistor relative to your "payload energy" which is the push on the rotor. The solution might be to go for a coil with twice as many turns and four times the inductance and hence the time constant will be four times as long. Note you are also using less current to generate the magnetic field because of the turns-squared effect. If you have a target "end of pulse maximum current," you may need to increase the battery voltage to push the desired amount of current through the coil to overcome the higher inductance also.
This strategy may give you a more efficient drive pulse. Even through there is more wire and hence a larger resistance, you get "more magnetic field payload bang for your input energy buck relative to your lost heat to resistance." In other words the coil generates just as strong a magnetic field as a coil with less turns but with less current, and that may be more efficient. This would have to be confirmed with testing. When you look at simple 12-volt relays, you can see how fine the wire is and how many turns there are which would seem to suggest that this approach would be worth checking out. (With some kind of Coil-A - Coll-B comparative test.)
There is one more kind of time constant at play sometimes. That's when an inductor and capacitor interact like a tank circuit. You may notice where the discharging coil charges a capacitor in your circuit the voltage and current waveforms become sinusoidal. It's like just a "slice" of an LC tank circuit in action. You can see it in the upper-right blue charging coil waveform.
In very general terms, you will notice for coils that the voltage is proportional to the rate of change of current of the coil. For caps the current is proportional to the rate of change of voltage. You can see this in your own waveforms.
MileHigh
Just a suggestion for making coils:
Go to the electronics store and buy regular insulated wire spools of different gauges. Get a nice big spool of very fine wire for sure. We assume that the spools themselves are regular white plastic spools. Sometimes the spools have a larger inner diameter so you could add a larger core if you wanted to. Note the energy storing capacity of the core is proportional to the volume of the core material. It's arguably more important than the number of turns if your focus is on energy storage in the coil. I am not so sure that applies for a pulse motor because you assume that you are designing a for maximum rotor push with minimum energy lost per push. You are probably better off with solid wire also to get the least resistance. You could also say you are getting a lager cross-sectional area of metal with solid wire as compared to multi-strand wire.
Then for each plastic spool you make two radial cuts on one of the plastic ends about 45 degrees apart and remove the plastic material. Now you have access to the inner layers of the coil. You carefully tap into the coil at two or three depths and make connection points. For example, you could use a small terminal block, the type where you insert the wire into a hole and tighten a screw would be good. Then you just take hot glue and solidify it all up. A hot glue gun is the poor man's 3D printer.
Of course you could buy spools of speaker wire and make true bifilar or series bifilar coil configurations also.
Say you buy four largish spools of wire in four different gauges. And you cut the sides off and you add three taps to each coil. So that means each coil is four connections, a reference "ground" connection and the three taps. That would give you effectively 12 coils to experiment with, and you could move your core material from coil to coil.
MileHigh
Here's a longer video showing the motor running at low power as well as at higher speed, I ask people to keep in mind that this is a prototype for experimenting and trying things, I don't claim that the setup is made to best specs, that was not my objective. It is to test an idea, weather or not the coils have enough inductance is irrelevant at this point. What is relevant is it spins very efficiently at quite low power and it can spin faster at higher power ( more wasteful) the time for improving the coils will be later. At this point I am testing and improving other things. Like the single battery running performance ect. There should be no doubt that the motor will run more efficiently with better coils, at the moment I am making new core's with less losses, then i'll wind new coils for the new frame ;) After more tests I'll know how I want them to behave. I am disabled and can only work at a certain pace, when it rains I get held up as well. :( As I said I have code to write, drawings to make, core's to make, coils to wind, a new rotor to design and make as well as a new frame.
I've changed the cap C3 to 2 uF and the inductor L1 to 10 uH since making this video clip, it's thick wire wound on a small toroidal core. Now the voltage spike is a bit higher and the inductive energy is discharged quicker, but it is still not quite right, I can do better. I'll come back to that later for now it works to make the motor faster and more powerful without a second battery, adding a charge battery now degrades the motors performance, whereas just removing the charge battery and returning the inductive energy release
back to the supply previously degraded performance, the difference between snubbing the spike back to the supply and with the inductive energy return circuit is marked.
http://www.youtube.com/my_videos?o=U
Milehigh, I made my main motor coil so that I can join the two windings in series to double the inductance (almost), I have wire for a duplicate coil but it's not wound yet, I'm still using an old coil for the charging coil, the motor coil is two strands of 0.7 mm wire side by side not twisted, at the moment in the two strands are in parallel switched by two mosfets, I can change it but the duplicate charging coil is not made yet. When I have two coils of two strands of 0.7mm wire the same then I'll connect the two strands on each coil in series and have two 24 mH coils still with not much resistance.
At the moment the only thing that warms up is the coil itself and most likely from core losses I think.
When I force it run faster it uses more power as any pulse motor does, they have a sweet speed where they can overcome the windage and drag efficiently, but the point is I can run at the sweet speed with more torque for the cost because of having two driving coils and recycling the energy.
I have more shots but I think it is very obvious that the capacitor C3 can be charged to over 20 volts at the same moment that C2 is at almost zero volts. Once again the blue trace for the motor coil current is inverted (upside down) the current is positive, it's the way the probe is connected.
Cheers
Farmhand:
Keep doing your thing at your pace. My posts are intended more to be stream-of-consciousness for the thread itself.
Cheers,
MileHigh
No Probs Milehigh, Yourself and Gyula are correct about the ampere turns. The advice is much appreciated. Parts of my posts are for the general experimenters as well.
Here's another drawing made differently that might help to explain the circuit better, everything is in place kind of thing. Like you said, all is not as it first seems.
When I look now I see that D4 should actually be before C2. I'm going to change that on my circuit. Don't know why I didn't see that before. >:(
With the generator coil I intend to mount a long core so I can move the coil along the core to maybe observe the magnetization delay, the core will be as big as possible but i'm not sure if I will be able to see the delay on the scope. The coil will have a bucket load of turns of 0.5 mm wire, thousands of turns. ;D
Cheers
A little bit more stream of consciousness:
You have your pulse motor running at it's steady-speed. I am talking an ordinary Erzatsbedini type pulse motor with the basic circuit.
Here is a simple thought experiment
You run the motor and you scope the coil current and you measure the pulse width and the final current level. Let's assume you see a typical exponential type rise in the current during the pulse.
Then you remove the rotor and you just energize the coil with the same pulse width. For example, you connect a signal generator to the transistor base input.
Will there be a difference in the final current level in the coil when it is driving the rotor vs. when the coil is not driving the rotor?
I say there will be a difference, and some might be surprised when I say that the final current level in the coil will be lower when the coil is driving the rotor. That would seem counter-intuitive.
Here is the explanation: When the coil is driving the rotor, you know that some of the electrical power you pump into the coil is being exported into the outside world, it is not in fact charging up the coil.
What follows is this deduction: The power into the coil is just the instantaneous volts times amps. So you can say that when you drive the rotor, you are taking a "slice" of the voltage (times current) away from the coil charging function and that "slice" is being exported to the outside world.
In other words, if there are 12 volts across the coil, at a given point in time perhaps four of those volts will be "eaten" by the rotor pushing function and the remaining eight volts will be energizing the coil.
So over the duration of the coil energizing pulse, this "voltage stealing" function means that there is less voltage available to energize the coil, therefore at the end of the pulse there is less current going though the coil.
So, how about all that simplified: This could explain the current draw going down as the motor speeds up. It all ties into the notion of the motor being seen as a pure abstract "impedance" by the battery and that impedance is actually an electro-mechanical impedance.
MileHigh
I agree Milehigh, and I can actually do that experiment and I will. I know it will be different because I can see that happen when I change the timing, which means the coil is energized while away from the rotor magnet. :) The current waveform changes dramatically which is why my current shot's look different at times, it's because of the timing of the pulses in relation to the magnet position.
For the test I can run the circuit with a fixed pulse width driving the rotor and scope the currents, then I can do either of two things. I can swing the timing right out of the way or I can stop the motor and remove the rotor and either take out the magnets and spin the rotor with another motor to get the timing or I can use a circuit I have to trigger the the CD4047 chip at the same frequency as the motor coils were firing when running, that way the coils will be switching the same with the same pulse width and but with no rotor magnets. If I make a 1 minute video clip I can show the waveform change in real time when I change the timing. Piece of cake. That was obvious when the experiments are done and notice is taken. ;)
When the motor is running faster at some times it has a lot less peak current through the coils than when running slower.
Rather than post more shots I'll make a 1 or 2 minute video clip to show it.
Cheers
Oh and for future reference my rotor weighs in at 435 grams which is almost 1 lb. Might be useful for an idea on the acceleration. I can now spin the rotor at 1600 rpm with 175 mA of current from the 12 volt battery.
P.S. Milehigh, thinking of the test made me wonder how the motor might run if I were to run the motor up to a certain speed/frequency then switch from the trigger signal to a steady frequency signal to keep it spinning at the same rate, make it "fully synchronous". hehehe Would be a fun test as well.
..
Here's a Video Clip of the magnet proximity (coils driving the rotor more) causing the coil current to reduce, the further away the magnet is when he coil is energized and therefore
the coils are driving the rotor less the "more" the current in the coils. The closer the magnet is to the coil core when the coil is energized the less current goes through the coils.
I think this is what you mean Milehigh ? In a way.
Pulse Timing and Coil Currents
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0whkutQ7mNQ
..
@MileHigh,
Here's a quote from you to Tinselkoala after he reported a rise in input with no magnet spinning with his sine wave motor:
"I think the basic dynamics are that the higher frequency you go the higher power you have to pump into the coil."
How does your current theory explaining the opposite effect to Farmhand influence your past position?
Synchro1:
That's a great question. The thing to keep in mind that in many cases the properties of a circuit are frequency dependent. For example an ordinary capacitor will change how it responds in frequency. A low and high frequencies a capacitor looks like a capacitor and passes the signal. But at very high frequencies the capacitor will act like an inductor and block the very high frequency signal.
So you can imagine a scenario like the following: If you run a typical pulse motor at low to medium frequency, you may see decreasing input power consumption as the speed increases because of the "voltage stealing" effect from power being exported to the rotor. (That's what they mistakenly call "the witch" on you know which threads on EF.) But as you run at higher frequencies the air friction starts to become very significant and then the power consumption will start to go up. I'm not just sticking these two ideas together for convenience, this is a very real property that you see in many places. Another example is a typical transformer. At low to medium input frequencies the transformer will work properly. But at very high input frequencies, the input capacitance of the transformer primary will effectively short out the input signal and the transformer output is near zero. The minuscule input capacitance will prevent any current from flowing into the primary windings so the transformer can't work, only if the input signal is at a very very high frequency that you normally wouldn't use anyways.
Tech link about transformers and frequency responses:
http://www.vias.org/eltransformers/lee_electronic_transformers_06_09.html
Again, these are basic principles that would have to be investigated on a case-by-cases basis.
MileHigh
Also, don't forget that my magnet spinner is working on a 50 percent, symmetrical duty cycle and is properly a "synchronous" motor, a special case of pulse motors. No doubt proper pulse shaping as to width and amplitude could optimize the current/rpm relationship -- as Farmhand's results indicate.
I'm back from CR. I'm setting my Quadfilar Spiral bedini up on my sailboat right now. I have a 1 farad digital capacitor to try and run in self loop.
I also have a "Glow Light" trasformer that generates a 1khz a.c. signal from a 12 volt d.c. battery. I plan to run the neo sphere up to 60,000 r.p.m. on one side of the Q-spiral with the bedini, then switch over to the 1khz a.c. sine wave on the other, and compare input if the neo sphere continues to spin.
Farmhand:
Your clip showed the effect quite nicely. The impedance of the motor goes up when you are driving the rotor, within certain limits. If I can ask you a favour for future clips, it would be to make sure the schematic is the latest revision (Did you move the diode?) and also show where the current sensing resistors are on the schematic. It really helps.
If you were a mad scientist like Russ you could put a pulse motor on a "suicide run." If you had a variable high voltage DC supply you could crank up the voltage on the drive coil and push the motor faster and faster. You should start to see diminishing returns on the number of RPMs per watts in. Higher and higher, what will fail first? Will the coil burn up? Will the bearings fail? Will something fly off the rotor at high speed? Will the transistor explode? If there is a charging battery, will it start to boil? Like some mad scientist you push your poor humble pulse motor past the breaking point! Muhahaha Now that would be fun.
Perhaps the Suicide Pulse Motor Building contest?
Thanks,
MileHigh
For that clip I did just add the one diode before C2. After the clip I thought for interest I would try to run the setup up and see what kind of speed I could get by timing the pulse to the charging coil so that the main motor coil is passed and the pulse happens over he charging coil, I didn't have the scope attached but what happened was I over volted some diodes only rated to 40 volts. Originally I was going to use all 40 volt parts and use a charge battery then the voltage is below 40v with 12 volts input, but I went with IRF740 mosfets while I waited for IRF1010's. But now the drains are seeing up to 80 volts and switching 60v at times. Anyway I replaced all the diodes on the board with higher rated ones.
I applied full boost (35 volts) with the timing retarded trying to speed it up then screeech from the diode and the input went to 5 amps on the 5 amp meter.
I have a feeling these diodes were kinda failing for a while.
I'll update the circuit drawing to show the changes I made with the diodes. I'm going to remove the rest of the 1N5822 diodes before I kill more, I'll replace them with FR302 (100v), FR307(1000v) or 1N5408 (1000v).
If I apply 35 volts boosted input then the mosfets would be switching 60 volts plus through MC1 from C2. No wonder the 40 volt rated diodes failed. :-[ I overlooked them. But all is well that ends well. :)
When it comes to load switching from a generator coil the fun will start. If there is a magnetization delay so that the rotor magnet is away from the core when the coil is affected by the flux then we would have a constant current generator wouldn't we. If loading the generator coil out of phase to the rotor magnet passing then the drag and output should be set at or about cogging drag shouldn't it maybe a bit more. But the output would be limited of course.
Cheers
P.S. Here's a tip, if C3 is too small in certain conditions the voltage in it can get too high, I've gone to three 6.8 uF caps in parallel and a 10 uH coil on a small toroid for the return arrangement.
..
OK I used a sniffer coil just to see what kind of wave form the rotor makes on a generator coil. This is the result below. The motor dropped from 2400 rpm and held at 2340 rpm with 12.6 volts and 220 mA input when the coil was placed near the rotor, no problem. The coil measured only 69.5 mH (mock up core), so I can see that if I make a gen coil with a few hundred mH I should get a pretty good sine wave. The positive end of the coil was facing the rotor with the probe to the positive end and the scope ground to the negative end, the coupling was set to AC on the scope. SO we can see that the north pole of the magnets induce a negative voltage in the coil then the coil swings positive about the same amount before then drops to zero volts for a period before the next magnet approaches, I can see there seems to be two bumps on the top of the waveform, so I'm surmising that my rotor has two weak south poles close together and three north poles one strong and two weaker to each side of it. I can change the angle of the out-rigger magnets so that they make two slightly stronger south poles a bit further apart and one even stronger north pole I think (on each side of the rotor). I'll try that by pointing the north pole of the out magnets more at the center of the two main magnets, then the south poles will be facing slightly out toward the rotors periphery. :) I think the motor will run even better then and the gen waveform will also be better I think.
Cheers
P.S. HopToad was correct. Of course all of the above confirms that the rotor can induce a current as he described in a previous post because there is south poles on the rotor.
But that can only happen with the motor coils if the emf produced that way is more than or out of phase with the emf generated by the collapsing magnetic field and I doubt very much that the rotors south poles can induce over 20 volts not to mention 25 volts so there is no room for induction from the magnets unless they can generate a higher emf then the collapsing magnetic field or it induces the emf at a different time. In my opinion it is the same a a generator coil that generated 30 volts peak to peak connected to a capacitor charged to 40 volts via a FWBR, there is no current induced.
That is one of the advantages to an orderly collapse of the magnetic field at a higher voltage, it stops the induction from the phantom south pole (in the motor coils), or at least that is the objective.. THe south pole can generate all it wants to in the generator coil.
2nd P.S I think the way my rotor spins down very slowly when the power is cut is an indicator that no significant induction of currents is happening from the rotor to the motor coils when there is a voltage present in all the capacitors.
..
Quote from: hoptoad on May 08, 2013, 05:33:12 AM
(snip)
Also, the rotor magnet/s is/are counter inducing a current in one direction through the motor MC1, via D2 D5 L1 and D4. In the circuit you've shown on the previous page, you can pull Q1 out of the circuit, and spin the rotor up to speed by another means, and you will get current through MC1 via the path I just outlined.
I notice also in the same circuit that any collapsing emf from MC1, during off time (from the supply) discharges through the same path.
http://www.overunity.com/11350/confirming-the-delayed-lenz-effect/dlattach/attach/123297/image// (http://www.overunity.com/11350/confirming-the-delayed-lenz-effect/dlattach/attach/123297/image//)
Cheers
Thanks Hoptoad, :) Tonight's experiments will be dedicated to investigating these effects (I hope). I kept what you said in mind and it appears to be correct. :-[
I think I understand better now the full implications of what you said. My apologies. I see taking D4 out increases rotor speed and input power for the pulse width, which is good for me. I must investigate further.
I've rearranged the circuit a bit for testing (as below) while keeping the component labels much the same except for additions ect. I changed all diodes to 1N5408 except the free wheeling diode D3 which needs to have less drop than the mosfet's internal diode, the flyback diode is also a fast recovery diode just for fun.
I intend to run the circuit as shown up to speed with a 2.8 mS pulse width and the pulse timed to energize the motor coil when the magnet is directly in line with the MC1 core as a benchmark and the pulse timing and the pulse width will remain constant throughout the tests.
Then I will systematically short the diodes (D4), (D5), (D6) and even (D2) one by one with a clip lead (directly across the diode, observe the wave forms and rpm for changes and record what happens then un-short them. After doing that one by one I'll test combinations (with two clip leads ;)), like shorting both D4 and D6. I'll also try connecting C3 in series with the battery and record the difference with that. A few hours experimenting there. ;D
I want as much speed/torque as possible for a fixed pulse width. But I want to keep the drain voltage below 80 volts, that way I can use IRF540 mosfets, so I have NE2 neons for a visual indicator as well.
Anyone have any suggestions to modify the magnet layout as I showed in the other sketch ? This drawing doesn't show the actual magnet layout.
Cheers
Milehigh, the currents were measured across the C.S.R.'s - R1 and R2 in the last clip, the center of the two resistors is the cap C2, and the scope grounds are connected there.
Basically it measures the current out of C2 and into the motor coil MC1, and the current out of the the charging coil MC2 into the capacitor C2. I did explain that in the video, but I agree a drawing is best practice. If the inverted current waveform was un-inverted and the wave forms superimposed, then the area where the current wave forms overlap would be "shoot through current". :D
..
OK so my tests had mixed results, taking out the diodes D4 and D6 is good in my set up with the charging circuit, it increases low speed start up torque by prolonging the currents through the coils, but for high speed running close to the pulse width maximum limit it limits the top speed of the motor because of overlapping currents I think.
The other diodes are all necessary, also with my setup because of the charging coil "MC2" then L1 is obsolete, MC2 does the job in my set up that L1 would need to do if there was no charging circuit/coil.
Anyway I went to a rotor with 8 all north out facing magnets, I get a maximum switching frequency of 320 Hz for 2400 rpm, at high speed or under load the input power is much the same as before because with 8 magnets the Pulse Width is much narrower. the start up torque is much better and the magnet spacing now means that my 40 degree charging coil is slightly retarded in timing to push the magnet the main motor coil just pushed and slightly advanced to pull it so I went with a push pull set up by reversing the charging coil polarity/connections so it now makes a south pole and pulls the magnet that the main coil just pushed,
it works really well and I can spin my fan blade at the same speed with 3 Watts less, now I can spin it at 1500 rpm with just under 10 Watts while getting 300 mA charge current into another battery. With a few hundred Hz the charge output is becoming useful at 80 Hz it doesn't do much.
I just use the battery in series with the cap C3 or in series with the charging coil. It's also really quiet now but it does make a nice hum. 8)
I think this is the rotor set up I'll do gen tests with.
Cheers.
Farmhand:
Perhaps you will wow them at the next pulse motor build off!
Here is a software fantasy build: You have some Hall sensors monitoring the rotor magnet passes at two positions. The Hall sensor outputs trigger the programmable timer inputs on the microcontroller. With software you measure the rotor speed and you can derive the rotor position to know when to fire the main drive coil. When you fire the main drive coil you also light up some LEDs to get a strobe effect to illuminate vertical white lines painted on the passing rotor magnets.
Then with "left" and "right" keyboard/keypad commands you make fine adjustments to the start and stop angles for firing the coil. You get visual feedback with the LED strobe. So you can find the "sweetest spot" for maximum RPM at a given average current consumption by tweaking the drive pulse and monitoring the RPM. Someone that knows how to code software control systems incorporating feedback loops could write a system so the tweaking of the timing is done automatically.
Here is a cool clip that shows the principle in action, the LED hard drive clock:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1asNB0te0o (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1asNB0te0o)
The author:
QuoteThe code I wrote myself, as I wanted to be able to add new types of displays and patterns to it. It does not assume the drive spins at a fixed rate, but times each revolution and calculates the delays needed to flash the display correctly. I use a timer interrupt to decide when to turn on or off the LEDs. I had used a loop comparing the timer value and it worked, sort of. Every few seconds it would glitch and the hands would quiver annoyingly. I was never sure what caused it, but switching to timer based interrupts made it rock solid. It's fun to slow the disk down with a finger and watch it still maintain the image until the disk goes too slow for the 16 bit timer to handle and starts overflowing.
If you had a rotor with four magnets on it, they will not all trigger the hall sensor at exactly the same relative angle. Also, it may be difficult to have the four rotor magnets exactly 90 degrees apart from each other. So what you can do is time each Hall sensor tick to tick with the microcontroller's built in timers. Then in software you could average the last four tick-to-tick times to get your RPM calculation. Or you could do a running average of the last 8 timing intervals, etc. This is a software low-pass filter to get a more stable RPM measurement.
MileHigh
Bonus clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Md78sOI1-r8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Md78sOI1-r8)
When are these build off's ? What you propose is interesting but I lack the programming skills, and I went with picaxe stuff when I decided to learn a bit, most seem to use Arduino or whatever they are called (spelling). But yes I like to challenge myself and try to learn new things. I haven't learned how to count revs yet even.
I had another brainstorm and made a real big improvement, this coil placement and rotor magnet arrangement is the best by far and I've tried several methods to get more torque and start up power. I've got 8 magnets N-S-N-S ect. I made the charging coil produce a south pole at the top and placed the charging coil so that it starts out pushing a south magnet face then as the motor speeds up rather than get out of tune "timing wise" it goes from pushing a south to attracting a north, now it's more powerful again, it can now spin my fan blade at over 2000 rpm easily and speeds up pretty quick for a pulse motor. With the fan blade on it can go from 1200 rpm to 2200 rpm in about 15 seconds. With 20 Watt's input it can blow a lot of air. At low speed it's push-push and at high speed it's push-pull.
I'm making miniature generators from shaded pole motors by cutting the frame to separate the poles and drilling the rotor (squirrel cage) and inserting magnets, I tested one last night I made form a small microwave fan motor, it worked well but the wire is too thin, I rewind it. I've got an extra big one with a two inch long squirrel cage I want to convert, it has thick wire.
My motor in the previous arrangement spun the little generator up to 2200 rpm with a belt , up geared. I ran it for a couple of hours experimenting. I got 27 volts RMS out of the little generator.
Anyway I was thinking of ways the motor could self regulate it's own speed. It doesn't need to be timed on the fly now except for start up.
My pulse processing is all done in hardware, I don't need a micro to run it, just a CD4047 the sensor and some other parts.
Cheers
What MH is proposing is relatively trivial to do with an Arduino, a couple of Hall switches (or even just one), and some external transistors to handle the coil currents. I read his post last night and would have done the setup and programming but I don't have any free Hall sensors and I refuse to take apart an already-built motor to scavenge one.
One big advantage of the Arduino over the stand-alone microcontrollers is the programming environment. Also, the ease of interfacing and controlling makes it nice to work with. Also there are tons of help, many examples of code, and lots of people showing different Arduino projects on YT.
The ease of software reconfiguring means that it's easier to experiment with than a stand-alone TTL or CMOS logic chip pulser, once you get the hang of it.
The Hall switch will send a pulse whenever the magnet passes it. You just put the Hall switch's 5 v signal output to an input pin on the Arduino, and the pulseIn() command reads the pulse timing. From this you can derive RPM very simply by knowing the number of magnets on your rotor and the pulse durations. The arduino can be programmed to send the output pulse to a coil with whatever delay or advance and pulse duration is necessary for the RPM, and the advance/retard and pulse duration timings can be sent to the Arduino live, either by two simple potentiometer controls or by keyboard mappings as MH suggests, and the whole thing can be monitored on the serial monitor using the Arduino programming environment or other terminal emulation application of your choice. Or you can use an LCD or touchscreen display very easily with the Arduino.
A little more sophisticated setup would use a ratiometric Hall sensor and then you could even select the precise magnetic field strength at which to send a pulse to the drive coil. This might actually automagically correct timing for RPM.
I'm not a salesman, but I love my Arduinos, they are cheap, easy to program and use, hard to break (I have blown one PWM channel output transistor on my Uno, out of eight...) and can do just about anything in terms of controlling little electronic devices. Or even big ones.
Well you sold me on it Tinsel, I'm gonna get one now. Any suggestions on the actual chip or start up kit I should get ? Is there USB interface, or just serial ?
Anyway I think you'll like my next video clip, I got it really thumping, it's kinda deceptive the sound doesn't match the speed kinda thing, but the tachometer jumps in the hundreds of revs. The capacitor C2 has a Sine wave on it that Matches the input pulse just like a Tesla coils wave forms, the pulse is less than 50% but the square side of the drain wave form matches to exactly the down slope of the sine on C2 kind of thing, like my Armstrong oscillator variant's wave forms.
The timing now is now almost automatic over a certain range due to the way the coils are oriented to the magnets but some auto adjustment would be very helpful. I can use my micro to switch the power to the coils off if a certain drain voltage is reached ect. as protections, which can be used to limit speed kind of.
Video will be about 15 minutes, it should be good for a laugh at my hot glue skills when prototyping. ;) I need to try that coil at a few degrees either side of 45* just to make sure I'm doing the right thing with the main build, it could have two motor coils and a single charging coil with two appropriate windings on it, the charging coil will be between the two motor coils so only the bottom 90 degrees of the rotor would be used for driving, (like a cradle). A 90 degree tripple, or I could make it two sets of coils on each side so two 45 degree N-S twin coil set ups that way. Dunno yet. If the testing shows me 45* is actually the best then it's a go ahead on something. I want some open space on the rotor for experimenting and to keep it upright and bottom heavy, I'll have to set up a rotor balancing device as well.
It's really a lot of fun. I'll need to get hall's i've never used them, sounds good though.
Cheers
P.S. Here's the second video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aC5Hdp6LSMU
And the circuit as it is now. I cut the circuit explanation part off the video to make two smaller uploads it's uploading now It's the first part.
..
Quote from: Farmhand on May 13, 2013, 10:07:32 AM
Well you sold me on it Tinsel, I'm gonna get one now. Any suggestions on the actual chip or start up kit I should get ? Is there USB interface, or just serial ?
Anyway I think you'll like my next video clip, I got it really thumping, it's kinda deceptive the sound doesn't match the speed kinda thing, but the tachometer jumps in the hundreds of revs. The capacitor C2 has a Sine wave on it that Matches the input pulse just like a Tesla coils wave forms, the pulse is less than 50% but the square side of the drain wave form matches to exactly the down slope of the sine on C2 kind of thing, like my Armstrong oscillator variant's wave forms.
The timing now is now almost automatic over a certain range due to the way the coils are oriented to the magnets but some auto adjustment would be very helpful. I can use my micro to switch the power to the coils off if a certain drain voltage is reached ect. as protections, which can be used to limit speed kind of.
Video will be about 15 minutes, it should be good for a laugh at my hot glue skills when prototyping. ;) I need to try that coil at a few degrees either side of 45* just to make sure I'm doing the right thing with the main build, it could have two motor coils and a single charging coil with two appropriate windings on it, the charging coil will be between the two motor coils so only the bottom 90 degrees of the rotor would be used for driving, (like a cradle). A 90 degree tripple, or I could make it two sets of coils on each side so two 45 degree N-S twin coil set ups that way. Dunno yet. If the testing shows me 45* is actually the best then it's a go ahead on something. I want some open space on the rotor for experimenting and to keep it upright and bottom heavy, I'll have to set up a rotor balancing device as well.
It's really a lot of fun. I'll need to get hall's i've never used them, sounds good though.
Cheers
Arduino clones are made by many different manufacturers but the hardware specification is followed by them all so they are mostly exact equivalents. I use the OSEPP brand and the Uno model for most of my stuff, although I also have an OSEPP Mega, the larger faster version with a lot more IO ports and RAM.
I would suggest getting an Uno, which will have the Atmel ATMega 328p chip and the USB interface. I bought the OSEPP brand because it is carried in-store at the local Fry's; you may find other brands to your liking, but the basic Uno of whatever Arduino clone is what I'd suggest starting with. Other models might have faster processors and more hardware interrupts but I don't think these are necessary for the pulse motor.
http://osepp.com/products/arduino-compatible-boards/osepp-uno-arduino-compatible/ (http://osepp.com/products/arduino-compatible-boards/osepp-uno-arduino-compatible/)
http://osepp.com/learning-centre/start-here/osepp-arduino-basic-companion-kit-start/ (http://osepp.com/learning-centre/start-here/osepp-arduino-basic-companion-kit-start/)
You can download and look at the Arduino IDE here:
http://arduino.cc/en/Main/Software (http://arduino.cc/en/Main/Software)
If you are using Linux, as I am, the installation is easier than what's described for windows in the links above. It just installs and works, from the Ubuntu package manager. The IDE comes with many example sketches (programs) that you can look through, and there's a complete command reference at the arduino.cc site.
I don't have a pulse motor built using the Arduino but here's my video example of sensor position detecting, with precise, adjustable timing, switching a heavy coil thru an external transistor:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pHDi9UvBOU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkiGTWODERo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkiGTWODERo)
BTW, I love your builds and your documentation and your careful work and thought process. I think you are a great example to other experimenters here... and to me as well. Thanks for sharing your work!
Here's the first video link so I'll link the two video's together here, the first video gives an explanation of sorts, if my mumbling can be understood, the problem is I think ahead of my talking and stumble on my own words. :-[
Video 1 Cicuit explanation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IndhigMm2Bs
Video 2 Test Run.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aC5Hdp6LSMU
Thank you very much for the links and the tips and help Tinsel much appreciated, I can spend wisely now. Using the same hardware as most others will be helpful.
The thing with the fan load is that at low rpm the fan is not much load but at higher rpm the motor must work harder for smaller gain because it takes more work to get from say 1800 rpm to 1900 rpm than it does to go from 1600 rpm to 1700 rpm.
I'm thinking I could use a squirrel cage on the extended shaft with magnets put into the squirrel cage so I can mount a four pole stator around it then I can switch the generator coils in series with the supply capacitor for regenerative purposes. ;) Hopefully it could act as a brake by switching the coils in with a mosfet. A test load apparatus as well, built right in on the shaft and there would still be room for a belt/gear or pulley on either side. I used an actual fan shaft and squirrel cage to make my rotor they are 8 mm so the roller skate bearing fit snug, the spacers are rattling though.
Cheers
Great, Farmhand!
Re fanload: As we found out in the Yildiz thread, you can get pretty good shaft power estimates if you use a known load like a model airplane propeller. Believe it or not, the aerodynamics of these things are researched and known to fair accuracy because at the higher levels, it's a competitive sport. You can get suitable propellers for small cost, you can stack them together to make multi-blade loads, and you can know the shaft power dissipation simply by knowing the stable RPM reached by the prop, your local air data parameters, and some number crunching.
http://adamone.rchomepage.com/calc_thrust.htm (http://adamone.rchomepage.com/calc_thrust.htm)
Check out all the different propellers in the "prop type" pulldown.
The power dissipation of a fan or prop goes as some power of the RPM (like square or third, I can't remember) so the faster you go the harder it is to go faster.
I see yes model airplane props would have to be tested for specs or rated on known principals. Good idea.
Here is the small generator I modded from a shaded pole motor, I left the shading bars on the small tryout one but I'll also try it without them. It has two north poles in a row and two south poles so it's basically a two pole generator it make nice sine waves too. You can see how I cut the joined parts of the core around the rotor to separate the poles to the sides and make gaps. With the bigger one I'll make rows of North then south magnets following the curves on the rotor to minimize cogging, cogging is lumpy in the little one but it spins up and generates sine waves.
Basically it make a generator kind of like this Tesla design below but with four permanent magnets on the rotor. As well is a picture of the bigger motor I intend to modify, it has 0.5 mm or so wire 480 mH and not much resistance the rotor is wide enough to take a row of magnets following the curves. And a pic showing how I made the rotor from a cutting board and old fan, I chewed the recess out of the bit of wood to take the optical sensor, hahaha.
Cheers
Farmhand and TK:
If anybody ever goes the microcontroller route to generate the pulse timing based on the measured RPM of the rotor that would be really cool. If you looked at that LED hard drive clock clip, it's really impressive how when he slows down the rotor the pulse timing remains dead-on. Note that even for your current builds, just having a separate transistor to switch on some LEDs to see the pulse timing relative to a white painted-on line (White-Out) on the rotor magnets may be interesting. You don't have to use it all the time.
I actually haven't had a chance to look at Farmhand's clips yet. For the "Pulse Motor Build-off" you can check with Tinman or ZeroFossilFuel or Russ Gries. They are the guys that typically organize it and have all of the info.
I am not a "fan" of using a propeller prop as a load because I think the typical pulse motor spins too slowly. I think the pulse motor driving a generator attached to a load resistor is the better route. During the Yildiz fiasco a very good suggestion was made to use two bathroom scales. With a smaller pulse motor using two digital scales might be perfect. All that you have to do is measure the RPM and the weights on the scales (assuming a pulse motor with a horizontal axis) and crunch some numbers and you will be able to measure the mechanical power output of your motor in watts.
MileHigh
MileHigh, Those clips are both very cool, and that pulse timing viewing can be done and would be neat on a pulse motor, just like timing an "old" car with a timing light ;), I've done that thousands of times. The thing is that the timing is not only important to speed, an advanced timing is good for higher speeds and more efficiency but for Torque we want the timing to be a bit less advanced so that enough current can flow in the coils to produce the torque. That would take some mean programming. To run more efficiently for a given speed and load the micro would need to advance timing to get best efficiency, then if more load is added it would need to retard it back a bit from where it was so the motor didn't slow but allowed more current to flow and retain the same speed if possible, but if it cannot maintain speed then the timing would be even more "too far advanced" for the load/speed. For a constant load it would be easy, but for dynamic loading not so simple. Most methods make a compromise between speed in rpm possible and torque. In the last video, I showed that the acceleration is poor when the timing is set so as to give a higher speed when there is a varying load, with the fan the load gets more as the fan goes faster. With a pulse motor we cannot afford to lose momentum even for a moment, the momentum should be increased before the load is added so that the motor does not need to catch up under load, it only needs to hold it's own. So load switching can help that.
With my current coil arrangement, timing is not so critical in a given range over about 500 RPM and changing the pulse width will change the timing of the currents in the "charging" coil by retarding it more which with my present coil arrangement will simply make the charging coil pull the next magnet more than push the one it should push, so I think it goes from push push on two magnets, to push pull on the same magnet, possibly if the main coil has a stronger pull then the main coil might go from pushing the north magnet to pulling the next south. Automatic timing advancement by design. To a degree, I think !!
I agree the generator load would be simpler. I'll rewind the little generator tonight and try it again, hopefully I can get it to produce 14 volts RMS or so with thick enough wire to allow the powering of a load. I might try a direct drive if I can manage it, if not I'll use a belt.
Using a generator coil with too much impedance is pointless, there is a voltage produced but it goes flat when a load is applied. and the rotor speeds up because the generator no longer needs to charge the capacitance associated to the coil to such a high voltage, so the load on the rotor is less, that is how Thane does it. Next paragraph explains it.
To produce acceleration under load or short circuit in a generator, the generator coil is wound so that it has significant self capacitance and impedance, when running with no load the generator coils self capacitance is charged and discharged with every cycle to the voltage observed and that is a "parasitic" load, so when the coil is shorted the impedance prevents a "real short circuit" but also stops the charging of the coils self capacitance and the coil itself because the wave form is flattened, that relieves the load on the "prime mover" and acceleration happens. It can be done even with a coil that has little resistance by adding a capacitor across the coil, when running with no "actual" load the capacitor is a significant "parasitic" load in itself, when it's added the generator rotor slows down because of it, if the capacitor produces resonance it slows the rotor even more, then when at resonance if the coil is shorted the generator rotor speeds up. Thane just winds the coils so they do the same thing. I don't understand how he thought it was free energy. Eventually when I find or wind the right coil I will show the acceleration under load using just the coil (no added capacitance), however using a capacitor I can produce acceleration under short circuit anytime. Just ask me and I'll show it again with this new setup, like I did with the other setup. It's a known effect and is in line with the laws of physical nature. And is predictable by using known physical laws.
In a Generator coil that works at reasonably high frequency I think we want to reduce the self capacitance of the generator coils to improve the unloaded efficiency of the generator, ie. make it easier to turn with no load. Thane makes his coils so they load up the "prime mover" right from the start up, shorting them reduces the load they present to the prime mover, and all his video's show that.
Anyone want another demonstration ? With wave forms ? Just say and I'll set it up.
Cheers
Quote from: Farmhand on May 10, 2013, 06:53:54 AM
snip....
I think I understand better now the full implications of what you said. My apologies.
snip....
No apologies required. We all can learn from one another. Your experiments, presented information, and honest opinions are a refreshing addition to this thread.
Using a NSNS rotor is a step in the right direction if you wish to fully investigate the positive and / or negative impacts of rotor induced (back) emf on motor torque/speed characteristics.
Cheers
http://www.overunity.com/11350/confirming-the-delayed-lenz-effect/dlattach/attach/123521/image//
You may find these of interest. Note that the Orbette is using Core Effect propulsion, not electromagnetic attraction or repulsion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8S02SB-ENA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8S02SB-ENA)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mi_FJwpPrQk
Thanks Tinsel, That you tube dislike dropper hits me as well. :) I get regular dislike's as well.
Hey is this type of controller OK for what I want to do ? It's an ET-168_Stamp. I think it is what I need isn't it ? http://www.futurlec.com.au/ET-Easy168_Stamp_Technical.jsp
I ordered some Allegro 3144 Hall sensors so I hope they will work for something.
Cheers
P.S. I'm also going to try a second switching phase so I can double the firing frequency and shorten the cogging distance, with 8 magnets set N-S-N-S, then I could use a maximum of 16 coils on the rotor a coil between each magnet, but in reality there will just be two more coils or maybe one more if it works that way. Also maybe get it to self start with some circuit fiddling. I've got a bit more testing to do yet with this arrangement.
Quote from: TinselKoala on May 14, 2013, 09:23:44 AM
You may find these of interest. Note that the Orbette is using Core Effect propulsion, not electromagnetic attraction or repulsion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8S02SB-ENA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8S02SB-ENA)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mi_FJwpPrQk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mi_FJwpPrQk)
Excellent videos TK. I hope John Bedini looks at them to see that there is no free mechanical from the rotor as he puts it.
@Farmhand: The Allegro line of Hall sensors is my favorite, I've used them a lot and have a 3144 in my Marinov Slab pulse motor.
The Stamp, Parallax, and Arduino systems are all microcontrollers with interfaces and programming systems and they can all do pretty much the same things. Which you use will be a matter of taste and convenience, but I think any would work.
I like the Arduino system for several reasons, the programming environment uses a form of the c++ programming language which I know fairly well. Another is Arduino's use of "shields" which are stack-on special purpose boards like multiple motor drivers, ethernet, wireless, touchscreen, etc. that stack onto the headers of the main board. I can't really compare directly as I have very little experience with the other systems. Stamp is used for robotics a lot, and is the oldest system, I think.
Many of the Stamp and Parallax peripherals can be used with Arduino, for example the Parallax LCD screen is very easy to use and I've also used their ultrasonic and IR sensors with my Arduinos.
Since the Stamp system doesn't have the same programming structure as Arduino, I might not be able to help with programming issues, but I'm sure someone else can do so easily enough.
It looks like this http://www.futurlec.com.au/ET-Easy328_Controller.jsp is fully software-compatible with standard Arduino, but has different hardware layout so the Arduino-standard shields won't stack onto it. It has the same Atmel ATMega328 chip as the OSEPP Uno that I used in the magnetic levitator. But it doesn't have a built in USB interface, only serial! You need the other thing http://www.futurlec.com.au/RS232_Converter.jsp and a cable to use with USB from your computer.
Grr.
If I was buying from an Australian supplier, I might consider the Freetronics Eleven:
http://www.freetronics.com/products/eleven
Comes with the socketed processor instead of the smd version, and has room on the board for some prototyping components, as well as being hardware-compatible with Arduino shields. And it has built in USB interface, and some other nice features better than a simple standard Uno.
Any of the microcontroller systems will be able to do what you need; many people just use the microcontroller chip itself and build up their own peripheral circuitry like power supplies, output buffers etc. but that's too complicated for me. I think Stamp might be best for built-in, dedicated systems, and Arduino best for all-purpose knocking about, with ease of connection being a priority (you can just stick wires into the dip sockets) and fast changeover to other roles.
@Hoppy: Thanks for watching, and yep, it's amazing how folks like Bedini and Friedrich and folks like that are so good at avoiding tests that could show a cost of power generation in their systems.
I had a free afternoon so I decided to start working on an Arduino pulse motor controller, even though I don't have any spare Hall sensors or pulse motors, for that matter.
I do have an IR photodetector/illuminator pair that takes 5 v in and puts out a pulse, just like the Allegro A3144 Hall sensor, though, so the sketch I'm writing will work with the Hall sensor just like it does with the IR sensor.
The sketch isn't complete, I just have the sensor read portion done. It detects the edges of the sensor output pulse, and determines the length of time in microseconds that the pulse is on, the length of time the pulse was off since the last pulse, and computes the duty cycle, on a per-pulse basis, and displays these timings on the serial monitor.
Later on I'll implement the potentiometer setting of the delay and the duration of an output pulse to a transistor coil driver.
Here's the program sketch so far, for your amusement and tinkering:
http://www.mediafire.com/?fbwun5jbndbec4b
And I'm processing and uploading a little video of it in operation so far... not very exciting but it does show the concept and the serial monitor output.
It will be viewable in a few minutes.
http://youtu.be/tDGqsz-IK28
I rewound one of the coils for the little generator but it only produces 4.5 volts RMS and it needs to be spun faster, but I can see the concept can work and that my pulse motor can easily spin it up, I think I'll go ahead and modify the bigger one with more care, compared to the little one it's about four times as big and has appropriate wire on it already, 400 mH worth of about 0.5 mm wire, that should be able to load down the motor or snap the belt. :)
I just thought i would share a short clip to show the concept, the part of the core with the coil former on it comes out, and if you have several the same they can be wound differently and be changed around, the original coils for the little ones have hundreds of Ohms resistance but the bigger ones have a lot less.
The pulleys are 1:1.2 ratio up from motor to generator, I have a small pulley but I'm worried it might break the belt.
It's also a bit close to the rotor.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjKFkpm2ADc
Cheers
Hi Tinsel, Micro's are awesome when you know how to program them. I've got the software and I'll order an Eleven board they look like good value, I could drive to Jaycar town and get a kit from Freetronics, which includes a lot of other stuff as well for not much more money which would mean no waiting, I've got quite a few different IC's and Transistors, mosfet drivers already but not any of the actual parts in the kit, I'll need to ring them to find out if they have the kit in stock, apparently the warehouse is out of stock concerning that kit.
I could use the picaxe but I would need to learn how to write the hardware interrupt code. I am capable but it's difficult when I have no previous experience with programming micro's. I'm certain doing these projects will help me to learn a lot more quickly (less time wasting), I like steep learning curves, it means I get to be a bit obsessive. ;D
I like to use the RPR-220 photo reflector when experimenting because I can stop the motor after I find the right timing and see the reflective strip and where it triggers the reflector with relation to the magnets, I can line it up by eye because I made the angle of the light to reflective strip and back in the radial plane (no need to have the scope on except to make sure the signals are clean, the emitter and receptor are in the one part.
However I think halls are a more practical and reliable method because of dirt, dust or oil ect. I made a module circuit so as to adjust the sensitivity which is very helpful for getting a proper clean signal with optical triggers.
Double or multiple pulsing is useful for getting the rotor up to speed quicker without needing to go too long with the duty on start up. I made a small mistake on my CD4047 signal processing circuit, the retrigger pin needs to be switched between the rails I have it switched between ground and the input signal, :-[ small change, but anyway it retriggers to get going up to a few hundred rpm then it's all single pulses.
To all/anyone, with the little generator design, what would be the difference between cutting the shading bars of the core and not after I have separated the "field" poles into two side's ? And should I stick with two large rotor poles one on each side so just one north and one south ? If for example both a north and a south magnet are engaging the same side/pole of the field for a moment will that waste power ? For example could I make the rotor with 4 x N-S-N-S poles ? With a wound rotor there is only one north and one south on the rotor but they are big and the magnetic effect of the inactive rotor coil is a lot less, nothing I guess, so I am thinking I need to keep only two rotor poles but big ones, like a quarter of the rotor face or more on each side.
Cheers
Quote from: Farmhand on May 15, 2013, 04:34:23 AM
I could use the picaxe but I would need to learn how to write the hardware interrupt code. I am capable but it's difficult when I have no previous experience with programming micro's. I'm certain doing these projects will help me to learn a lot more quickly (less time wasting), I like steep learning curves, it means I get to be a bit obsessive. ;D
Hi !
I would suggest AVR or ARM based boards with arduino as good starting point.
And if you need more performance than arduino environment - I did very crazy things with AVR controllers - feel free to ask.
(tiny)AVR 8PIN devices are even cheaper than 555, can run standalone......
rgds.
I would really like to get a reliable measure or at least a "gauge" of the shaft power before changing test arrangements. Does anyone have an idea I can implement fairly easily to get a benchmark ? I don't need a HP or torque value just a reliable benchmark to gauge against. I'm thinking I'll just hang a given weight from a leather belt over the polished shaft like a friction brake and it should be equal if done the same then I can add weights to load it down and see the most weight it can tolerate hanging over the shaft from a fixed anchor point something like that. But as it heats up the friction value will change. Seems a tricky thing to do reliably but I'll see what I can do. Maybe a turnbuckle and a digital hanging scale for weighing chickens. :D
Cheers
P.S Scratch that, I have a simple test load, :) I found a small KV 1880 - 3 phase model airplane motor, an "outrunner", the outside is what turns with the magnets on it, so I can just put the belt around the outside of the outrunner motor, the pulse motor can hold over 1800 rpm with a 1 Ohm load on one phase (between two wires), I'll try it with two 1 Ohm resistors I guess. If I short a winding it throws the belt immediately. 10 Ohms only loads it a bit. It take a fair bit to turn the three phase motor and the voltage is low but the frequency is relatively high, it'll do for a test load it should remain a stable measure. It produces one volt through a one ohm load so that's neat. It can accelerate under the one Ohm load if kept in the torque range. If I de-tune it too much while the 1 Ohm load is on it suddenly drops speed beyond recovery without removing the load.
Oh and the wave form remains a stable sine wave so measurements are even possible. An improvement in Watts can be found then.
..
OK so I shot a video of a 1 Ohm draw down test on the three phase motor as a generator. As It turns out if I switch in cap to double the size of C2 I can drive the generator with two 1 Ohm resistors between the windings but only at 1200 rpm. :P
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAEgLr5zXK4
Also I redone the schematic to show the boost converter hardware and the way I intend to employ a second motor coil with a bifilar wound charging coil and switch them in parallel with separate switches. Everything is renamed and I think C3 and C4 could be 220 uF instead of 330 uF. With 50 volts max on the boost capacitor I should be getting nearly 80 volts to switch the coils with at times. It'll bang along then and really slap the table. ;D
Cheers
I like the resonant charging feature of your
setup - it can provide an additional "boost"
to your supply voltages. Shouldn't there be
a couple of "check valve" isolating diodes in
the feeds to capacitors C3 and C4?
Very nicely done!
Hi SeaMonkey, Nice to read you, :) Yes you're right, the "de-q-ing" diodes I left out for the sake of less parts, but they are kind of important, they would go between the Boost cap and the MC2 charging coils, or they could go after the inductors but I would put them before, the point is to check (stop) the reverse flow of energy from the two charging caps C3 and C4 back to the supply which is the boost cap C2. However the Q is quite low because of the low frequency, still they should be there.
I made an improvement, for some reason the charging coil works best reverse polarity but placed slightly before the "S" magnet after the one over the motor coil rather than before the "S" magnet that just passed the coil, this makes the coils close together with the inside edges of the cores tips only about 1 inch apart, but Wow what an improvement in speed and torque to how I had it for the load down video, now it can hold at over 2000 rpm with a 1 Ohm load on one phase of the generator and 10 ohms on another phase. Should I make a triangle of load resistors for each value ? 2 ohms is not much load for a 1.3 volts generator but 1 ohm is and a short circuit almost actually stops the generator, it throws the belt, now the belt is slipping when I apply two 1 ohm loads at high speed so I have to make it a tad tighter or increase the pulley friction some other way. Placing the charging coil close to one motor coil doesn't sit well with me so I might go silly with the glue gun again. But anyway, I now know where it likes to go and it means the motor will be able to rotate in only one direction. It wont run well backwards.
The charging coil needs to be reverse polarity and in an advanced position to a 45 degree "S" magnet, I need to look at the currents in the coils again, I setup charging caps so I can look at the differences in the currents when I go from 220 uF to 440 uF on the charging capacitance, using 440 uF the torque at lower speeds is better but it won't run fast, I'm almost convinced there needs to be two charging caps so a larger capacitance can be switched in by the micro if the rpm is below a certain value that would improve start up speed, lower rpm torque and power throughput. Doubling it is too much but it'll make seeing the difference easier.
After the latest coil position adjustment the motor can now reach 2800 rpm at the peak of its input power curve but all the torque is at about 2000 rpm now rather than the 1800 rpm before and with the same input pulse width. I think i could draw the curves fairly close after the loading experiments, it really helps to load the motor down with a real case load, the 1 Ohm resistor it can work into gets a bit hot but it's only a 0.5 Watt resistor.
I'm almost setup now for the second motor coil. I've got several things I want to do with respect to my own generator coils for the rotor which will be much less lossy than driving a generator especially if the cores slide in and out. :) My rotor design means that the cores cannot "catch" on the rotor magnets, worst they can do is to scratch the outer edge of the rotor so they can be made to go right up to the rotor and be shaped for the curve, I intend them to have very big cores about 1.5 inches diameter so the core tips will be curve shaped I might even double the thickness of the rotor and get another 8 magnets to make it better that way. then it would be a 24 mm thick rotor, it really needs to be thrice as wide. ;) I'm wondering if the motor coils would benefit from larger diameter cores. The motor coil core is fairly small and the coil gets hot after a while.
Cheers
P.S. Now since there are 8 magnets and 4 are souths MC2 can be placed in 4 locations on the rotor in an advanced position of about 5 to 10 degrees before any of the "S" magnets.
SeaMonkey do you think it could be possible the motor coil is handing off some flux directly to the charging coil at some point ? Or maybe sharing cores or something ?
@Farmhand: Very Nice! You are doing a great job of documenting and developing your system. Keep going!
You probably realize that your torque measurement system can provide a known variable resisting drag by externally energizing one of the "extra" windings on the brushless outrunner with some variable DC. You've made a simple dyno system; I wonder if it's possible to calibrate it in standard units somehow.
Thanks Tinsel, I need to stress though for those considering building that the principal of the motor is the slight difference in phase of the currents as well as their variations, and the position the charging coil is placed is very dependent on the - pulse width - coil inductances - charging capacitance - rotational speed Vs magnet spacing, and if we want high rotational speed or low rpm torque.
The design considerations are
1. How much power we want the motor to use.
2. How fast we want it to spin.
3. How much torque it has and where.
For more Torque at lower rpm we can design the motor to do that by using more inductance more capacitance and closer to 50% duty which will limit the speed of the motor unless it is computer or manually controlled to maximize all possible parameters for different situations.
For more speed we need higher coil switching frequencies so it's narrower pulse widths - less inductance - less capacitance - higher voltages and timing tweeks.
Certain things are limiting by nature.
Anyway I am close to getting two 1 Ohm resistors on load at 1800 rpm, I'll post a quick clip of how I do tonight after a rearrangement and tune up. Twice I re installed the magnets the wrong way around for the sensor strip placements. arrrggg. Then wondered why it wouldn't work. :-[
Too small of a pulse width compared to the inductance starves the motor of it's ability to reuse the inductive energy released as well as keep taking from the supply while under load, I think. The pulse width needs to be not so long as to waste energy but not too short for the inductance to prevent proper current flow. That's when tuning on the Dyno gets to be fun ;D.
Cheers
Quote from: FarmHand
SeaMonkey do you think it could be possible the motor coil is handing off some flux directly to the charging coil at some point ? Or maybe sharing cores or something ?
Very interesting question. Wouldn't it be
something if we were able somehow to
see the magnetic field in its entirety with
some device which could enable us to
visualize its strength and polarity?
When it comes to flux, flux leakage and
wondering the paths flux can take in a
magnetic system be prepared for
numerous surprises as conditions change.
Fascinating stuff!
Thank you for pointing out that diode SeaMonkey, it is kind of important, with the changes I made I got a bit confused I'll confess.
Anyway I think I only need one where (D10) is now in the revised drawing, for some reason I can't modify the other post to replace the drawing.
Also I think the change I made in preparation for the second motor coil tricked me, I wound a new coil from four wires of 0.5 mm twisted wire but because I put it on the same former it slipped my mind, so it has more or less inductance which is affecting things, I'll use two strands for each charging circuit.
Now after looking at the currents and switching between 220 and 440 uF I can see almost exactly what to do. If I want to try for maximum power I need to design around a certain duty cycle % of "on" time closer to 50% at the target rpm range and with a bigger capacitor, if I want to use more power.
The coils being close seems not to be a problem but I'll do a few specific tests and measure the inductance of the new charging coil then re-position the charging coil again this time with the pulse width set to give me the correct duty at the right rpm band. It's a lot better but still not right. This time I'll position it back on the other side again between MC1-2 and point "A", so that the timing of the maximum of the current in the charging coils is neutral with respect to the magnet pass with the correct pulse width at the right rpm to give 45% duty in the target rpm range with no boost.
I think I've found the optimum pulse width for the motor coil so the rest I figure around that. It's a little bit of trial and error but it's difficult to know if an idea will work some times without trying it, I need to remember that the motor coils are meant to do the work and the charging coil is just a bonus so it's core tip should be a bit further away from the rotor magnets I think.
New drawing below, I just put in a 6A01 diode which is a 6 amp 100 volt part.
I keep getting new idea's which can side track me at times.
@Farmhand: I try to understand your latest circuit and magnet arrangement and some questions come to my mind.
1) I guess that one could replace the "5 Amp Boost Converter" with a 36 Volt power supply (e.g. three 12 V batteries in series instead of one 12 Volt battery)?
2) About the N S N S N S N S arrangement of the magnets on the rotor:
Do you pulse the MC1-1 and MC1-2 coil only when the N pole is in front of them?
What happens when then S pole is in front of the MC1-1 and MC1-2 coil? Is not the rotor slowed down a bit, because the S pole clings to the core of the coils?
3) Why do you use two transistors Q3 and Q4 to power the coils MC1- and MC1-2? Is not one enough?
This is not a criticism, I am just curious.
Greetings, Conrad
No probs Conrad, Your questions are very valid.
1) Yes you could use a higher voltage supply or a variable DC power supply, that's just what I like to use because I have solar charged batteries and I want to be able to apply more or less power without needing to change the pulse width.
2) Yes that's right, the way things look is that the prolonged currents in the coils attracts the next opposite magnet and with the charging coil slightly out of phase there is a slight neutralizing of the cogging drag because of that.
So I think the real torque happens when events go like this-- the motor coils repulse a north magnet in the "on" time then the prolonged currents through the motor coils during the "off" time attracts the next opposite polarity magnet, the same happens with the charging coil just a tad later and when the motor coils push the rotor so fast that the charging coil phase is too late to push a south it must then attract the next north if anything. The extra attraction of the motor coils to the next magnet by the prolonged currents would neutralize the drag and the drag of the south magnet leaving the motor coils can only force more current through the charging coil. I must end the theory of operation with a big I think because I can only say what I think. The currents also become sinusoidal looking at some points I'll include a shot here shortly if you check back.
I try to look at it like pipes of fluid and the coils are elastic bags, the capacitors are reservoirs the diodes are check valves the voltage is pressure (potential is level in reservoir) and the switches are sluice gates, they need to chop the water off.
The pressure from the momentum of the water when the gate slams shut forces the water to flow up through the diode and into a reservoir (flyback diode to return capacitor)
The pressure from the momentum of the water also fills the charge cap to a higher voltage. So when the motor coil is first switched, current flows from the charging cap before it flows from the supply. ( Current can't flow from the supply until the level in the charge cap tries to fall below the supply level).
The pressure from the return capacitor forces current through the charging coil and charging cap but not the motor coil.
Basically it looks like the magnets do interfere at times. But it should be all cancelling, the south pole leaving the motor coil would force current through the charging coil to push it away and that also adds to the charging cap voltage level to increase the bang of the next switch on. :) If I just cut the power to the coils from the supply it seems to want to keep running, it runs on for a while with no generator attached. (By run on I mean it takes a long time to stop, too long kind of thing than if it were all drag).
I only use two transistors because they are there to use for two coils. With separate coils I like to switch them separately, multiple strands on the one core I usually use just one transistor if it can take the current.
Cheers
P.S. Conrad you bring up a good point and I think I should draw radially segmented graph to show the on and off times for the transistor and current flow times for the two coils.
With the shots the yellow trace is the motor coil it's upside down and it is first, then the blue current trace is after it that's the charging coil current.
The two left shots show the difference between 220 uF and 440 uF for the charging cap, the bottom left is the abnormal one where the application of the extra 220 uF caused the current in the blue coil to be delayed longer and put the charging current way too far out of phase and made it look as if it comes first but it doesn't.
At certain times the current can not fall to zero in both coils it just goes up and down in value. The coils get a work out but they don't wear out. :)
..
Quote from: Farmhand on May 16, 2013, 03:41:02 PM
So I think the real torque happens when events go like this-- the motor coils repulse a north magnet in the "on" time then the prolonged currents through the motor coils during the "off" time attracts the next opposite polarity magnet, the same happens with the charging coil just a tad later and when the motor coils push the rotor so fast that the charging coil phase is too late to push a south it must then attract the next north if anything. The extra attraction of the motor coils to the next magnet by the prolonged currents would neutralize the drag and the drag of the south magnet leaving the motor coils can only force more current through the charging coil. I must end the theory of operation with a big I think because I can only say what I think. The currents also become sinusoidal looking at some points I'll include a shot here shortly if you check back.
Basically it looks like the magnets do interfere at times. But it should be all cancelling, the south pole leaving the motor coil would force current through the charging coil to push it away and that also adds to the charging cap voltage level to increase the bang of the next switch on. :) If I just cut the power to the coils from the supply it seems to want to keep running, it runs on for a while with no generator attached.
@Farmhand: I agree with your analysis concerning the S-poles. Somehow the S poles even help (although one would think that they introduce problems).
I made the same observations with my very simple and crude ring magnet spinner, see:
http://www.overunity.com/11350/confirming-the-delayed-lenz-effect/msg359314/#msg359314 (http://www.overunity.com/11350/confirming-the-delayed-lenz-effect/msg359314/#msg359314) (trigger coil, single transistor)
http://www.overunity.com/11350/confirming-the-delayed-lenz-effect/msg359277/#msg359277 (http://www.overunity.com/11350/confirming-the-delayed-lenz-effect/msg359277/#msg359277) (single transistor driver)
http://www.overunity.com/11350/confirming-the-delayed-lenz-effect/msg359078/#msg359078 (http://www.overunity.com/11350/confirming-the-delayed-lenz-effect/msg359078/#msg359078) (only one drive coil, single transistor)
http://www.overunity.com/11350/confirming-the-delayed-lenz-effect/msg358967/#msg358967 (http://www.overunity.com/11350/confirming-the-delayed-lenz-effect/msg358967/#msg358967) (H-bridge driver)
I built an H-bridge driver to push N-pole and S-pole, but the simple one transistor driver (only pushing the N-pole) was more efficient (it used less power to reach the same rpm).
When I find the time I will try variable pulse timing with an Arduino (I have the Arduino Due) using the same simple and crude ring magnet spinner (in order to have a comparison with the simple one transistor driver and the H-bridge driver).
Efficiency can be gained by getting the pulse timing just right. But that could mean, that pulsing N and S could be an advantage in case the pulse timing is right?
a) Push 1: push N-pole away (sending current through the coil, exactly timed pulse)
b) the back EMF from Push 1 will attract the coming S-pole
c) Push 2: push S-pole away (sending reverse current through the coil, exactly timed pulse)
d) the back EMF from Push 2 will attract the coming N-pole
- repeat the steps a) through d)
I attach the planned Arduino set up. A man skilled in the art will be able to expand this circuit to an H-bridge (using two opto couplers).
Greetings, Conrad
Yep it should work the same both ways and alternating pulses should be both more efficient and more powerful, whichever depending on the objective. Prolonging the currents after the switch off helps rather than hinders if we make our circuits to do it. For sure. We can do anything we want if it works my friend. ;) Even moreso if it's fun.
It's very similar to driving a Tesla coil, we use sharp edged pulses to keep a nice sine wave standing up and use the power of the sinusoidal currents driven by resonant rise. The impedance facing the recirculating currents is overcome by the way the magnetic field collapses and tries to short the coil by building potential.
In the video this time I show the charge capacitor on the yellow trace and the mosfet drain on the blue trace.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLiNk6yBWyY&feature=youtu.be
It's good to get confirmation of the efficiency you seen with one way pulses, but two way pulses can be just as efficient I think, the thing is there needs to be enough off time for the prolonged currents or wasting happens where more pulse width means less speed, prolonging the currents means the on time needs to be at least only 50% of the entire cycle so for one way DC pulses that is one pulse of 50% or less but for two way pulses that is two pulses of 25% or less. So the pulse width could get too short for the inductance maybe, something to consider.
At first I wanted to stop the currents quicker but then I figured why not let them do what they want and try to use it.
Cheers
@Conrad.....what is it with you and your P-channel mosfets? Do you just happen to have a box of them that you are trying to use up?
;)
Flip that mosfet symbol over, put the Source to the negative rail and the Drain to the low side of the load, and use something like IRFP260 or IRFP460. N-channel mosfets are cheaper and perform better than the equivalent P-channel mosfets.
Quote from: TinselKoala on May 16, 2013, 07:50:46 PM
@Conrad.....what is it with you and your P-channel mosfets? Do you just happen to have a box of them that you are trying to use up?
;)
Flip that mosfet symbol over, put the Source to the negative rail and the Drain to the low side of the load, and use something like IRFP260 or IRFP460. N-channel mosfets are cheaper and perform better than the equivalent P-channel mosfets.
@TinselKoala: I hope I got it right with the N-Channel MOSFET. Note the difference in the connection of the Gate to the opto coupler and the reversed role of R1 and R2.
The intention is to bring the MOSFET (which drives the coil) in the on state whenever the LED in the opto coupler is shining.
I am a bit slow at electronics.
Greetings, Conrad
Hi Conrad, I've been thinking about your questions, and now I am wondering if I should do a test to see the effect of making the rotor all north out again and return the charging coil polarity back to normal but without moving the coils, that should work the same kind of way but would rule out the attraction to the next magnet of opposite polarity. I'll just turn the "S" magnets from out to in and change the MC2 polarity back to normal, and try it. Not sure why I haven't already tried that to rule it out.
Cheers
@Conrad: Now you can put your scope probe "ground" references at the negative rail where they belong, and use a second probe "tip" at the location on the bottom of the load where you now have the first probe's reference attached (mosfet Drain). The voltage difference between the probes will give the drop across the load and can be used to compute the current in the load.
Your gate voltage dropping network is workable I think, but the resistances are kind of low for my liking. You generally don't need such a low value to pull a mosfet gate down when it's supposed to turn off, so you might be wasting some power here. Also, it's sometimes nice to protect the gate with a pair of Zeners from gate to source, back-to-back, at the desired max gate voltage, like 12 or 15 volts. This will limit the max gate voltage and hopefully shunt overvoltage spikes away from the gate and sometimes can save a mosfet that's in severe service. With the optocoupler acting as a sort of "fuse" this shouldn't really be necessary, but who knows until the circuit is built and tested and has had a few failures.
Hi all, I was wondering MileHigh could you look at these scope shots and my drawing and tell me your opinion on what is happening ?
Anyone is welcome to comment.
I'll write what I think here, I'll track the rotor as the different points on the rotor pass the motor coil MC1. The coil MC2 is reverse connected and the coils are placed as shown or thereabouts. The timing is slightly advanced for normal efficient running at around 1800 to 2200 rpm.
The events are kind of overlapping. As the drawing shows. I neglected the flyback diode, but there is one.
1) At point "A" the mosfet turns on ( I know because the timing is set to do that). This repulses the north magnet above the MC1 coil and continues until just before the next south magnet "engages" the core properly. Also as the south magnet is approaching the MC2 coil it cannot oppose the current. EDIT: Actually I think the south magnet approaching the charging coil does oppose and stop the current in the Charging coil, going by the shots.
2) At about point "B" the current starts in MC2. This repulses the south magnet as well adding torque to the rotor.
3) At point "C" the mosfet turns off and the discharge starts. By this point the rotor has turned 45 degrees and the south magnet is above the motor coil MC1 reinforcing the current through it and back to/through the charging coil MC2 via the return circuit. This also is attracting the next South magnet to the MC1 motor coil and the next North magnet to the MC2 coil.
4) From points "C" to "D" the motor coil discharges. This is in time with the approach and departure of the South magnet over the MC1 motor coil and the North magnet passing the MC2 Charging coil. Both reinforcing the current through the coils. And attracting the magnets. At some point the voltage is such that the coils cannot add to it by generation so there is no Lenz effect drag only cogging.
5) THe current in the Charging coil continues towards point "E". If the duty is low there is dead time at the end I guess.
With the scope shot the motor coil current is the yellow trace and is upside down. The points marked on the shots don't necessarily relate to the sketch.
The rise of current in the Motor coil starts at point "A".
The rise of current in the Charging coil starts at point "E" or thereabouts.
EDIT: After some more testing I have determined that the mosfet "on" time (2 mS) is between point "B" and point "C" on the scope shots, and the discharge is the fall of current of course.
To me it looks good, I just need to get the correct MC2 placement for the delay ect. .
The drawing is a bit off compared to the scope shot but the sketch is what I think I am trying to do.
Cheers
P.S. It does look to me that the motor coil current is rising before the mosfet turns on in those shots. I just took a couple more to study.
It's a resonant push at the right time, just to peak the currents. the next shots show good current in the motor coil and much less in the charging coil but for longer. Sweet.
I will still need to test the all north facing magnets but still only firing on four to see the effect the extra magnets have when they are "N" magnet faces.
OH and one other thing is that I noticed that at efficient running with no load there can be and I took a shot of 900mA RMS current in the motor coil while there was only 700mA RMS current in the charging coil and the circuit was only drawing 400mA from the 12.5 volt battery. Which was turning the 580 gram rotor at about 2200 rpm Whatever that means . .. :D
OK so point "D" on the sketch corresponds to point "F" on the scope shot.
..
This generator coil works to speed up the rotor under short circuit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpKZw15A41Y
Cheers
Dear Farmhand,
Does your generator coil have a ferromagnetic core or it is an air core coil?
If it has a ferromagnetic core, then removing the generator coil completely from your setup, what is the RPM then?
thanks, Gyula
Hi Gyula, Yes it has the part from the motor core inside a square laminated one with curved ends. I can check that no problem but I'll need to be a bit careful so I get a proper result, I'll have to leave it running while I remove the mount with the coil on it, might take a while and I'm about to go do stuff so I might not get it done for a while I think the rpm will be slightly higher without the core there but the input power probably will too also be higher because of the design of the motor, the pulse width will not change but the input power is related to the rpm, so without the core if the motor does spin faster it might consume more energy, however it didn't seem to in the video, I didn't look that closely though, I do it and post all is shared. I had that in mind. ;D See the input current in the video, that is the current out of the battery at 12.5 volts or so.
Umm there is 15.6 uF across the coil though just to be honest. ;D
I'll do the test it sounds like a good idea.
Cheers
Gyula, What about if I get it running with just the core removed, then carefully slide the core into the coil to see the difference, both shorted and not shorted with and without the core. It would be easier than removing the entire coil. Maybe that's what you meant ?
Without the core the rotor is about 3/4 of an inch from the coil end, but there is the clip leads and the spade terminals on the coil former as well to think about, I think they have steel in them. Would the clip leads and spade terminals matter ?
Motor sounds sweet hey.
Cheers
P.S. To all, I want to be fair and forthright. I have no intention of fudging anything and if I see something odd I will say. No bias.
..
Yes, if you can remove the core only, it is also good because I assume the air core coil with its tuning capacitor will not cause significant drag when the coil output is unloaded. The clip leads may cause also a negligible drag with their eddy current inductions in them.
The current meter does not change in the video when you short the coil output, it is good sign... ;)
Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on May 19, 2013, 05:58:58 PM
Yes, if you can remove the core only, it is also good because I assume the air core coil with its tuning capacitor will not cause significant drag when the coil output is unloaded. The clip leads may cause also a negligible drag with their eddy current inductions in them.
The current meter does not change in the video when you short the coil output, it is good sign... ;)
Gyula
Probably good to check all 3 ways. With coil and core, without core, without core and coil, just to have all stones unturned. ;)
Mags
OK done, And at three power levels.
At Power level (4) I got
No coil - 3017
Air coil - 3013
Shorted Air coil - 2986
Cored coil - 2854
Shorted Cored coil - 2967
At Power level (5) I got
No coil - 3106
Air coil - 3085
Shorted Air coil - 3063
Cored coil - 2928
Shorted Cored coil - 3062
At power level (6) I get
No coil - 3190
Air coil - 3176
Shorted Air coil - 3150
Cored coil - 2990
Shorted Cored coil - 3144
Fairly convincing experiment, I think it went well and is repeatable with similar results.
When I make the coil that will work alone with no added capacitance, I hazard a guess the result will be the same.
Oh and the power did increase this time when when the cored speed up happened at Power Level (6) only about 100 mA or so.
It didn't seem to move much on the other levels maybe because of the boost converter making a spongy voltage or something.
The higher levels of boost are 50% duty, the lower ones vary down to 20 % or so. Dunno bout that.
Cheers
Those are numbers that I would have expected where the core is the drag that speedup is overcoming. So many had failed to show that.
Your shorted numbers are good, cored or not compared to free running. Shorting is a bit different than just loading unless the load is heavy. Less of a load, more drag.
Thanks for showing that. ;D
Mags
Quote from: Farmhand on May 19, 2013, 07:47:06 PM
...
When I make the coil that will work alone with no added capacitance, I hazard a guess the result will be the same.
Hi Farmhand,
Thanks for your efforts and showing the results. Regarding your guess above, I agree the results would be the same or only a tad bit better without the added capacitor because when you tune the coil the resonant current circulating in the LC tank gives a small additional loss, negligible in practice (assuming the coil has a reasonable quality factor, say Q>10).
Quote
....
Oh and the power did increase this time when when the cored speed up happened at Power Level (6) only about 100 mA or so.
It didn't seem to move much on the other levels maybe because of the boost converter making a spongy voltage or something.
The higher levels of boost are 50% duty, the lower ones vary down to 20 % or so. Dunno bout that.
Regarding your boost converter's changing duty cycle, is not it normal as it varies: for higher levels the converter has to 'pump' out more juice hence duty cycle increases and vice versa? And when the levels do not change much then duty cycle can stay at a relatively constant value, it has no much reason to correct for.
Gyula
No Probs Mags, Yes the numbers make perfect sense. What I say next is not directed to you Mags so please bear with me.
The way I see it a normal Alternator or AC generator usually makes a forced sine wave, ie. you might notice that the little three phase model airplane motor makes a sine wave right off, at very low speeds because of the design of the motor, it has minimal resistance and inductance for use with PWM controllers but the effect of the immediate sine wave is the layout of the magnets and the coils/cores. But when we make a generator from just placing coils at a given distance and place magnets a similar way what we get is a frequency driven sine wave or a resonant condition is what make a sine wave, ie, we don't see a sine wave until a certain frequency is applied or reached and so when that frequency is passed resonance is passed and the coils experience increased impedance due to the reactance. This means the coil cannot pass currents very well. If the core is removed the resonant frequency is dropped by a whole bunch of Hz and so the coil can then pass currents but being air cored it doesn't process the magnet flux very well and generates much less so causes very little drag.
I only went to a harmonic but it was enough to cause drag on the cored coil that the shorting could not overcome because the wave form was a result of frequency and not generator design. A generator designed to output maximum power at best efficiency makes a forced sine wave at all frequencies has as little resistance as possible and the inductance is designed so resonance is not passed and reactance is not an issue. Such a generator when shorted will cause severe to catastrophic drag because it tries to work into the short. When a coil has a frequency induced sine wave or a frequency induced reactance situation that causes very high impedance the coil cannot power loads properly and cannot be shorted proper because current cannot flow well at that frequency.
The proof is in the inability of the generator coil to power loads even at a lower frequency, being that when a load is added the waveform is distorted even at lower frequencies.
If we want to use frequency induced sine waves they need to be high frequency and backed by the input of high energy pulses of input power not just a sniff of a passing magnet.
To make a good permanent magnet alternator it needs to have the cores and magnets arranged so that the machine makes a sine wave right from start up, the magnet to core distance should be as close as possible ,the cogging kinda needs to be counteracted using some Technique (there are some in use already), also the coils need to have not so much inductance that the resonance frequency is not passed during operation so that inductive reactance is not an issue. This type of alternator will load down the prime mover anytime a load is placed across the generator output because it it designed to generate electricity not to get funding from investors.
I'm not finished yet though. My demonstration is still not convincing enough, I have another with more impedance and higher voltage most likely no added capacitors as well. The coil I just used had 0.5 mm wire and not all that much inductance or resistance and it worked to get AUL because I added capacitors, I will try that coil with no capacitors first then if it won't accelerate without caps. I will record it's output with the caps and without. Then I will go to a coil that has Henries inductance rather than mH and 400 Ohms resistance. I have several other coils of my own making to try as well.
The next coil will cause acceleration with as little as only LED's as a load, or shorted.
My motor is a very good prime mover for testing these things because it can keep a constant pulse width, this means the speed of the rotor is very prone to slow with load and the voltage is spongy so a decrease in load will increase the working voltage of the motor coils and increase the speed by improving efficiency alone, it can accelerate under load without much increase in input power, sometime none. Which did kinda surprise me but I think the reasons I just outlined is why. It's not all the motor design but the supply circuit I'm using with it as well, a bit of both really, the decrease in load would unload the charging coil and so it would release more energy from it's magnetic field after pushing the rotor and as a result the main motor coil gets both - more energy and at a higher voltage to boot.
Cheers
No Gyula, My boost converter is manually controlled via a pot, I chooses between the battery voltage or 9 different levels of boost it stays where I select. However if the load is small on the lower levels of boost I use less than 50% duty so the motor pulls the voltage down, the boost converter only works at 3 kHz so the low duty makes a spongy voltage.
I use a picaxe to sense the voltage on the boost cap and it shut's off the PWM when the voltage on the cap gets to the set level. So I can very both the boost current (the duty) and the resulting unloaded voltage, when a load is applied at a lower level the voltage drops if the duty is so low so that the power remains the same around about.
You wanna see the code that controls it ? Would be no problem, it's not sophisticated programming or anything. Just hack programming but it works, I can write better code I have four switches for outputs on the picaxe control board I made it's a 14M2 so it has I think 5 outputs and 5 inputs I've configured it with 4 mosfets for outputs and 4 dedicated inputs with two spare. But I used low voltage mosfets 50 volts and IN5822 diodes so the switches are mainly for power control. I use one input and output for the boost converter hence the need to keep the initial boost below 40 volts but then the charging coil is a boost converter as well. More than first meets the eye.
Cheers
Puff for me, lol I thought your converter to be automatically PWM controlled, that is why I answered like that.
Never mind. Thanks for the code offer, I do not need it, I am not using picaxe or Arduino stuff, rather limited in tinkering place at the kitchen table.
Gyula
I just thought it would be a good idea so there was no confusion that's all. Not just for you. The code shows the PWM for the levels but the sensed voltage is converted to a scale between 0 and 255 for the voltage limit. I use the same type of code that I wrote for my boxed up picaxe boost converter. One ADC input has the pot to choose the levels and another ADC input senses the voltage, it's a custom setup and I can adjust it to whatever. I do go to 55 % duty if I want a more solid voltage. The way it works I can turn the boost converter on and with a flicker of current the boost cap is charged and the PWM only kicks in if the resistor potential divider drains the voltage over time or a load is attached.
Pulsing coils and stuff for just charging batteries is a long gone for me, I use a similar setup to boost the voltage of my small solar battery conditioner, it can work in low light to condition batteries with 24 volts capacitor discharges because of the boost function, in full sun the boost stops and the setup pulses the solar panel charged capacitor to keep the panels at 17 volts and things need to look after themselves, when the battery is charged it goes into float mode and if loaded it begins charging again if there is sunshine.
All the pulsing of coils for flyback is just boost converter stuff. Tesla's resonant charging circuit from the "IGNITER FOR GAS ENGINES" patent was/is a type of boost converter. It uses the discharge of the coil to charge a capacitor to a higher voltage.
Basically my motor shows several principals that are very useful. As well it put's into perspective some claims of the likes of "in a Bedini machine the rotor work is free", I see that when the rotor is loaded the charging coil produces less voltage into the charging capacitor, ergo the work from a coil's magnetic field on a rotor is not free. Lets see someone prove otherwise.
I don't want to seem as though I'm trying to teach you more educated folks circuit theory or anything, that would be pretentious. I very much respect and appreciate the expert help. ie. My friend SeaMonkey I think knew I had a busted diode because he could tell by the wave forms but being a fantastic teacher he just mentioned it and allowed me to find the fault. SeaMonkey has taught me much, I see him as a mentor not just in electronics but also as an example of self control and decorum, and in that area I lag far behind. As a rule I always defer to the knowledge of the educated men such as yourself and others of the like, I am very grateful for you all. But by the same token I don't want to be treated as if I know nothing (not saying anyone in particular is doing that, just sayin), I am learning. I might lack words and some experience but not brain power and vision. I'm trying to tread lightly. :)
I don't go for pretty stuff, I want to get into the guts of things. As Mags said leave no stone unturned. I like to design my own little experiments to see how and why things happen. My analysis might not be spot on but I think I'm getting warm. On a number of fronts.
The way I see it the guru's have attacked our intelligence and deceived many of us for profit or otherwise. For me that means war. On all fronts, propaganda and covert operations are par for the course for the other side, they even team up to from a stronger deception, I work alone. I've been attacked ridiculed and marginalized on several forums, this one seems tolerant of me, but it makes no difference. I strive to find the truth and reveal it. Whatever it may be. It's a straight road and easy to follow, but it's not paved well yet. Others are doing it too. The truth will prevail. My advice to the Guru's is "Ante up and show the goods or give it up" I won't be the last and I'm far from finished.
Some Guru's I think are thrust into the role but don't fight it, I think because it seems desirable due to the adoration/attention.
I have the rest of my life to fight deception and coercive persuasion anyway I might as well make a sport of it. ;D
No one has tried to sue me yet, but I have had attempted anonymous contacts. They don't scare me one bit. Neither do the threats like those UFO Politics and his followers throw at me. Talk of firearms and all kinds of childish stuff like they think they can shoot me from the USA. hahahaha. Or are they saying they are working for dark forces and can actually make something happen. I doubt it. But don't discount it. Regardless I am not afraid. I poke tongues at them all. :P
Free energy is all around us. There is no doubt. Before money everything was free. Energy cannot be created so all that can be done is to collect it or harness it, just like a solar panel does.
Thane says energy can be created. That is like he is saying he can add something to the universe that did not previously exist. It's baloney.
Cheers
Farmhand:
I have seen several references to guns also. The tradition of having an anonymous handle predates the Internet and goes back to computer bulletin board systems and that is predated by the same tradition with Citizen's Band radio. Because of a preponderance of unusual characters with unusual beliefs on the free energy forums in comparison with the general population, I don't give my name to anybody. I don't want to be attacked or harassed by a nutcase. Relatively recently I tried to help somebody on YouTube understand their circuit, somebody that most people would consider to be a cool and laid-back guy, and he thew a complete and total freak-out on me. A year before this he asked me for my email and even though I had a few nice chats with him, I got cold feet and didn't reply. Not so much worried about this person, but more the people he was in contact with. And look how it turned out, he was the one that had the psycho freakout. If he knew my real name he could have given it out to his flaky free energy friends and then I would have to live with the nagging thought that someone would attack me because I am "part of the MIB."
I haven't followed this thread for a week and will try to catch up soon. I know that I have given others some push-back when it comes to misconceptions about electronics and energy concepts for their own good. You would probably agree with me that there is a lot of peer pressure for people to agree with each other as they research, even if they are talking silliness and sometimes complete nonsense. Stirring up the pot is a good thing if it gets people to think and view what they are doing more seriously. Look at the UFOPolitics threads, they are a classic example of most things going wrong with a tangible peer pressure amongthe followers to agree with each other all the time. As of a few months ago, nobody made any comparisons with a motor with the original wiring configuration with a rewound "asymmetric" configuration to see if there was any merit in the rewinding. The so-called "energy destroyer 'witch'" in a motor that UFOPolitics talks about is almost certainly the voltage drop in the coils do to the export of the input electrical energy being converted into mechanical energy that makes the motor spin. If I am correct, the entire "belief system" in the UFOPolitics threads are based on confusing the conversion of electrical energy into mechanical energy to actually make the motor turn, with an "energy destroyer," the belief that there is something in a regular motor that "destroys" energy.
Sometimes I might give you yourself some push-back when I hear a concept that I suspect could be rooted in a misconception. The intention is to encourage you to possibly think more about your analysis and perhaps get a new perspective. I am not doing it for some perverse thrill to make anybody angry. Suppose somebody says, "the motor will run much more efficiently at resonance." My ears perk up. What resonance? What data do you have to substantiate this? What evidence of resonance do you see? Can you show timing diagrams that demonstrate what you are talking about? If nobody says that then people can just hum along and blindly believe it, start repeating it to others without really knowing what they are talking about, and so on. It can become a vicious circle that ultimately hurts people and prevents any progress. A few years ago myself and Poynt dealt with Aaron of the the Energetic Forum when he replicated the Rosemary Ainslie circuit. We started talking about coils and we mentioned to him that an ideal coil has zero volts across it when pure DC current passes through it. He was confused and couldn't understand this. What that means is that Aaaron had been "on the bench" for about 10 years at that point, he would go visit Johnny B. and talk about working on the bench with him. It means that after 10 years of running a free energy forum and 10 years worth of tinkering on the bench, hosting conferences and even writing books related to electronics, that Mr. Aaron had no real understanding of how an inductor works. That's the kind of thing that is to be avoided at all costs.
MileHigh
I agree, but the problem i see with some of you educated guys is you stick and linger on small points that actually mean little. Many of us are not always concerned with the little things as we don't have the time to learn how to be an electrical engineer in our spare time. Also sometimes people might be put off by the using of the "proper" language. Not me if people want to talk to me they need to tone down to language I use or explain it well as they go.
I don't get the MIB angle, it doesn't make sense to think that suppressors would just call up and not talk. I'm more suspicious of a certain site mod and co. that like to track people down to their real names by the IP addresses and so forth then out them. I think they do the spook thing to try to scare people off. Not buyin it.
So MileHigh is a resonant charging circuit actually not resonant. if Not what should it be called to differentiate it's operational characteristics ? Remember I'm not claiming less energy
to turn a rotor and looking at my input current meter you should see I am no overly concerned by micro input devices. What I am claiming is a motor that is capable of more torque and power for the number of coils (iron and copper) than most pulse motors. And energy recirculation causing an increase of energy in the circuit until dissipation halts it.
I understand that power is power and energy is energy. We cant get the energy delivery without the application of sufficient power. I'm not trying to make energy. :) And the word resonance can have several meaning in different contexts.
In reality the word means to re-sound and it's actual meaning has no basis in electronics at all, it is about sound - pressure waves, electro-magnetic waves were not defined when the meaning of the word came into existence. So any use in electronics is convoluted to some degree in my opinion.
I mean we can get technical beyond technical if we wish. But what is the point. It's just like the back emf thing, it's only back emf or counter-emf that is opposing he flow of current to form the field, the field itself is a magnetic field and when it collapses it creates an emf which causes current in the same direction, how could it be back-emf if the current flows the same way ? I gave up on that and just skirt it by using different words that mean the same thing like flyback and inductive energy release rather than back-emf or counter-emf as well as just understanding what people mean (in context) when they say back-emf.
Basically the way many explain it is that the magnetic field is made up of back-emf. I think it's magnetic flux, and when the field collapses it creates a forward emf. Now I think that is more like elastic bag behavior than that of a flywheel a flywheel cannot release it's energy so quickly as in the catastrophic energy release we see when a magnetic field collapses. I think the flywheel analogy confuses people because they don't see flywheels release energy all of a sudden like a magnetic field collapse, I think you must agree that flywheels don't do that. I know it's sacrilege to think a model you promote may be confusing but that is how I see it.
I see myself and quite a few others as being in the middle, on one side is fantasy and fiction and the other is deliberate confusion tactics and abject denial. Just a generalization, no person in particular in mind.
Some of us just want to tinker in the shed and share about it. Some of us almost live in the shed mine is a second home, sometimes first it has a bed,sink TV and all I'm guessing many others have similar too.
Anyway I think it is very much like as Tinsel said, people are talking right past each other, and no one wants to admit anyone else can be correct.
About 5-6 years ago I didn't know what a diode was. I began looking on the internet for help to set up my new solar panels and kept getting hits for free energy when I searched for solar panel installation help, one hit was Otis-T-Carr and his spinny thingy which has purportedly been replicated by a Russian research group as a Searle device when it more closely resembles a Carr device, I find it interesting that the Searle device is so similar to the Carr device. But I digress. The point is I am here because I am curious.
I don't need others telling me what I should be doing, I am an adult. I'll do whatever I want. But I was deceived by claims made after I found the forums and I aim to make it harder for others to be deceived the same way. The MIB thing is just a convenient way for people like RomeroUK to get out of jail free, so to speak, and at the same time that alludes to them having something when they don't.
It was the Bob Boyce self charging thing that distracted me for a bit. Once I learned about batteries that became clear as a complete farce.
The problems lay with the sensationalism of Peswiki ect. they seem legit to most. Why are they allowed to continue. Why do engineers not collaborate to have them taken down if they lie ? Who protects them? Why can they commit fraud and get a way with it ? Something smells funny in free energy town. I think you'll agree with that.
And then there is Thane saying he can make energy and with claims NASA and so forth are interested in his stuff. Why no legal action ? Is he protected.
If there is MIB involvement it is in the form of the high quality fakes that work to trick people, like Don Smith, Kapanadze, and many others, At least I believe these folks are sanctioned or allowed to continue for some reason when they should be arrested on fraud charges. I guess they could just know where to draw the line so as not to break the actual law.
I think you have more to fear from the folks whose money train you upset than from the experimenters themselves.
Cheers
Farmhand:
You made lots of good comments, I will make some comments.
As far as language goes, it's impossible to know what terms the other person is familiar with. I won't use common-use terminology on the forums that I know is misleading, which is just a small subset of what is normally used. I don't have a problem with using some of the common terminology on the forums. Don't be shy and ask me what my terminology means if you don't understand it. Plus there is always Google and people should go there first. If anything, I generally use the correct terminology as long as it is not too technical.
As far as resonance goes I know that debate took place a month or so ago on OUR. Resonance by definition means that something is resonating, like an LC circuit. It's stored energy that sloshes back and forth between two states or circuit components. You need those properties for true resonance. As I mentioned before, a Joule Thief does not resonate. A 555 timer circuit does not resonate. Both examples fail to comply with the criteria just mentioned. Rather, they have an "operating frequency." They both are pulse circuits that are triggered by voltage potentials that cross a certain threshold. For many people there is a school of thought that says to not water down or reinterpret the meaning of technical terms because that leads to confusion. I can't make general comments about what some people call "resonant charging circuits" without the details. Also, I wasn't making any comments about the work you are doing because I haven't looked at it. I am kind of getting worn down so your probably won't hear me discussing too many nit-picky details. Also, resonance is a fundamental concept in electronics even if resonance means "re sound."
QuoteIt's just like the back emf thing, it's only back emf or counter-emf that is opposing he flow of current to form the field, the field itself is a magnetic field and when it collapses it creates an emf which causes current in the same direction, how could it be back-emf if the current flows the same way ?
You make reference to it being "forward EMF" and you are absolutely correct. Perhaps people started calling it "back EMF" because they mostly saw a negative voltage spike? The ironic thing is that the "negative voltage spike" is actually a "positive voltage spike" that wants to keep current flowing in the same direction. It just so happens that more often than not the scope ground probe is at the "wrong" end of the coil and it appears to be a negative voltage spike. Just flip the ground and signal contacts around and you will see a positive voltage spike and when you look at your schematic it will be much clearer that the inductor is in discharge mode trying to push the current in the same direction with a "positive voltage spike."
QuoteNow I think that is more like elastic bag behavior than that of a flywheel a flywheel cannot release it's energy so quickly as in the catastrophic energy release we see when a magnetic field collapses. I think the flywheel analogy confuses people because they don't see flywheels release energy all of a sudden like a magnetic field collapse, I think you must agree that flywheels don't do that.
Sometimes people need to contemplate things for a while and what first appeared to be counter-intuitive becomes intuitive. Flywheels perfectly emulate a magnetic field collapse. It's so close that it's in fact identical.
I put out that teaser about how a flywheel models a "back EMF spike" and it's good to know you were thinking about it. So here we go: A big flywheel is spinning and you want to stop it from spinning. You put on gloves and grab the disk with your hands and slow it down. Can you make it stop instantaneously? You of course know that the answer is no. You know that force equals mass times acceleration. So to make it stop instantly you have to have infinite acceleration and that means it takes infinite force to make the flywheel stop instantly.
So you do the next best thing. You have powerful hydraulic brake calipers clamp down hard on the flywheel as fast as possible. You know that the calipers will experience a massive spike of force from the flywheel as it decelerates - there is your "back EMF spike." A massive spike of voltage output from the coil means the current stops flowing in the coil nearly instantly. A massive spike of of force (torque) put out by the flywheel means the flywheel stops spinning nearly instantly. For a coil, if you disconnect it from the battery, it will literally ionize the air and turn it into a conducting plasma to keep the current flowing. This happens at the speed of light. It's literally impossible to stop the current flowing in a coil instantly. Likewise, it's literally impossible to make a flywheel instantly stop spinning. No metal alloy in the calipers will be able to make a flywheel stop instantly, no metal alloy can withstand an infinite force. The metal will always flex and give a bit. If the metal doesn't flex then the spinning flywheel will shatter the calipers.
So if you can follow that you see I was serious when I said a coil and a flywheel are essentially the same thing. Any electrical circuit that you make on your bench can be emulated with an equivalent mechanical circuit and vice-versa.
MileHigh
A few more comments:
QuoteThe problems lay with the sensationalism of Peswiki ect. they seem legit to most. Why are they allowed to continue. Why do engineers not collaborate to have them taken down if they lie ? Who protects them? Why can they commit fraud and get a way with it ? Something smells funny in free energy town. I think you'll agree with that.
Most people are now in cringe mode when it comes to Sterling and all his web sites. I can't see him changing though and I don't think that he has a bad heart. Honesty it's almost unbelievable when you first encounter it. "Nobody" in the real world of engineering knows that people like Sterling or Bedini exist. Likewise there is no "MIB" or whatnot watching comical situations like the Yildiz affair. None of these things are even a blip on a blip. People in the engineering profession are worried about the real world projects that they are working on.
QuoteIf there is MIB involvement it is in the form of the high quality fakes that work to trick people, like Don Smith, Kapanadze, and many others, At least I believe these folks are sanctioned or allowed to continue for some reason when they should be arrested on fraud charges.
I think they fly under the RADAR with respect to law enforcement. Every now and then one of them gets busted.
MileHigh
"It's just like the back emf thing, it's only back emf or counter-emf that is opposing he flow of current to form the field, the field itself is a magnetic field and when it collapses it creates an emf which causes current in the same direction, how could it be back-emf if the current flows the same way ?"
Problems arise in communicating concepts when their is no differentiation between normal back emf (rotor induced counter emf - which is opposite in polarity to forward emf) in a motor, and the back emf produced by a collapsing magnetic field in a pulsed system. Unfortunately, electronics convention does not differentiate between the two and refers to both types of emf as 'back emf', regardless of the origin of the emf.
I prefer to refer to rotor induced back emf as back emf or counter emf, while referring to the emf produced by a collapsing field as cemf or collapsing emf, in order to differentiate the two different types of back emf.
Cheers
I recommend this MIT lecture video even for the layman, it helped me to understand a lot, I had to watch it several times and I have a way of being able to understand in a general way what he is talking about even though I don't understand the calculus very much at all because I've never learned it. I still found it was enlightening.
What do you guys think of the Prof. and this lecture in particular? At 36:00 minutes on he explains what I am seeing in the coils that will work to produce the speed up effect. If we go from say Omega L of 300 Ohms at 1000 rpm to Omega L of 900 Ohms at 3000 rpm then it might be enough to see the effect. Just arbitrary figures. And I might have the terminology wrong I'm just writing what I heard him say. But I did watch the entire video and watched him do all the calculations, he just lost me and I couldn't fathom it all at once. But I got what he was saying anyway I think.
Lecture
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpO6t00bPb8
Cheers
MileHigh, I see now what you mean about the flywheel yes it would do that, I envision when we try to stop the wheel quickly there is a very sharp rise in something for sure so I see your point now. The flywheel would seem to be the mechanical analogy like how a mechanical hammer works, I've used one of those there neat. And the elastic bag the gaseous one. There is no doubt a flywheel is not easy to pull up quickly, but it would seem the force needs to be applied to the flywheel to get the effect but with a coil the force is removed to see the effect. When we switch off the power that is driving the flywheel it doesn't let go of it's energy catastrophically it slows down gradually.
Take a vertical water pipe of say 20 mm Inside diameter and 100 meters "high" and install a fast " valve" at the bottom end then take out 20 meters of pipe in the middle and install a coil shaped (or not even) appropriately elastic rubber tube (bag) with an inside diameter of say the same 20 mm, the top of the pipe is fitted to the bottom of a tank with X head of water available and the flow from the valve is unimpeded, the bag is so that it would burst with 1.5 times the latent pressure, at the bottom of the bag (coil) is a safety valve set to fire when the pressure becomes slightly higher than the latent pressure and the main bottom valve is rated to burst at 1.5 times latent pressure. What happens when we turn the valve on and off quickly. Would the bag not expand under the momentum of the falling water build pressure then squirt water from the safety valve to prevent rupture ?
The force would be like the hammer effect in water pipes. I imagine a water system for low voltage low frequency stuff and a gaseous system for HV HF stuff. Just what I see when I visualize.
I see your point with the flywheel though if we try to stop it. But with water or gas we just turn a handle to stop the flow and the build up happens.
Cheers
Farmhand:
I dug up a posting that I made a while ago, food for thought about the flywheel business:
-----------------------------------------------------
MECHANICAL EQUIVALENT CIRCUIT OF A JOULE THIEF
Imagine you go to the gym and you find an old-style exercise bicycle. The type with a seat and pedals and a chain link to a big flywheel, like a regular bicycle. There is a friction belt that goes around the circumference of the flywheel. You set the tension on the friction belt to adjust the difficulty level.
Imagine the belt is completely loose. You pedal for a few seconds and get the flywheel spinning and then you stop pedaling. Then you add tension to the belt and the flywheel spins down and stops. Then you loosen the belt and repeat the whole process all over again.
Even when you are completely exhausted, it's still possible for you to pedal and get the flywheel spinning if you pedal slowly and take your time to build up the speed. Don't forget that the friction strap is loose when you pedal.
That's a Joule Thief. You are the battery. The flywheel is the coil. The friction belt is the LED.
The torque that you put on the flywheel from pedaling is the battery voltage. The torque that the flywheel puts on the belt during the braking is the coil voltage when it's de-energizing. The rotational speed of the flywheel is the current through the coil.
I have never heard of any claims of over unity exercise bicycles and by the same token, a Joule Thief - an energizing and de-energizing inductor - is not over unity.
-----------------------------------------------------
In this context, is it possible to make a connection with a Joule Thief driving 100 LEDs?
Well, 100 LEDs means a larger voltage for the same current. Since R = V/I we can say that a Joule Thief driving a 100 LEDs has a much larger "LED equivalent resistance" to drive.
Quoting myself above:
QuoteImagine the belt is completely loose. You pedal for a few seconds and get the flywheel spinning and then you stop pedaling. Then you add tension to the belt and the flywheel spins down and stops. Then you loosen the belt and repeat the whole process all over again.
Adding tension to the belt means that you are putting a resistance on the spinning flywheel. So 100 LEDs is equivalent to adding more tension to the friction belt, and the spinning flywheel will come to a stop more quickly. You can easily see this on a scope with a real Joule Thief.
Also, you know that even if you add tension to the belt, the moment the belt makes contact with the flywheel the flywheel is still spinning at it's current angular velocity. That explains why the 100 LEDs will light up. The angular velocity of the flywheel is akin to the current flowing through the coil. So even with 100 LEDs, when the inductor starts to discharge, there will still be sufficient current to light up each LED.
The more LEDs you add, the faster the current flow decreases and the shorter the time the LEDs are illuminated. That's equivalent to adding more tension to the belt and slowing down the flywheel faster. So, more LEDs in series = adding more tension (and resistance) to the belt.
Just for clarity: The friction between the belt and the exercise bicycle flywheel while the friction is being applied represents the time the LEDs are illuminated and discharging the coil's stored energy. In one case you get heat generated between the belt and the flywheel, and in the other case you get light and heat generated inside the LEDs. In both cases you have an "energy burn."
The energy stored in the flywheel = 1/2 Moment_of_Inertia x angular_velocity-squared.
The energy stored in the coil = 1/2 Inductance_of_Coil x current_flow_around_the_coil-squared.
If you notice they are essentially the same formula. The amount of moment of inertia of a flywheel is equivalent to the amount of inductance in a coil. The angular velocity of the flywheel is equivalent to the current flowing through the coil. The torque either applied to the flywheel to make it spin up faster (energizing), or produced by the flywheel when it is driving a friction load and slowing down (de-energizing) is equivalent to the voltage across the coil.
If you can visualize that it may help you visualize how a circuit with a coil operates. My example of the exercise bicycle is an excellent analogy for the energy dynamics taking part in a Joule Thief circuit. When you strip a Joule Thief circuit down to it's bare essentials, it's nothing more than a battery energizing an inductor followed by the inductor discharging though one or more LEDs. It's a very trivial circuit when you look at it from that perspective.
MileHigh
MileHigh, Here in these shots I think what I can see is the rotor of my motor is returning energy to the capacitors by generation through the coils. Because of the spacing of the coils when the rotor magnets pass they can at times put energy back into the electrical circuit briefly before it goes back to the rotor. This part of the generation is partly counteracted by the anti cogging effect at that part of the rotors travel I think.
In between the white lines is what I see as the mosfet "on" time just after the current drops off, but see before the current is rising in the coil before the mosfet allows energy to be input from the supply, and yet there it is, I think that is the rotor generating electricity in the coil and the current flows around through the return circuit as HopToad so kindly pointed out (thanks Hoptoad). Going that way means it must also go through the charging coil MC2 which helps turn the rotor, then into the charging capacitor/s to be switched through teh motor coil MC1 again along with what was also added from the supply. The only way the current can rise in MC1 that way when the mosfet is off is if a south magnet is passing it. As the south magnet is passing the MC1 coil and reinforcing the currents around the circuit MC2 is attracting a north magnet to it, as it just pushed the south that is passing the MC1 coil and MC1 pushed the north just before that. If you look at my rotor timing chart you'll see what I mean, it is very confusing but I think I eventually got it fairly correct.
Still I might be a tad off on my analysis but what else would explain the current rise in a switched off coil if not from the magnet through the return circuit. The coils are kind of loosely locked together and the magnets help shape and reinforce the currents.
Also notice the RMS current values ? What does that mean ? THe current is scoped across 0.1 Ohm resistors. So that around 900 mA RMS in MC1 and 700 mA RMS in MC2, and the circuit drawing only 400 mA from the supply.
Anyway is that resonance. Or not sloshy enough. ;)
Cheers
P.S. and harder running I think lowers the RMS current in the coils and raises the input current. So the energy stops being returned when under proper load.
Actually I think MC2 maybe forcing the current I see in MC1, dunno that's why I asked your opinion. :) It is a bit confusing.
..
..
Quote from: Farmhand on May 21, 2013, 12:22:02 AM
snip...
In between the white lines is what I see as the mosfet "on" time just after the current drops off, but see before the current is rising in the coil before the mosfet allows energy to be input from the supply, and yet there it is, I think that is the rotor generating electricity in the coil and the current flows around through the return circuit
snip...
..
Yep.... KneeDeep
Farmhand:
I am glad you are having fun! I am referencing you hand-drawn schematic in posting #1391 although I am not sure this is the proper one.
QuoteAlso notice the RMS current values ? What does that mean ? THe current is scoped across 0.1 Ohm resistors. So that around 900 mA RMS in MC1 and 700 mA RMS in MC2, and the circuit drawing only 400 mA from the supply.
I notice in the schematic that there is a mechanism for current to flow counter-clockwise because of the diode arrangement.
I will start off with the yellow trace. You can see the current starts from zero and reaches a certain level before the MOSFET switches on. That is probably due to the approaching magnet or magnets (I am assuming MC-2 may be helping here). So the current starts flowing with a "rotor push."
I am going to assume that the MOSFET switches on at top-dead-center. So when that happens the current continues to increase in the coil and the cap between MC-1 and MC-2 is supplying the bulk of that current.
When the MOSFET switches off, you can see a nice linear decrease in the current output by the coil. You also notice that there is only a modest increase in the current through MC-2. To me that suggests that most of the current is going into the cap above the battery. You also notice that the MC-1 coil completely discharges before the cycle starts all over again.
For the blue trace for the MC-2 coil, probably the most striking thing about it is that current is always flowing through it. Note that it has capacitors on both sides of it to both feed it with current and absorb the current. So if anything, it looks like MC-2 has a "spongy" ride. I think that MC-2 is "pulled" when the MOSFET switches on as well as being influenced by passing rotor magnets.
It's great that you are looking at the currents because most experimenters don't look at the currents flowing through their coils and coils are devices that are based on current flow. I am pretty sure that many pulse motor setups have coils with current continuously flowing through the coils and the experimenters are not aware.
Here is a possible bird's eye view of what's going on in your pulse motor: The periodic MOSFET pulsing of MC-1 pushes on the rotor and also initiates some current to flow through MC-1 and MC-2. Once the MOSFET switches off, you still have three "power sources" to keep current circulating counter-clockwise. 1) MC-1, 2) MC-2, and 3) the passing rotor magnets.
So between pulses current keeps circulating counter-clockwise. I don't know if that's a "good thing" or a "bad thing" relative to your design goals. One school of thought might say that continuous current flow implies continuous resistive losses. However, it's still possible that the continuous current flow facilitates better performance and you can live with the resistive losses.
Is it resonance? Personally I don't see anything that looks like conventional resonance. Keep in mind I think that the term "resonance" for a pulse motor is a vague undefined term. I believe that many people believe that the pick-up coils are supposed to be in resonance with the passing rotor magnets but I am not sure.
My personal opinion is that some form of resonance may be possible with a pulse motor but it would have to be defined and you would need scope traces to confirm the observations. You would expect to see something like very nice sine waves that are slightly modified by the drive coil synchronously adding energy. Somewhere you would need to see an energy drain that is also synchronous with the resonance.
To repeat myself, "resonance" is often an ill-defined and often abused term. Some pulse motor designs are very likely to be devoid of all resonance. Note that they are "pulse circuits" which is a separate and distinct class of circuits as opposed to "resonant circuits."
I think you made reference to musical instruments and resonance. In all musical instruments there are two distinct components that slosh the energy back and forth at the resonant frequency, and the energy in each component is in a separate and distinct form. Can you clearly identify these two separate and distinct components and energy storage mechanisms in a pulse motor to find resonance? Also, keep in mind that "resonance" has an almost magical and mystical meaning on the forums that is often quite disconnected from reality. Suppose you make a fantastic pulse motor with great performance and it doesn't resonate! It doesn't really matter, does it?
Just for fun, think of all of the wind instruments that don't use a reed, like the pipes in a pipe organ. Let's take a look at a lowly beer bottle. When you blow across the opening in a beer bottle you hear a resonant tone. Can you identify what's resonating in the case of the beer bottle? This question is open to anybody.
Anyway, I hope what I just said helped! I don' see resonance in your waveforms, I see a setup that is recirculating energy to use it again. If you are getting better performance from your pulse motor like this, then the proof is in the pudding!
MileHigh
Quote from: Farmhand on May 21, 2013, 12:22:02 AM
Anyway is that resonance. Or not sloshy enough. ;)
Lol slosh. I dont find it to be a good word to describe resonance really. Sounds a bit messy and not in order.
MH, do the books call it sloshing? Just wondered. Dont think I have heard it put that way before. I could be missing out here.
Mags
Magluvin:
I am pretty sure you will find the term "sloshing" in text books. Between peaks, you have that mixture where one component of the energy is in electric field form and the other part is in magnetic field form and they are continuously transitioning and 90 degrees out of phase with each other so that sounds "sloshy." Just recently I read "tank circuit" was derived from the notion of water sloshing back and forth in a water tank.
MileHigh
Well Milehigh, I did show that when I speed the motor up to a certain speed there are sine waves both in voltage and current wave forms, Already shown, and I don't limit myself to your definitions of resonance.
It's obvious you just don't want to get it, because the improvement was immediate and obvious as soon as I put the charging coil near the rotor and it sped up as a result, an immediate increase in torque and efficiency. I need to prove nothing. My claims of an improvement are blatantly obvious in just the design principal alone. However
when I am ready I will prove whatever I please. No one can stop me simply because all anyone can do is talk at me. ;D
1. There is the resonance frequency of a coil, a coil can be tuned to resonance frequency and not actually exhibit resonance as such due to loading.
2. There is EM resonance.
3. There is sound resonance.
4. There is mechanical resonance.
5. Resonance has different meanings just like many other words.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resonance
QuoteIn physics, resonance is the tendency of a system to oscillate with greater amplitude at some frequencies than at others. Frequencies at which the response amplitude is a relative maximum are known as the system's resonant frequencies, or resonance frequencies. At these frequencies, even small periodic driving forces can produce large amplitude oscillations, because the system stores vibrational energy.
Resonance occurs when a system is able to store and easily transfer energy between two or more different storage modes (such as kinetic energy and potential energy in the case of a pendulum). However, there are some losses from cycle to cycle, called damping. When damping is small, the resonant frequency is approximately equal to the natural frequency of the system, which is a frequency of unforced vibrations. Some systems have multiple, distinct, resonant frequencies.
Resonance phenomena occur with all types of vibrations or waves: there is mechanical resonance, acoustic resonance, electromagnetic resonance, nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), electron spin resonance (ESR) and resonance of quantum wave functions. Resonant systems can be used to generate vibrations of a specific frequency (e.g. musical instruments), or pick out specific frequencies from a complex vibration containing many frequencies (e.g. filters).
This diagram below I was referring to.
There is a resonant exchange of energy from coils to rotor to coils to rotor again and so on.
I think that is tied to the way the currents can become sinusoidal in both coils, the currents don't always look the same as in the shots there, I showed shots of two sine waves for the current as well before, and a voltage sine wave on both coils can be had as well. Not many resonant setups are resonant at all frequencies, there is a frequency where there is best resonance effects. Anyway I'm not here to prove anything to you and the setup is not even complete.
Anyway If I didn't recognize resonance and how to attain it I would not have so many resonant devices. I'm outa time to argue the point any longer. I have things to do.
And since I have nothing to add in this thread for some time it's bye bye for a while. :)
Quote from: MileHigh on May 21, 2013, 08:51:03 PM
Magluvin:
I am pretty sure you will find the term "sloshing" in text books. Between peaks, you have that mixture where one component of the energy is in electric field form and the other part is in magnetic field form and they are continuously transitioning and 90 degrees out of phase with each other so that sounds "sloshy." Just recently I read "tank circuit" was derived from the notion of water sloshing back and forth in a water tank.
MileHigh
I see that there are references to sloshing of water in a tank. There are some examples out there. There are some differences though. If we had a tank and it teetered a bit from on side to the other where the water is nicely moving from left to right, back and forth, from end to end and time it till it settles, then that would be very close to an LC. But the water tank could take a random tilt, splash or hit and not be in the same state of resonance as we are discussing, but still take a relatively long time to settle, where the LC if left on its own after a random charge or induced pulse will still only continue to 'slosh' for a time period at its resonant frequency, like a bell. If the teetering tank were rocking in a nice timely back and forth slosh and it were disrupted with a random teeter jolt( input is teeter for the water tank), and left to react, the rocking rhythm would not be the same, yet it would continue a more complex sloshing than the single sloshing wave back and forth. Instead of tic toc tic toc, it could go toc tic tic toc tic tictoctic toc toc. lol An lc would not behave that way if disrupted during resonance. It will just ring at the same freq at different levels or be nulled out, depending on the disruption and timing.
So the water tank I can see sloshing being a good term any way you look at it. But an LC is consistent in maintaining its freq of operation when set off with nearly what ever input or disturbance. Not that it cannot pass currents of other freq, but we are talking about resonant states. Sloshing seems sloppy, splashy, random energy dissipation and distribution, where an LC works more in an orderly fashion and a pendulum is a much closer model in most ways. In order to get the water tank to slosh in resonance would require a controlled input to get it smoothly sloshing back and forth. But a pendulum, no matter the input pulse, where or when, will always resort to its resonant freq or a dead stop, just like an LC. ;)
If we look up slosh, the definitions dont coincide with resonance at all. So maybe for some beginners the term sloshing might lead them to think of something other than what is really happening in an LC circuit. ;)
The water tank is a better analogy of an 'LC ladder' with many LCs in a series parallel fashion where you pulse the input and the LCs transfer their energies to the next LC and down the line where the output is delayed by the progression through the circuit. The output is usually a load. But the load can be eliminated and the 'wave' will bounce back at the end of the circuit back to the beginning. Like the water tank.
Now this LC ladder can be randomly disturbed else where in the circuit or random input pulses, 'will' have ripples and disturbed waves 'sloshing' around the circuit. Of course its 2 dimensional, and water is 3d.
Mags
One more comment then you can have all he last words you want.
An example of the abject denial. You say that in the case of the AV plug the Earth is a "wire" but it isn't, you want to be so specific about everything but cannot bring yourself to admit that a "wire" is a man made conductor, and the Earth is a natural conductor the Earth is not a wire by definition, but it can be a conductor. When there is wireless transmission of electricity using no wires that means using no man made conductors. Talk about ignorance and arrogance.
It would be wise not treat others like idiots. I bet my leftie I could school you real good on a number of different skills and knowledge of many subjects, so get over yourself.
I require no further communications with you as I get nothing really from it. So any efforts on your part are your own wasted efforts.
The Earth is a wire what a joke. Even a school kid can tell the difference between a piece of wire and some dirt. Hahahaha
Go read up the definition of "wire" and "conductor", if you don't already know the difference and are just being silly.
Regards
Quote from: Farmhand on May 22, 2013, 12:14:20 AM
One more comment then you can have all he last words you want.
An example of the abject denial. You say that in the case of the AV plug the Earth is a "wire" but it isn't, you want to be so specific about everything but cannot bring yourself to admit that a "wire" is a man made conductor, and the Earth is a natural conductor the Earth is not a wire by definition, but it can be a conductor. When there is wireless transmission of electricity using no wires that means using no man made conductors. Talk about ignorance and arrogance.
It would be wise not treat others like idiots. I bet my leftie I could school you real good on a number of different skills and knowledge of many subjects, so get over yourself.
I require no further communications with you as I get nothing really from it. So any efforts on your part are your own wasted efforts.
The Earth is a wire what a joke. Even a school kid can tell the difference between a piece of wire and some dirt. Hahahaha
Go read up the definition of "wire" and "conductor", if you don't already know the difference and are just being silly.
Regards
In this vid below, I use a small neon transformer from an old scanner that fires the scan tube. its about 1kv ac out. I use 1 lead of the secondary to an AV plug, to 2 .33uf 275v caps in series and discharged into the primary of the spark/ign coil using 2 SIDACs in series. Sidac works as a solid state spark gap, these are about 230v break over.
You will see that if I connect another lead to the other end of the neon transformer secondary, the charging of the caps through the AV plug increases. And then bringing that lead close to the ign coil it charges even faster, and finally I touch the lead to the casing of the coil and we have liftoff. lol The lead from the other end of the neon secondary connects to the circuit via the capacitance of the ign coils can and the windings inside. We are just using capacitance as part of the circuit loop any way we look at it when using the AV plug.
I would venture to say the av plug would still charge the cap with little or no 'outside' capacitive loops just because of HF brute force. That open neon secondary is pumping charge back and forth in the open secondary, compressing and decompressing. If a cap plate is neutral and that compress/decompress impresses a difference of potential across that diode, then I feel the cap will charge anyway whether it has interaction with outside capacitance or not. This could be tested with different outside capacitance levels to see if there is a plateau that shows that charge can happen with just brute force, charging one side of the cap at a time. ;) Being that capacitor plates seem to be 'flexible' with their plates being at different levels of charge, then I think they would accept or give charge differences of the single plates without a connection to the other plate, like how the AV plug functions. If we ran a wire to the space station from earth, we could charge the space station to probably what ever charge and polarity we would desire, or how ever much it would accept or give up. There are limits.
None of this circuit is connected to ground. It happens with capacity in the air between components. But if we are close to the 'ground, I would say that limits the lower radius of air capacity, but just might help increase the air capacity between components in the circuit depending on the proximity of the circuit to the 'ground'/'earth.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TR3WmK3qrws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TR3WmK3qrws)
Mags
Farmhand:
You are really upset that I did not see resonance in your motor setup. It's like you want to force me to agree with you. So your passive aggression has transformed into outright aggression and nasty words. What the hell?
Your rant against my comments about how an AV plug works are over the top and nonsensical. There you completely lost it.
That's about all that I can say.
MileHigh
My purpose to posting in this thread about the motor design with what very many people call a "resonant charging circuit" is to show what I am using, how it works and the principal behind it, is so that others may benefit from the concept if they wish. I made the process of understanding the thinking behind it as step by step as I could so that the real intention for doing it is seen by at least some. And in that regard I think I have succeeded.
In common usage the motor would be run from the grid power and would be microprocessor controlled in the most advanced application and merely a compromise in general use, as are all motors, none are perfect in all applications.
I don't require permission to use the word resonance. Furthermore I have little regard for arguing semantics. Hence the mentioning of the Earth is a wire rubbish. Those of us stuck in reality realize that the Earth conducts and displacement current exists so the "Earth is a wire rubbish" is completely unnecessary. It would be much less confusing to just say the Earth is a conductor and is acting as a wire would act as a conductor. But repeatedly it is said by the Tesla deniers that there is no wireless energy transfer, they equate wire to conductor and treat everybody like an idiot by insinuating we don't know what the heck a conductor is compared to a wire for goodness sake. Personally I take that a direct insult to my intelligence. And I know others take it that way as well. And I know you know it MileHigh, just like I know Ex. knows it. I feel you guys deliberately complicate things, and deliberately misrepresent what some people say at times particularly when our dear Mr Tesla's devices or inventions are mentioned. I am not concerned of the wild claims made by those other than Mr Tesla. If the patent tells the truth then that is all that matters to me. The patents have the claims.
So I cannot take anyone seriously who continues to claim the Earth is a "wire" when it is clearly not, though it can be a "conductor". The difference is very important in the context of the purpose of the devices it relates to. Please desist with trying to make everybody else conform to your views and accept that people know the difference between these things.
Anyway when I am ready I will make a thread particularly about this motor here, at the present time I'm not happy to say I have a motor put together that posses all the required relationships to work in the best possible way for the design.
During the RomeroUK thread I mentioned using a resonant charging circuit to power a pulse motor and that the charging coil could help to turn the rotor, no one did it that I am aware of so I thought it was time for me to try it and see what happened.
As It turns out, after more adjustments the charging coil as it sits now in my motor is approximately 90 degrees lagging out of electrical phase with the motor coils (there are two now), each one 360 degree electrical phase occurs in a 90 degree sector of the rotor and the charging coil is 90 degrees out of phase with the motor coils.
MileHigh, You seem to not want to just let things happen, even when there is seen to be a reason for it there is negativity in general from you, though I do admit that you do agree on points at times and even say when you think something is a good idea. So I don't see you as being intentionally nasty so to speak.
Please keep in mind to argue with you i need to research to find the words to fit the pictures in my head, and that wastes my time, I work in pictures and when i need figures I know it and educate myself with the necessary information learn enough to get the job or project done to my satisfaction.
I can work two ways, I can keep everything to myself, or I can share as I go. As I find it I prefer to share so that if I miss things people like HopToad and SeaMonkey help me because they are actually interested in if I succeed or not. At certain times I can have a lot on my mind because I find order in chaos, I do get confused and make many mistakes or misspeak. I try to rectify when I do.
No hard feeling on my part, I'm just sayin I don't communicate that way.
Cheers
P.S. And as far as my motor goes, it does not matter what you think it has or hasn't got in it's operation what matters is what is. What is is what is and that is that. If anything I may claim is incorrect then so be it. But please if you want in imply that I made a claim please back it up with a quote so that I may retract it if I see I am in error. That is the proper thing to do.
The use of series capacitances is not yet even explored, but the effects can be foreseen in certain situations if we run simulations in our heads based on previous "hands on" experience (engineering), usually the simulations are very close to operating conditions as of course they must be when based on real previous outcomes..
..
Farmhand:
You're objecting to my use of metaphor, like it's some sort of offense. It's really crazy when you think about it. On top of that, when I post I am always conscious of the general readers of the thread, I am also posting for them. The use of the metaphor is to give people insight, and they might benefit from visualizing the earth acting like a conductor, a wire. It's something they might not have thought of before. I am willing to bet there are people in this thread right now that have never pondered this stuff. There is also a buzz word, "single wire power transmission." If you believe this when first learning about electronics, if you stumble and don't master the basic basics, then you are crippling yourself and it will corrupt your understanding of electronics. Single-wire power transmission is impossible, because you must have current and voltage to transmit power. Also, any electric circuit must form a current loop to work. All of these important concepts are contained within visualizing the fact that "single wire power transmission" is in fact "two wire power transmission." Some of the readers of the thread might not realize it and benefit from the learning experience.
And I get that kind of response from you, because I used a metaphor? You think I was trying to insult anybody? Give me a break.
MileHigh
Well here is an interesting effect which is kinda related to this thread.
I'm not sure even if this is considered normal but when adjusted and loaded a certain way the voltage at the drain of the mosfet which is the low side of the coil becomes more than the voltage in the capacitor that is powering the coil. As I load the rotor a small amount, the input power drops and at the same time the voltage at the drain is rising along with the capacitor voltage that is feeding the coil, but the interesting thing is the drain voltage at switch "on" is more than the capacitor voltage at the high side of the coil. When trying to stop the rotor it feels a little like the rotor is pushing back like a spring. Towards the end of the clip it has that strumming kind of sound. I used to hear a similar sound coming from the tuned length exhaust extractors on one of my old cars. Personally I like the sound, I think it's machine music or singing. ;)
Video clip.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3I5AnBPoGvI
I think that is why when the rotor accelerated under the small generator coil short the input power did not increase in the video. In that case as it accelerated the voltage became more at the drain and the capacitor. ;) I thought I should show that so that there is no confusion. Not sure if it is all that important just interesting. :)
Cheers
wait a minute,wait a minute guys.ive figured it out.ive got the answer you seek..gather round all you who have ears
Igor runs magnets into his trifilar Bedini coil core, and gets "Magnacoaster" Output Power. What's missing here is the acceleration of the rotor, and the delayed Lenz effect I spoke of. I believe Igor simply didn't test for Lenz delay acceleration, but I measured it in mine. This is an overunity setup. The core magnet is generating power seperately.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzNjAs3-9LA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzNjAs3-9LA)[/size]
This experiment is basicly the same as the Dragone. Impulse demagnetization is generating OU power.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWhsJWXEER4[/size]
Synchro1:
Linking to clips that show experimenters trying out different setups without any serious measurements being done, and trying to proclaim you yourself on behalf of the unknowing experimenters that the setups are over unity is not helping anyone. It's like "free energy soft pore corn."
Making power in and power out measurements on pulsing circuits is a science and an art and requires a lot of knowledge and finesse and the right equipment.
Over unity does not sprout like mushrooms in a damp bog when people play with circuits like you are trying to imply. Please try to keep it real.
MileHigh
The "Magnacoaster" is currently in the marketplace as an OU generator!
I don't know if you are aware of this Synchro1 but the majority of people on the free energy forums consider Richard Willis and Magnacoaster to be a fraud.
And I just checked his web site and there is no sign of anything about the Magnacoaster magic generator.
Feast your eyes on this:
http://www.magnacoaster.com/index.html
Now the site shows magnetic field medical quackery crap, just like they used to do in the 1930s, eighty years ago. I checked, and it's the same address as the original Magnacoaster address.
His Twitter feed still has him squawking about waiting for parts and a "new building."
QuoteRichard Willis @Magnacoaster 2 May we are looking at a new building to move production to the next level as we have out grown our space
Going back to the "revamped" web site, the new pitch:
QuoteWith the use of high powered neodymium magnets, we create a high powered field that allows any inflammation in both the soft tissue and muscle structure to disappear.
The patient, depending on the injury, will see a change with the first treatment. Most bruising and swelling is caused by a restriction in the materials around the blood vessels. By using the magnet, it reduces the restriction allowing proper flow.
This guy is a low-life scumbag, Synchro1.
The people that paid him cash for their "Magnacoaster generators" have lost their money and now this asshole is into medical quackery.
MileHigh
Dr. Leon Dragone tested that magnet pump at over 40x OU. The drawback is, the power generated is small, and impractical. Nevertheless, the combination of the demag power and the Lenz delay, charged the self looped run battery in my setup. I just noticed these videos from Igor. I plan to replicate Igor's setup with the rotor I just built for the Flynn Gap test. His rotor either speeds up , slows down or remains unchanged. My rotors speed up when I draw a magnet in towards the rotor through the core as he did. Take a close look at Igor's Magnacoaster Bedini video. You can visibly see the rotor speeding up when Igor inserts the ferrite rod into the coil core at around 1:12 into the video. This is the reason I publish on this thread.
Here's a picture of my magnet core diametrics and bifilar coil:
Reply to your comment on: bedini-magnacoaster:
My question to Igor was; Does the rotor speed increase when you insert the iron magnet into the coil core? His answer:
"yes, it does, a little...
to get to the bottom of it we need to make an inductor from it !
here's the Vorktex secret - by oscillation (it's his "breaker") get a HF HV output; transform it down to HF HA output and than rectify it to the caps bank; and discharge it to batteries to run the inverters to run the oscillator ... looped...
btw, like your antygravity tests...
cheers"
This confirms the rotor acceleration. The question remains, is this "Lenz Delay Effect"? My theory is that the magnet interferes with coil efficiency, inducing the delay! Extending the output coil core length appears to slow the coil performance down too!
Richard Willis and the "Magnacoaster" VORKTEX installation video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyY_GNezusM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyY_GNezusM)
Synchro1:
Just to append to my comments about Magnacoaster's web site. It appears that the medical quackery "switch over" was only a temporary test to "exercise" the HTML code and make sure that it all works. The regular Magnacoaster web site is back on line and is still full of complete crap. The guy may as well have a Post-It note stuck on his forehead that says, "Buyer BEWARE!"
So probably sometime in the near future our buddy Richard will get a new domain name registered around the globe for his medical quackery web site and it will be born.
The new web site tag line: "Is that a bar magnet in your pocket or are you just attracted to me?"
MileHigh
Igor's rotor acceleration from the core magnet doesn't account for all the increased Trifilar output. The "Magnet Pump" effect helps explain the surplus! This is an impulse demagnetization effect that generates power from the realignment of electron spin on the quantum level. It's unwise to discount this effect entirely because someone associated with it is suspected of charlatanisem!
If putting strong magnets near us is beneficial to our health then we all should be as healthy as pigs. :) I don't see how he could make money telling people that magnets are good for them. There is no rolling on the floor laughing emoticon. So. hahahahhahahahhahahaha @@@@@@@@
There was a thread about Richard Willis at EF and our friend Rick who is an excellent investigator found he was full of it. Anyone interested to read some more truth should look up that thread for more info.
No offence MileHigh but 90 % of us don't need you to tell us who is a scammer, the 10% can't be reached because of a need to believe in every OU claim. Believe it or not you are an outsider where I am not, I've been conned and misled so I'm arguing the same as you, more or less, but from the inside. Appreciate any help you give though. I just wanted to point out that many of us can see a deliberate faker and can tell the difference between a measurement error and a deliberate fake claim.
To me the fakers are obvious. Quite some time ago I found in a datasheet for the IRFPG50 mosfet the unclamped inductive discharge wave form, and it was a "h" wave which showed me mr monopole is full of it, since then I realized lies and deceit are par for the course. And since I have been working against it. I'm as keen as anyone for new sources of energy. But I will not stand idle and ignore all the liars and deceivers. I've outed my share. I could make a list. I've spoken out and shown evidence about a lot of stuff to dismiss misconceptions.
http://pdf1.alldatasheet.com/datasheet-pdf/view/68554/IRF/IRFPG50.html
The people I feel have something to answer to are the folks Like "Michael John Nunnerly" at EF who is obviously trained and educated but he works for deceit and uses his influence to give credence to fake claims regularly. Why not go after people like that ? The one's that really cause the trouble and reinforce the belief in fakery.
...
Truth is that no one that matters believes Synchro anyway,(too many spurious claims) if you ignore him he will post less. If you reply he will post more. Gotta pick a better mark than that. :)
Cheers
So who matters, your group of chronic cynics and Tesla bashers?
Synchro1:
If I were you I would spend a month and find an Electronics 101 book or something on the web.
http://electronicstheory.com/COURSES/ELECTRONICS/e101-1.htm
http://www.howstuffworks.com/electronics-info.htm
http://101science.com/Radio.htm
http://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Electronics+Skills+101/6190/1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtzGxJ-FGV8
http://www.digilentinc.com/classroom/Electronics101/
Right now Electronics 101 is just a big grey zone in your head. Some foggy notion about how things work. Think of the average person and their smartphone, same thing. Or how even a lot of software programers view an underlying operating system as just a big grey mass. Or for the average Joe how Windows works. I am a hardware guy and I am out of date. So I don`t know how the PCI Express graphics bus works. It`s just a big grey area for me. The trick is that I don`t need to know because I am not designing boards to plug into the PCI Express slot.
MileHigh
@Milehigh,
You're nothing more then an educated fool. You take your homework assignment and shove it. You monkeys found enough ways to dodge the rotor speed up caused by magnets positioned in output coil cores, and the extra output. What about the central issue? This amounts to a "Grey Zone " in your head!
So you feel it will help for me to read about Ben Franklin's Leyden Jar? You compare to Steven Hawkings in one glaring manner; You act paralyzed! You forced to me do that stupid bifilar nail test you're too stinking lame to accomplish that much in the real world, you're sending me back to first grade. You're just an insulting punk! You condescend to Nicola Tesla, and speak about him as though he could use a first grade brush up too. TK says you're just BS. Wise up to yourself!
Bah!!! I throw my hands up in a dramatic gesture of futility!!! Baaaah!!!!
Synchro1, do what you want but it's enough to make a grown man cry and a dead man run. Nothing dodged, I discussed the "delayed Lenz effect" in detail way back in this thread. It would indeed help you to read about Ben Franklin's Leyden jar. I didn't force yo to do anything and your clip was a joke. And I have accomplished much more than you on the design side I assure you.
Wise up and wake up Synchro1! Smell the roses!! If you want to talk about electronics then you should as a grown man roll up your shirtsleeves and undertake to educate yourself if this is really and truly your hobby. Without that, you make a fool of yourself. You are the one that is paralyzed and trapped in a black box filled with dark fog. Can you see it or are you in denial?
I won't discuss this anymore, there is no point. You are a grown-ass man! Start it up because you can't compete with the riders in the other heats! Ride like the wind at double speed. Take yourself places that you've never seen.
All your single wire coil needs is a capacitor scarfed on to make it the same as a serial bifilar. That means there's no difference between the coils. Maybe we can wire an additional component on the SBC and call it a transistor?
Dear
There is something I don't understand, why Thane Heins is he talking that there is a 45° phase shift in the RegenX Coil, where as, from my understanding, this wouldn't have an accelerating effect?
regards
Quote from: synchro1 on June 08, 2013, 10:26:55 AM
.Maybe we can wire an additional component on the SBC and call it a transistor?
Or a degenerate semiconductor?
In this experiment I am testing my bittoroid, this experiment consists of there being no phase variation when the bittoroid is charged or discharged with the 8 high power 4 watt LEDs at the output. This is a short but informative and interesting video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H64mWylOT_s&t=4s