This year is bigger and better than ever including new rules (no rules) and pulse motors do not have to have electrical input.
This is worthwhile to follow even if you are not into pulse motors.
Russ Gries and Tinman are the organizers.
http://revolution-green.com/2013/08/25/pulse-motor-build-competition/ (http://revolution-green.com/2013/08/25/pulse-motor-build-competition/)
Kind Regards
Hi Mark
I know it says "pulsed motor" but can TPU's be entered? (no moving parts). Obviously the TPU needs to do work. 1 run battery, a battery being charged and a load being operated.
:)
Quote from: lightningengineer on August 25, 2013, 04:06:30 AM
Hi Mark
I know it says "pulsed motor" but can TPU's be entered? (no moving parts). Obviously the TPU needs to do work. 1 run battery, a battery being charged and a load being operated.
:)
Hi lightningengineer
There is no definition of a pulse motor as such,but a motor must have a rotating shaft in this case.
So unless you can include a rotating shaft of some sort on your TPU,then it cant be used,as it is concidered a solid state device.
Quote from: tinman on August 25, 2013, 05:06:53 AM
Hi lightningengineer
There is no definition of a pulse motor as such,but a motor must have a rotating shaft in this case.
So unless you can include a rotating shaft of some sort on your TPU,then it cant be used,as it is concidered a solid state device.
No worries. I will see if I get time to adapt it.
QuoteThere will be two categories, class A. Advanced. and class B. Beginners
I can suggest a few things to up the ante for the advanced class to make it more interesting.
1. Measure your power input and RPM and then calculate your RPM per watt of input power. How does it vary for different input power levels? Can you plot it on a graph? If it does vary for different input power levels then what is the sweet spot? How does this compare to other entries?
RPM_Efficiency = RPM/Watts_In2. For point #1 above, smaller motors will likely have an advantage over larger motors. So to even the playing field one way might be to weigh the mass of your rotor in grams. The idea being that smaller rotors with low mass are likely to spin faster per watt of input power as compared to larger rotors with larger mass so you want to try to find a way to compensate for that.
Weighted_RPM_Efficiency = ( Rotor_Mass x RPM)/Watts_In3. You know that air friction increases as the RPM increases. So if you run your pulse motor at low speed its RPM/Watts_In should be better than if the pulse motor runs at high speed. Can you actually show this with your measurements? Are you sure that the change in RPM efficiency is due to increasing air friction alone? Are there perhaps other effects that come into play when you compare the motor running at low RPM versus high RPM? Does the timing of the switching come into play? Does the time it takes to energize the coil itself come into play?
4. If you are recovering the back spike from the main drive coil and charging the "charging" battery then calculate your charging efficiency.
Charging_Efficiency = Charging_Battery_Output_Power/Source_Battery_Input_PowerCan you demonstrate that you are making proper measurements of the input power and the "charging" battery output power? How does it compare to the other pulse motors? Does the charging efficiency change with RPM? If it does change with RPM can you explain why? Can you plot it on a graph?
If any advanced keeners out there are up to it, hopefully some of these ideas will make the investigations after the build itself is completed more interesting.
MileHigh
@ MileHigh
Thanks for your input,and great seguestions there aswell.
What we will be baseing our decisions on as far as points scores go,will be in the next video-comeing soon.
I have show and posted video's on how to take accurate P/in and P/out measurements.It's realy quite simple with your standard ssg type pulse motor,but as we seen in the other PMBO's,some machine's take a bit more to calculate P/in and total P/out-including shaft power. But it can be done,as you know-so we'll see what the competitors come up with lol.
I think a TPU can be entered, ask Tinman to answer that.
Excellent suggestions MH
Kind regards
Mark
The prizes are rolling in,so get ya build shoe's on guy's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7toAF6l0pCo
Plus a hand held digital oscope has also been donated(new ofcourse).
Here is the thread to the buildoff if anyone wishes to join in.
http://iaec.forumco.com/forum.asp?FORUM_ID=54
A digital caliper!! OoooOooooooo!
I'm thinking piñata or a big Christmas stocking, eight feet tall! Or combine the two!
There are some really nice prizes.
If I was going to build one I would like to try for something that did totally insane speeds. If you found a nice solid but small aluminum wheel rim, say about eight inches in diameter, that would be the basis of the build. Let's assume that you can insert a bearing into the center of the wheel. You pick a bearing optimized for very high speed and low friction. I am out of my realm, but I will assume that you can find one. The whole assembly is solid, like a chunk of metal.
Next thing is to figure out what to insert into the center hole of the bearing. Suppose you build a T-shaped aluminum magnet holder with stock aluminum extrusions, sink some taps, tighten it all down with those hex machine screws, etc, etc.
Imagine a solid chunk of aluminum that you drop into the bearing, the center of the "T" goes into the bearing and each end of the "T" has mountings to tighten neodymium cylinder magnets into. Very carefully you drill tiny countersink holes into the magnet cylinders. You then can secure them into the holders with the pointed ends of machine screws.
Anyway, if you can visualize that rotating "T" with the big cylinder magnets pointing outwards on each end. Then you set about getting it to rotate at medium speed with a simple setup with just one intention. You get it perfectly balanced by drilling small amounts of aluminum out of the top of the horizontal "T" shaft. I don't know how that's done to actually do the balancing, but I will assume it's doable.
Once all that's done, your physical setup is ready. The next step is to work out some power electronics to make that sucker fly. When you are dealing with drive coils, you need higher voltage to get high current faster. So perhaps get six smallish 12-volt batteries. You don't need to run it for long periods.
So 72 volts and then experiment with coils and electronics and timing and push the speed up as high as you possibly could go. One way might be to have external power coils that are separate from the drive coils. So the transistor switches on a big power coil and that charges up. Then that discharges into the actual drive coil. In theory you could have big external power coils that fire the two drive coils that push on the big neodymium cylinder magnets. You cold even have say four power coils, two per drive coil.
Anyway, if everything was balanced, even the two drive coils would have to be "balanced" in the way they push on the rotor magnets. Lust for speed beckons...
It would be expensive but look at a guy like Russ, he has all the equipment to do it, and he is excellent at simply finding this kind of stuff for free.
Anyway, I think that it would have the potential to get frighteningly fast and those big cylinder magnets (say one inch in diameter) would have to be secured properly. I am sure there is a way better way to do it than I said. For example you could make some kind of machined "cup" that they fit into.
Call that a virtual entry into the competition! The Armchair Redeemer Mark IV.
MileHigh
MH:
How about 300,000 rpm? There are several folks that use a simple sphere neo and hit those speeds or higher. (very dangerous of course) The highest I have obtained is 16,000 rpm with my Jonny Davro one magnet, no bearing Bedini pulse motor. (Using the Lidmotor transformer coil)
Bill
There was a report a couple weeks ago where a guy was seriously injured when a magnet he was spinning fast actually came apart. It happened once and he was slightly dinged, then a few days later he did it _again_ and was hurt bad, I think he needed surgery on his hand.
So the speed limit can be exceeded, this is known already. Please stay safe, there is no point in speed for speed sake. Did I just say that? Balls to the wall, men, damn the torpedoes and full speed ahead! (but wear safety glasses anyway)
I'd like to know if unconventional power supplies and operating principles are allowed. Are these to be strictly electromagnetic PMs, or would electrostatic or even pneumatic drives also qualify? How about a gravity-driven PM? (Or rather a PM that was mechanically driven by GPE converting to KE, like a cuckoo clock)
I am being serious here.
Quote from: Pirate88179 on August 26, 2013, 11:17:50 PM
MH:
How about 300,000 rpm? There are several folks that use a simple sphere neo and hit those speeds or higher. (very dangerous of course) The highest I have obtained is 16,000 rpm with my Jonny Davro one magnet, no bearing Bedini pulse motor. (Using the Lidmotor transformer coil)
Bill
I have to admit that I'm a bit skeptical of those reports. I think they are driving with a frequency of 300kHz and assuming synchronous rotation, but I don't know if they have any concurrently valid measurements of speed by other means.
I've been rotating a little disc magnet glued to crude axle made from a bit of wire, no precision at all, using a couple of coils driven by my function generator. I can get 5000 rpm or so, confirmed by strobotach. I'd really like to try a sphere magnet in a good solid housing, in a vacuum, with proper tachometry, just for grins.
Bill:
No spinning eggs, it's has to be a motor. Speed just for speed's sake. You could even watch it from behind a pillar via a big mirror. lol
I took my inspiration for this design from a battling robot from either Robot Wars or Battlebots. I tried to find it on YouTube but gave up. The team took a mag wheel rim and built the robot guts inside the solid aluminum rim. I think it fired a metal horizontal shaft back and forth. The shaft was terminated at each end by a sharp point.
So if you can imagine that, with a bloody mag wheel rim in the boxing ring, the body of your robot is pretty much indestructible. I don't think it's mobility was particularly good and it's weapon of the "plunging pointed stick" was not so great.
Of course those two shows are great fun just in terms in looking at the builds of the robots themselves. The super heavyweights were scary for sure and easily had the capability to do serious harm to a person.
MileHigh
Well my pulse motor made from a vcr head using 4 neos hit about 12,000 rpm. Not all that fast but it sounded cool. Would that qualify? It even had a threaded adjustable gap between the coil and the rotor.
Battlebots are cool. Too bad they don't allow explosives to be used.
Bill
Another cool project would be based on the beautiful direct drive turntables from the late 1970s and 1980s. They had a tape head reading a magnetic stripe on the inside of the platter for servo speed control and a beautiful direct drive where the platter is the rotor with a magnet array, and there is a stator electromagnet array in the base. It's all optimized for constant RPM. I would assume there might be a micro at the heart of the thing. However, it could be done with hard-wired logic also.
You might be able to hack into the speed control and in theory with the servo feedback there is built-in variable torque to compensate for changing loads. Making the speed variable could be as trivial as replacing a crystal oscillator signal with a signal from a function generator. Then if you could somehow boost the power going into the stator electromagnets but keep the same control signals you are rocking.
@TK
Here is this years ruel's or motor guide line's. We have opened it up a bit,and it no longer has to be an electrical pulse.
A rotating device that turns by pulses. Those pulses are not limited to electrical pulses.
It can be gas pulses,liquid pulses,or anything that creates a pulsing force ( most the time repetitive pulses but could be limited to one pulse) that is used to rotate the device's mechanism ,rotor,flywheel ECT.
It can be big or small,and made from any material.
The wackier and most use of resources the better.
The pulse motor build off actualy started as a private comp between Russ and myself lol. But we then decided to extend it to everyone.
This will be the third build off,and we hold one every year.
This has brought out setup's the likes you have never seen,even a gravity/weight shifting pulse motor. There was also one that fired very high voltage arcs into a wheel with ventury shaped jets cut into it.This expanded the air inside these jet's,and forced the expanding gas out of a small opening on the side of the wheel,which in turn rotated the wheel at quite a high speed.
There will be two categories, class A. Advanced. and class B. Beginners/use of resources. Russ and Brad will decide witch category you will be in, based on previous builds by yourself/ your entry video. we encourage the beginner's to use there resources. this will help you in your class. Build from junk is good!!!
All info can be found on my forum here-http://iaec.forumco.com/forum.asp?FORUM_ID=54
So- who thinks they can come up with something that hasnt been done befor,to rotate a shaft,flywheel or rotor-using pulses of some sort.
In reguards to safty-please guy's-play it safe.
Below is a picture of one of my moderators on IAEC.
A magnet came loose,and this was at only 730RPM. He nearly lost sight in that eye,and spent many months with vision in one eye only. Although we see them as toys,they can be very dangerous.
@tinman: Thanks for posting the details! I don't know if I can come up with anything "new"... without a lathe I can't work to the precision necessary to make a Warlock's Wheel PM (Marinov's Siberian Coilu) unfortunately. But maybe someone else might be interested in making one.
SAFETY IS NO ACCIDENT.
That's a slogan from years ago that the civil aviation authority used in their safety literature. And it is right: safety must be planned in, from the beginning.
Please please please, all builders of rotating assemblies or even stationary ones using magnets: DO NOT RELY ON ADHESIVES to hold your magnets in place! Always design _structure_ that restrains your magnets physically so that they _cannot possibly_ come loose! There isn't much that is more dangerous in our home laboratories than a strong magnet out of control flying off at high speed.
Strong magnets are dangerous! We play with them casually all the time so it's easy to forget. But even a small NdBFe magnet can shatter when it hits something, and when it shatters, small bits will come spalling off at high speed, these are usually red-hot, and if one hits you in the eye... or hits your child or pet or spouse or something.... you will be sorry.
Wear safety glasses. If you wear spectacles, have your optician recommend some prescription safety glasses. I have a bifocal pair that I had made with the bottom part so that I can focus easily at "lathe" distance and the top part for distance vision. Strong shatterproof lenses. A full face shield isn't too silly in certain cases: My good looks were saved by one when a big capacitor I was working with blew up in front of me, spraying hot oil all over the place, caught on fire.
We are all really lucky, even the fellow with the shattered eyeball above. Let's not push our luck by designing in disaster. Safety is no accident.
Analyzing the efficiency of the transistor switching is not something that you normally see but it might be something for some people in the advanced group.
There are two main goals and there are trade-offs where one optimization can have a negative impact on the second optimization and vice versa. The two optimizations are 1) to switch the transistor on and off as quickly as possible, and 2) to burn the least amount of energy through the base transistor and diode drop of the base-emitter junction in the transistor.
The reason you want to switch the transistor on and off as quickly as possible is that the transistor is burning energy through the collector-emitter junction during the switching itself. It the transistor switches off slowly it will steal energy from the back-EMF pulse.
Let's assume that the motor is running at its high speed steady state speed. Let's also assume that you have done a manual test of the transistor with the drive coil to determine the minimum base current to saturate the transistor relative to the resistive load of the coil. You may or may not want to use that data.
So you have three variables to play with: 1) the number of turns in the pick-up coil which will determine the max EMF voltage, 2) the physical size and shape of the pick-up coil which will determine what the EMF waveform looks like, and 3) the value of the base resistor. By experimenting with your scope and watching the switching carefully and also looking at the pick-up coil voltage waveform you could in theory find a maximum efficiency sweet spot for the switching at the max steady-state speed.
MileHigh
@TK
A Warlock's Wheel ?.
Well as you probably know,i have a lathe lol.
I also have run out of ideas for a build in this comp-although i cant enter ofcourse.
@Tinman: The Warlock's Wheel is what Jeffery Kooistra called his Marinov Siberian Coilu experiment. He was working for Gene Mallove at the time and wrote about the experiment in Infinite Energy Magazine.
Jeffery writing in Analog:
http://www.analogsf.com/0806/altview.shtml (http://www.analogsf.com/0806/altview.shtml)
Ken Rauen's analysis, which I think is incomplete:
http://www.infinite-energy.com/iemagazine/issue39/deviceupdate.html (http://www.infinite-energy.com/iemagazine/issue39/deviceupdate.html)
I built one in 2000, a good testbed that had vertical mercury brushes that could contact the "stator" ring from either the inner edge or the outer edge, had a self-contained power supply (2 9v batteries) and a light-actuated switch to turn the current on without perturbing anything. The ring, the armature magnets and the powersupply/brush structure were all triaxially mounted on 3 nested axles and everything could move independently. The behaviour reported by Marinov and later by Kooistra was soundly confirmed by this apparatus. When energised with the brushes positioned on the inner edge of the "stator" ring, the ring and the inner magnet armature both rotated... in the _same direction_. Since my brushes approached the ring from below and the lead wires were parallel to the device axis, the explanation that Rauen gives for Jeffery's results does not apply to mine, although it did appear that my ps/brush support was pushed in the opposite direction.
Let this sink in a bit. The more one thinks about it the more incredible it seems. Does the device really violate Newton? Does it work by flux leakage from the central magnets, or is this flux confined and unable to interact directly with the current in the ring?
Anyway, by interrupting the current at the right time, this thing can be turned into a pulse motor, and the magnet armature and the "stator" ring will both rotate in the same direction. An optical chopping wheel and led-photodiode pair will do the trick.
My original apparatus was damaged after I demonstrated it to a room full of physicists, when some mercury splashed out and shorted the logic chip on the power supply board. We moved the lab before I could repair it, and now it is lost. I made a version without the stator ring, substituting a cleverly wound coil to simulate the current paths in the ring. I call it the Marinov Slab motor; it runs on a 9v battery and also _appears_ to violate Newton because it is unclear what is being pushed against to turn the rotor, and it also appears to have no armature back-reaction.
@TK
Is there any clear diagrams of this device?
Quote from: tinman on August 30, 2013, 06:48:25 AM
@TK
Is there any clear diagrams of this device?
I'll try to sketch what I built but I'm a lousy artist.
The Phipps paper has some good illustrations that should make the basic layout clear. What is amazing about the Phipps paper, with all its careful analysis, is that he seems to have missed entirely the difference between putting the brushes on the inner edge vs. the outer edge of the ring.
http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/Pre2001/V05NO3PDF/v05n3phi.pdf (http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/Pre2001/V05NO3PDF/v05n3phi.pdf)
Let me say it again: With the brushes on the outer edge of the ring, you give it power and the ring goes one way and the magnet armature goes the other way. No problems with Newton and Lorentz.... and this is what Phipps analyzes. But..... if you put the brushes to contact the inner edge of the ring only.... the ring and the armature move in the same direction. This is so unbelievable (and kind of difficult to implement) that Phipps apparently didn't even try it.
So the setup is like this: You have a hefty copper ring. Most people who have looked at this use copper vacuum flange gaskets, these are ideal in the 5 or 6 inch size. This is your "stator" but it must be mounted so that it can rotate freely on its central axis. You also have a magnet rotor "armature" that is mounted in the center, co-axially, and also can rotate freely. Marinov said to saw a bar magnet in half lengthwise, flip one half over and glue them together, so that you have a "flux loop" so to speak , but I just used a couple of bar magnets, stuck together so that one end of the stack has N-and-S polarities and the other end the S-and-N polarities. So you have a ring, encircling the rotor and everything is able to spin around on the same axis.
Then you arrange your brushes to contact the ring at 180 degrees apart. The brushes should be adjustable so that they can either be set to contact the ring on the outside edge or the inside edge. They can't drag the ring, torque is low, so mercury or GalInStan is used. Current is high though so the brushes need some thought. For a first build I would make the brushes and power supply stationary, not able to rotate.
So, to start, you set up with the ring with brushes at 180 degrees apart. The magnet armature is positioned so that the bar magnets are closest to the brush points. Looking down from above you could draw a straight line through the brushes and the S and N poles of the armature magnets.
Now you give it the current.
The Armature will "snap" around to the 90 degree position so that the poles are now at the midpoints of the ring, between the brushes, and will want to "lock" in this position for as long as current is applied. But while the armature is moving to that "lock" position, the ring itself will also move, either in the same direction (brushes inside edge) or in the opposite direction (brushes outside edge). Once the armature "locks" into the position at 90 degrees to the brushes, then the rotor just coasts, it is no longer being "pushed" in either direction, and the armature wants to stay put. So just before it gets to the "lock" position... you turn the current off. This enables the armature to "coast" past the lock position until it is again lined up with the brushes, and you can apply another pulse of current (in the opposite polarity? I can't recall). This will drive the armature on around to the next "lock" position and the ring will keep coasting along. Lather rinse repeat.... and you have a pulse motor that will blow people's minds altogether, guaranteed.
Requires low voltage and high current, I was using two nine-volt transistor batteries in parallel, with a mosfet switch triggered by a light sensor, but that was for the rotating power supply. For a fixed PS, try to get 10 amps into the ring per pulse at least.
For a "proof of concept" single pulse demonstrator you can do what Jeffery did: Just glue a copper ring to the top rim of a styrofoam cup (if you use clear plastic cup you can see the armature better) , suspend it upside down with a thread, over a pair of magnets sitting on the table. Usually you don't even have to mount these magnets, just stick them together edgewise and set them down on the ends so that you have your N-S pole pair up and the S-N pole pair down. Make two little pools of mercury in depressions in the table that the ring can contact, lower the cup/ring down over the magnets until the ring contacts your brush pools, and then use wires or foil slid under the ring edge to make the power connection to the mercury pools. A pair of strong bar magnets, cylinders with flat ends, 1 or 2 inches long by 1/2 inch diameter, would be ideal for this proof of concept test.
It is not as complicated as it sounds, until you try to explain why it works the way it does. Marinov thought it worked by interaction with the scalar A field, since in his original conception there should have been essentially no flux leakage from the split , flipped and reassembled central magnet. But it works a lot better if you allow flux leakage, so I don't buy into Marinov's explanation, and neither did he at the end of his life.
Ideal ring:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/High-Vacuum-Copper-Gaskets-4-1-2-CF-Flange-3-1-4-/300628576466?_trksid=p3284.m263&_trkparms=algo%3DSIC%26its%3DI%26itu%3DUCI%252BIA%252BUA%252BFICS%252BUFI%26otn%3D21%26pmod%3D300528636168%26ps%3D54 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/High-Vacuum-Copper-Gaskets-4-1-2-CF-Flange-3-1-4-/300628576466?_trksid=p3284.m263&_trkparms=algo%3DSIC%26its%3DI%26itu%3DUCI%252BIA%252BUA%252BFICS%252BUFI%26otn%3D21%26pmod%3D300528636168%26ps%3D54)
As you can probably tell, turning the single pulse demonstrator into a pulse motor with continual rotation will be a bit of a challenge and will demand a lot of creativity.
Here is my Marinov Slab. If you can imagine the coil (it is a single coil even though it looks like two) being replaced by the ring, and free to rotate around the same axle as the rotor, that's the idea.
(Bottom view, showing Hall sensor position on its adjustment "timing" disc; the magnets are the two light spots at 2 and 8 oclock in the black Delrin rotor disk. The "virtual brush" positions are at 12 and 6 oclock, where the two half-coils almost meet.)
To tell the truth, in all of the fifteen years or so that I have been involved in this quest, both professionally and as an amateur hobbyist, seeing that thing rotate both parts in the same direction has been the most amazing, non-intuitive, hair-raising thing I have seen yet. You see it, and you go.... waaait a minute, WTF is going on here, what did I just see? It looks like a violation of Newton (since you can't see what is being pushed against to turn stuff) and Lorentz force laws too.
(I mean the full Warlock's Wheel of course; my Slab is just a simulation without the degrees of freedom of motion needed to demonstrate the full effect.)
Even if it turns out to be a perfectly explainable phenomenon in terms of "ordinary" physics, it is still utterly amazing and I know that there are applications waiting for it out in the real world, probably in spacecraft or other low-gravity situations. But how to make them? I don't know.
@TK
So we need to arange the magnets to produce the field pictured below?
Ok,i think this is a combination of the"dropping a rod magnet down a copper pipe,and the homopolar motor.
If we made a homopolar motor,and placed a free wheeling copper ring around the rotating magnet on the motor,the copper ring would rotate in the same direction as the magnet.
So we send an electric current through the copper ring,and the magnetic field would be at right angles to the electric field,as are the PM's field's to that of the copper ring.
So realy,it is working just like the homopolar motor.
Quote from: tinman on August 30, 2013, 09:22:16 AM
Ok,i think this is a combination of the"dropping a rod magnet down a copper pipe,and the homopolar motor.
If we made a homopolar motor,and placed a free wheeling copper ring around the rotating magnet on the motor,the copper ring would rotate in the same direction as the magnet.
So we send an electric current through the copper ring,and the magnetic field would be at right angles to the electric field,as are the PM's field's to that of the copper ring.
So realy,it is working just like the homopolar motor.
No, it isn't, I think. Don't forget that the ring spins in the opposite direction from the magnets if the brushes are on the outside edge, and in the same direction as the magnets if the brushes are on the inside edge. The ring isn't spun by eddy currents from the magnets if they are both going in the same direction; also the ring coasts freely once the magnets are in the "lock" position, even while current is still applied. Eddies must exist in that case but they are too weak to affect the motion of the ring, except maybe to slow down its coasting a little bit. The ring is only propelled (by something) while the magnets are not yet in the "lock" position at 90 degrees from the brushes, even if current continues to flow.
Quote from: tinman on August 30, 2013, 08:59:55 AM
@TK
So we need to arange the magnets to produce the field pictured below?
Yes, pretty much. Actually you can even put "keepers" on the ends of the magnet pair and get even more flux confinement that way. But if you spread the magnets apart and don't use keepers like in my Slab, then you have much more flux leakage than you are showing... and I think it works better.
IOW, I don't think Marinov's explanation of no flux leakage and a scalar field interaction is really what is happening. But regardless of why it works, the strange thing is that it does work. If the explanation of pushing against the brushes and lead-in wires is correct, then Jeffery's foil lead-ins should have been pushed out of their pools when the current started flowing and things started to move. But they weren't. This is why the experiment is worth doing, and turning it into a pulse motor for continuous running is a great project. Marinov thought that it would be a "perpetuum mobile" with the ring spinning forever without any more power supplied. I wonder what would happen with a superconducting ring.
Does anyone think that my pulse motor powered by my earth battery would be interesting enough to enter with? I really like the idea of this competition. I am just not sure that any of my pulse motors would be different enough to be competitive. The earth battery angle is about the only angle that I might have.
Bill
Quote from: TinselizedK
http://www.ebay.com/itm/High-Vacuum-Copper-Gaskets-4-1-2-CF-Flange-3-1-4-
(trimmed for example purposes)
Ahoy Mate,
A
hyperlink would have been very useful
in the above case as some browsers are
unable to process long urls and stretch
the page to very, very wide.
Otherwise, thanks for the input.
Quote from: SeaMonkey on August 31, 2013, 01:06:12 AM
Ahoy Mate,
A hyperlink (http://www.ebay.com/itm/High-Vacuum-Copper-Gaskets-4-1-2-CF-Flange-3-1-4-/300628576466?_trksid=p3284.m263&_trkparms=algo%3DSIC%26its%3DI%26itu%3DUCI%252BIA%252BUA%252BFICS%252BUFI%26otn%3D21%26pmod%3D300528636168%26ps%3D54) would have been very useful
in the above case as some browsers are
unable to process long urls and stretch
the page to very, very wide.
Otherwise, thanks for the input.
It was a hyperlink. I clicked on TK's link and it worked for me. Not a bad price for such an item. What browser are you using? I suggest Firefox.
Bill
Quote from: Pirate88179 on August 30, 2013, 11:29:51 PM
Does anyone think that my pulse motor powered by my earth battery would be interesting enough to enter with? I really like the idea of this competition. I am just not sure that any of my pulse motors would be different enough to be competitive. The earth battery angle is about the only angle that I might have.
Bill
Hi Bill
Enter with what ever you have,as everyone's build has the same chance,and is of equal importance.
The only catch is that you have to build the machine within the time frame. One that you have already built cannot be entered-it has to be new.
Tinman:
OK, I see. Thank you.
Bill
Quote from: Pirate88179 on August 31, 2013, 01:19:28 AM
It was a hyperlink. I clicked on TK's link and it worked for me. Not a bad price for such an item. What browser are you using? I suggest Firefox.
In the Post Reply editor there is an icon
which facilitates creation of the Hyperlink.
This permits long urls to be displayed
indirectly as a brief descriptive.
Learning to use the Hyperlink is a
valuable skill and I wish more would take
advantage of it.
Yes, that is what I use to create a hyperlink. I assumed that is what everyone has to use. I don't think I see your point here. Does the forum software automatically create a link when it is typed (or copied and pasted) in the message body? It didn't used to be that way. If this is the case then I believe what you are saying is that instead of a long string of a page location, one could simply post a link that says "check this out" or something. Is this what you are saying?
I did not know this was possible with the SMF software as this is a tool that scammers use in e-mail links. i.e. the link says Socialsecurity.gov but when you hover over the link it really takes you to "pornworlddotcom.
I will look into this a little more.
Bill
Quote from: Pirate88179
...I believe what you are saying is that instead of a long string of a page location, one could simply post a link that says "check this out" or something. Is this what you are saying?
Aye, that is it!
When created this is what the Hyperlink
will look like:
Pirate's posting.Once learned, the process is quite simple.
Quote from: SeaMonkey on August 31, 2013, 05:08:59 PM
Aye, that is it!
When created this is what the Hyperlink
will look like:
Pirate's posting. (http://www.overunity.com/13746/2013-pulsed-motor-build-off-competition-announced/msg369529/#msg369529)
Once learned, the process is quite simple.
I have been doing that for years but, I was not aware that Stefan upgraded the SMF software so we could do that here. I must have missed that upgrade. Thanks for pointing it out.
Bill
That is pretty funny...
I tell you how to build the most amazing thing you will likely ever see in these pages, and you are bitching about how I typed a link to a vacuum flange gasket.
(not 'you' Bill, you know what I mean....)
I run an up-to-date Firefox but the hyperlink insertion has never worked for me. I don't get prompted or see a place to insert descriptive text. I don't know if I have something disabled, it's just an annoyance. My quote button only half works and doesn't pop up the "unquote" meta-text command string. Flash, Java, all that crap has to be made invisible soon, perhaps in a HTML5 universe?
Speaking of motors, see the attached pic of a simple ion drive rotary motor. That concept could be converted into an ion-drive pulse motor. It works from the principle that sharp edges emanate the strongest electric fields so the air molecules get ionized at the tips of the needles and get pushed away at high speed. So the thing spins due to the Third Law of Motion.
With a Hall sensor you could trigger a small coil like a conventional Bedini/classic pulse motor setup. The voltage may get fairly high and there are no neons to protect your transistor. So perhaps a small home-brew ignition coil type of configuration would be the way to go. That eliminates the possible frying of your diode/transistor problem.
The coil-based HV pulsing circuit would "discharge" through the spinning rotor and the current would flow into the ion discharge needle array. Every coil discharge would generate a "puff" of ions to keep the motor turning. You might even be able to push it and get some special effects.
The rotor doesn't have to be measly pieces of bent wire with sharp pointed ends either. You could make "needle arrays" mounted on a nice rotor frame or use knife edges for the ion discharge and have a bigger coil and more ion pushing power. It would be a challenge to have the right sized components and to figure out how to tune it. Also, note that the entire rotor is pulsing at a high potential when the rotor is spinning.
Could be fun!
Quote from: MileHigh
I don't get prompted or see a place to insert descriptive text.
Within the editor for this forum you
highlight the "descriptive text" then
click on the hyperlink icon.
Then into the blank area of the url
box in the popup right-click paste your
previously saved (copied) url, then click
OK.
Quote from: TinselizedK-bore
...and you are bitching about how I typed a link to a vacuum flange gasket.
Do we detect a bit of resistance to a better
way here? :o
Ah, the difficulties of dealing with ANPD... ::)
O.K., I'm outtahere until your next screwup. 8)
This from the person who can't control his browser so he has to put hard returns every few words in his (or her) posts so that any thread is twice as long as it needs to be. Right.
::)
Yes, I can see it was a screwup to tell what I know about the Siberian Coliu of Stefan Marinov.
Meanwhile, here is some more whacky inspiration for someone to make a pulse motor. (I think that the action of the moving part of a motor should in some way control the pulsing... I'm not sure a corona motor fed with chopped DC at some high frequency would quite satisfy me as a "pulse motor"... but maybe the Chaos Motor does, as its sparking pulsations are controlled by the position of the "rotor". Sort of.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hw7hajAjv5k
Hi TK,
this video may be of interest to you or Ed Gray researchers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wzrAFAz0eQ
Luc
TK:
In my imaginary rotor design of the ion pulse motor there are indeed small magnets on the rotor to trigger the Hall sensors. So indeed it's a pulse motor. Gotta have that.
It would be funny if you doubled the battery voltage and therefore quadrupled the high voltage inductive discharge energy such that the "needle arrays" spat out St. Elmo's Fire!
MileHigh
P.S.: The Chaos Motor makes me think of the intro to a famous country blues rock'n'roll song.
Ah, Ok, I didn't get the part about the Hall sensors. Might work... but good luck using them in the high electric field environment!
Here's a photo that I believe shows something like St. Elmo's Fire on a spinning Ion Motor : this is happening at slightly reduced pressure, within a diffuse bluish cathode glow, the white anodic plasma clings to patches on the motor armature and tips.
Weel were into week 3 of the PMBO,and some interesting setup's are starting to come out of the darkness.
A tesla coil powered pulse motor???
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGE8HAcyQ1Q
Hey tinman I noticed in another thread on OUR that you said something about toroidal wound coils in pulse motors:
QuoteIf the field was contained within the core,how dose the rotor spin?.There has to be a magnetic field pushing against the rotor magnet's.
But in a "core effect" pulse motor like Steorn's Orbo or my Orbettes, the operation is different than that. What happens in those motors is this: the ferrite of the core material is normally attracted to either pole of a magnet with equal strength. But if you wind a nice coil around the toroid you can drive the core into magnetic saturation, and this actually _reduces_ its attraction to external magnets of either polarity. No field need leak out from the toroid itself. You can prove that the "core effect" isn't due to leakage by reversing the polarity of the DC current in the toroidal winding. This has no effect on the strength of the "reduced attraction" of either polarity of the external magnet.
So for a core effect motor using toroidal coils, you time it so that the coils are _off_ as the rotor magnet approaches the coil, and then at the point of closest approach you pulse the coil. This _reduces_ the attraction of the rotor magnet, no matter the polarity of the current or the magnet, so the rotor magnet can move along past the core without being dragged back as much as it would otherwise. The difference in attraction can be small but the effect can produce strong acceleration in the rotor anyway. It's a very weird way to run a pulse motor but it works great, even when you have really well-constructed toroidal coils with essentially no flux leakage. The magnetic saturation of the core material by the contained flux, so that it can't be further attracted by an external magnet, is the key.
.
Quote from: TinselKoala on September 11, 2013, 05:30:27 AM
Hey tinman I noticed in another thread on OUR that you said something about toroidal wound coils in pulse motors:
But in a "core effect" pulse motor like Steorn's Orbo or my Orbettes, the operation is different than that. What happens in those motors is this: the ferrite of the core material is normally attracted to either pole of a magnet with equal strength. But if you wind a nice coil around the toroid you can drive the core into magnetic saturation, and this actually _reduces_ its attraction to external magnets of either polarity. No field need leak out from the toroid itself. You can prove that the "core effect" isn't due to leakage by reversing the polarity of the DC current in the toroidal winding. This has no effect on the strength of the "reduced attraction" of either polarity of the external magnet.
So for a core effect motor using toroidal coils, you time it so that the coils are _off_ as the rotor magnet approaches the coil, and then at the point of closest approach you pulse the coil. This _reduces_ the attraction of the rotor magnet, no matter the polarity of the current or the magnet, so the rotor magnet can move along past the core without being dragged back as much as it would otherwise. The difference in attraction can be small but the effect can produce strong acceleration in the rotor anyway. It's a very weird way to run a pulse motor but it works great, even when you have really well-constructed toroidal coils with essentially no flux leakage. The magnetic saturation of the core material by the contained flux, so that it can't be further attracted by an external magnet, is the key.
I to thought this to be true once,but much testing shows me that the field isnt contained within the core. Infact, even with a very small amount of power pulsed into a toroidal inductor(coil), a magnetic field is produced eminating 360* around that toroidal coil. Not all the produced magnetic field is confined within the core.
hi everyone,
I have uncovered an article that is related to "ou" motor which is merely running off from magnets with no batteries.
Unfortunately i do not have sufficient know how about mechanics or designing or even to advise or validate.
I am merely attaching this file hoping that someone whom is capable in designing is able to verify maybe by replicating to prove if this device is fake or for real.
Maybe this can be the masterpiece to win the competition. :D :D :D
Quote from: tinman on September 11, 2013, 06:38:12 AM
I to thought this to be true once,but much testing shows me that the field isnt contained within the core. Infact, even with a very small amount of power pulsed into a toroidal inductor(coil), a magnetic field is produced eminating 360* around that toroidal coil. Not all the produced magnetic field is confined within the core.
I agree, an imperfectly wound toroidal coil will have considerable leakage, especially from the connecting wires. But careful winding and proper core material can reduce this to very low levels. If you put too much current in the coil, the core saturates, and then it essentially acts like it has permeability = 1 for additional flux from the windings, so this flux can also be detected outside the toroid.
But what I describe is definitely true. The core effect is distinct from attraction and repulsion effects in a pulse motor. You can reverse the polarity of the DC pulses with little or no effect on the core effect rotor RPM, and the timing requirement is a dead giveaway. At first it might seem like you have a repulsion motor because the timing is similar, but on more careful examination... like by reversing the polarity of the rotor magnets ... you will see the difference.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfdLC676S94 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfdLC676S94)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpRELAryfGU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpRELAryfGU)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEWAjzA7YYA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEWAjzA7YYA)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBS3tDyZEs8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBS3tDyZEs8)
Hmmm there seems to be something wrong with that last video which is a shame because it is the most interesting of the bunch. I think it's being suppressed, I can't even get it to play right on my channel.
I agree with TK that it depends on the core material and saturation as to the amount of flux that escapes the cores outer sides. But all the action in in the middle. ;) In the doughnut hole. ;D
Mags