hi i came across a motor where rotor and stator of motor rotates at same time ,where now the motor is more eff .
now there are motors in the market which are 99 % eff where only rotor are rotating , if we can rotate stator also ,we can have motors more than 100 %
Proof of concept
DC motor http://rotatingstator.com/index_eng.html
And for induction motor
Безопорный двигатель 1. Такого двигателя не видели.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBWKi5k1zCQ
some more info
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Sle8xUWtNI
http://www.google.co.in/patents/US20060125243
Is this perpetual motor?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgvR9_zviKI
1st answer
bad idea look at searl project 2 explain simple you want a coil witch produces a magnetic field by putting voltage and amperage on the coil
that produces the tap. as a metafore take a bicicle put it upside down and tap the weel
you need less energy with the same effect of the energy, when you use dc your killing the dipole
3 fase motors and regular dc motors Always have a green yellow wire to ground it, that all the radiant energy going to waste
you wanna use pulsed dc to tap it
i used to pulse moving stuf but came aware of solid state
first by Thomas Bearden the college of John Bedini the MEG
then i have buildid my own coils and start pulsing them
2 newtonn yes thats overunity but in a small scale, they have better setups look up perminant magnetic motor perendev 8)
perendev
they somehow figure out how to either shield 1 side of the magnet or they produce them like that not realy sure
think in your old big pc's hardrives is mounted with a shielding plate
anyway here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFGiWiXMHn0
The counter rotating rotor and stator in a motor is a very interesting setup to explore. At the moment I am experimenting
with a permanent magnet motor build in that way. At a later stage I hope to publish some results concerning in/output power,
efficiency, torque and construction.
Justawatt, when a motor with a rotating rotor and stator should be more efficient than 100% it was already invented 100 years ago.
There are enough patents on that theme. By the way, why not talking about counter rotating rotors. In this case the stator becomes a rotor.
To make it more complex; why keep it only by 2 rotors?
Interesting find justawatt
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Justawatt, this is an amazing find https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBWKi5k1zCQ
The rotor and stator are attached to the same pulley. When the motor is powered, the rotor drags the stator in the same direction.
This proves that the back torque against the stator is not the same as the torque on the rotor. If the rotor torque and stator back torque were equal, the rotor and stator would try to turn in opposite directions. No matter what pulleys were put between, the forces would be equal and the motor would not turn. This shows the opposite, the rotor torque is higher than the stator, and therefore, the rotor must be applying torque against something other than the stator.
If I had to guess, I'd say the torque is being directly applied to the magnetic field of the stator, but the field doesn't translate that completely into torque on the physical coils of the stator. Of course it's not OU because the magnetic field is proportional to the electrical power input, but it makes me question something else...
Does something like a Hatem generator actually produce OU? The magnetic cogs have intrinsic magnetic fields and don't require any external energy to maintain. If the above motor demo hypothesis is true, the mechanical energy out of a Hatem should be greater than the mechanical energy in. http://www.rexresearch.com/hatem/hatem.htm
Mindfreer repro: https://youtu.be/c4FEba4kQb0 https://youtu.be/PzIfowus-HY
@ this OU forum we have to admit that Russians are very interested (and also very skilled) in building electromechanical devices.
The Quest for OverUnity is going fast in that country and also in it's former USSR satellite states. They have exellent engineers and
scientists using more and more YouTube as their publishing platform.
I don't know Russian but Google does. This is one of the YT reactions at the contra rotating rotor and stator motor.
"If you are a physicist, RESPOND TO IT.
Experiments are what happens in practice.
I argue with physicists that the rotor has more power than the stator. The rotor and stator have the same torque moments, but the revolutions are different.
That's multiplying the speed at the moment of force and we get different power from the rotor and stator. Physicists on the forum are proving to me
hat there is no such thing in physics, the rotor and stator have different power. And I say to them that the rotor and stator have different power
if we consider the power formula F * s / t. I argue with the physicists at the forum, there is Newton's law, the smaller the rotor is relative to the stator,
the more will have speed. What is the difference in mass and radius of the rotor from the stator in so many will differ their speed. All physicists agree with this.
The moment of force of the rotor and stator is also the same according to Newton's law. Now we multiply the moment of force on the rotor and stator revolutions and see different power.
Everything is still correct according to the laws of physics. Physicists do not like that the rotor and stator have different power.
Why. Yes, because there is Newton's third law, "The force of action is equal to the force of opposition." The question is asked, different capacities may have the same strength of action.
This is a serious topic. Physicists are in a deadlock situation and can not give me an answer. If physicists tell me that different powers have different strengths of action,
this means that Newton's third law is not correct."
Hi Webby, I'm not a physicist either but I like to know more about the theory of mass.
Here again a (part of) a comment made from the same person where he takes an example of a bullet and a gun
to explain the relation between innertia, mass and acceleration.
"Let's imagine an example:
The bullet strikes the body at 3.6 kg with a force F = 102244.9.
The gun strikes the body at 3.6 kg with a force F = 4924.8.
And the gun and the bullet will give the same bodies the same impulses.
What have you come to? I came to this, the body of 3,6 kg resists the change in speed of 20 times more when a bullet hits, than when it strikes a gun.
This proves that the greater the acceleration of the body, the greater the inertia of the body.
In short, Newton's second law through this formula m * a = F confirms that the inertia of the body varies in proportion to the acceleration. This is confirmed by practice.
The bullet had 20 times more resistance to changes in speed than the shotgun, when they brake into metal. This means that inertia-mass has grown 20-fold.
Fact is a fact, you can not argue with that.
Physicists are looking for an explanation of what a mass is. Acceleration is a change in the speed resistance. A change in the resistance of the speed is inertia.
And inertia is a mass. All this is written in the first and second law of Newton. The mass increases with acceleration.
There is no law of conservation of mass in nature.
If the inertia and mass of the body change, then there will be a flutter and a perpetual motion machine.
Physics is confusing. Newton's laws assert that inertia and mass vary with the body during acceleration. The law of conservation of mass, not true.
The law of conservation of mass is in contradiction with the laws of Newton".
Webby, I see what you mean by a planetary gear. In the first part of the video he turns the rotor by hand, and the stator also moves at a lower RPM. That's true when turned by an external force. I also understand that the stator would try to turn opposite the direction of the rotor, and if allowed to the RPM of each would come to total the RPM of one if the other were stationary.
But I still don't see how a gear reduction would cause the rotor to drag the stator in the same direction. This can only be possible if the stator induces more torque on the rotor than the rotor induces on the stator. Or I could be mistaken and just seeing diamonds in dirt.
I think a good test would be to see if a motor with a locked rotor would still produce a torque when powered. I'll have to add that to my list. ;D
Quote from: webby1 on August 16, 2017, 01:34:09 PM
I am seeing if this posts to the forum,, I do not have a reply choice on this thread at this moment so I used the profile link to see a post and then use that for a reply.
The reason you aren't seeing the "reply" or "quote" buttons is because somebody
posted a HUGE image up above, so the buttons are scrolled all the way offscreen to the right.
If you use your scrollbar and shift all the way to the right you'll see the usual Reply, etc. buttons.
This will persist on this page until someone either edits that HUGE IMAGE or enough posts are made to
go to a second page of normal width.
HINT: If people can't even figure out how to edit an image so that it doesn't result in this stupid
SUPERWIDE page... how do they expect to discover "Overunity" or "Free Energy" ?
Webby, I think they fudged that test. How about you?
GREAT WORK.
The patent claims to generate more 'electric power energy' than conventional fixed stator generators,
when using the same rotational driving force.
The question is this true? How much will the efficiency/electrical power increase?
The only way to know is to build a simple test setup with a small DC motor to check that claim.
Who is first?
https://www.google.com/patents/US20060125243 (https://www.google.com/patents/US20060125243)
https://youtu.be/StZF8ponGXg
Here's a video of a counter rotating generator. Towards the end he says that the original motor required 350W and he's getting 710W output at 900RPM. As far as a generator goes, if it's designed for wind or water power, it would be more efficient. But that's only because you can generate more power in a smaller form factor. For a normal gas engine generator, the generator head would be smaller, but it would still require an engine large enough to handle the higher wattage. Notice that he's probably using two 3/4 or 1HP motors, but he would need at least 1HP total for a load of 710W.
As far as the motor design in the original video, I can't see how that could be more efficient than a normal motor. ???
add on this
New Motor .Counter rotating principle of magnets.Video with subtitles
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lznY_Q--R8
Quote from: justawatt on August 17, 2017, 10:44:29 AM
add on this
New Motor .Counter rotating principle of magnets.Video with subtitles
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lznY_Q--R8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lznY_Q--R8)
Nice, but the key to self-running is to rotate shaft
Quote from: justawatt on August 17, 2017, 10:44:29 AM
add on this
New Motor .Counter rotating principle of magnets.Video with subtitles
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lznY_Q--R8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lznY_Q--R8)
Interesting design!
The below videos better demonstrates his device operating:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRqu47P0CEY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRqu47P0CEY)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beSB-u8B5mk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beSB-u8B5mk)
Quote from: gotoluc on August 17, 2017, 05:32:46 PM
Interesting design!
The below videos better demonstrates his device operating:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRqu47P0CEY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRqu47P0CEY)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beSB-u8B5mk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beSB-u8B5mk)
Here is a Spanish patent on the above videos:
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=ES&NR=2608468A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20170411&DB=&locale=en_EP# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=ES&NR=2608468A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20170411&DB=&locale=en_EP#)
I included below a machine translation of the Spanish patent text and claims to English. If someone needs a translation to French or German, he can go to this link and choose it:
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=ES&NR=2608468A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20170411&DB=&locale=en_EP# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=ES&NR=2608468A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20170411&DB=&locale=en_EP#)
It is interesting the inventor in his video titles claims a 50% increase in efficiency for his counter rotating dual shaft prototype motor.
Gyula
You cannot increase efficiency by rotating both stator and rotor. They both turn relative to eachother and the increased number of moving parts makes the motor less efficient. Not more efficient.
Vidar
Quote from: justawatt on August 14, 2017, 04:14:11 PM
hi i came across a motor where rotor and stator of motor rotates at same time ,where now the motor is more eff .
now there are motors in the market which are 99 % eff where only rotor are rotating , if we can rotate stator also ,we can have motors more than 100 %
Proof of concept
DC motor http://rotatingstator.com/index_eng.html (http://rotatingstator.com/index_eng.html)
And for induction motor
Безопорный двигатель 1. Такого двигателя не видели.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBWKi5k1zCQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBWKi5k1zCQ)
some more info
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Sle8xUWtNI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Sle8xUWtNI)
http://www.google.co.in/patents/US20060125243 (http://www.google.co.in/patents/US20060125243)
Quote from: Bertoa on August 16, 2017, 02:56:34 PM
@ this OU forum we have to admit that Russians are very interested (and also very skilled) in building electromechanical devices.
The Quest for OverUnity is going fast in that country and also in it's former USSR satellite states. They have exellent engineers and
scientists using more and more YouTube as their publishing platform.
I don't know Russian but Google does. This is one of the YT reactions at the contra rotating rotor and stator motor.
"If you are a physicist, RESPOND TO IT.
Experiments are what happens in practice.
I argue with physicists that the rotor has more power than the stator. The rotor and stator have the same torque moments, but the revolutions are different.
That's multiplying the speed at the moment of force and we get different power from the rotor and stator. Physicists on the forum are proving to me
hat there is no such thing in physics, the rotor and stator have different power. And I say to them that the rotor and stator have different power
if we consider the power formula F * s / t. I argue with the physicists at the forum, there is Newton's law, the smaller the rotor is relative to the stator,
the more will have speed. What is the difference in mass and radius of the rotor from the stator in so many will differ their speed. All physicists agree with this.
The moment of force of the rotor and stator is also the same according to Newton's law. Now we multiply the moment of force on the rotor and stator revolutions and see different power.
Everything is still correct according to the laws of physics. Physicists do not like that the rotor and stator have different power.
Why. Yes, because there is Newton's third law, "The force of action is equal to the force of opposition." The question is asked, different capacities may have the same strength of action.
This is a serious topic. Physicists are in a deadlock situation and can not give me an answer. If physicists tell me that different powers have different strengths of action,
this means that Newton's third law is not correct."
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?FT=D&date=19790215&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP&CC=DE& (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?FT=D&date=19790215&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP&CC=DE&)
NR=2733719A1&KC=A1&ND=5
" ! automatic translated german/english !" :
In the generator according to the invention, a portion of the electrical energy generated in a conventional generator is passed through an armature arranged in another stronger magnetic field. The armature, together with the magnet generating this stronger magnetic field, is mounted on the axis of the rotating armature of the generator so that the force exerted by this stronger field on this current and thus on this armature acts on the axis. The current through this stronger magnetic field is so dimensioned and flows in such a direction that the force generated by the field overcomes the back pressure exerted on the axis by the generator. In addition, the force provides the required angular momentum on the axle to keep the generator's armature running, thereby generating electrical energy. This current always flows through this magnetic field in the same direction. Since this field and the current rotate together with the axis, the field always exerts this force on the axis and keeps it running.
When this magnetic field is stronger than the magnetic field of the generator, a lower current in the former field produces a force equal to the force generated at a higher current in the latter field. The back pressure exerted on the generated current through the weaker field of the generator is overcome by letting a fraction of the generated current flow through this thicker field, and that when a little more current flows, the axis receives the required angular momentum the rotation is obtained. Thus, only a fraction of the generated current drives the generator to generate electrical energy. The stronger this second magnetic field can be compared with the generator field, the less is the fraction of the generated current required to actuate the generator. Thus, once the generator begins to generate current, a portion of this generated current, flowing in the stronger magne
tic field, keeps the generator running while generating power.
now to the essentials :
read it:with paper and pencil beside and mind integer
The electrical device is mounted on the rotor shaft of the conventional generator and rotates together with the shaft. There is therefore no relative movement between the field poles and the armature during the rotation. As a result of the magnetic field of the electrical device, a current which is directed at one side flows through the conductor on the armature, as a result of which a force is exerted on the armature by its magnetic field and thus on the shaft which compensates for the counterforce exerted by the generator.
If, in a conventional generator, the field strength B, the length of its conductors is denoted by L, and the current flowing through I, the magnitude of the counterforce F exerted on the conductor, and thus on the shaft, is F = BLI. If the field strength of the electrical device 2B is the length of its conductor L and only passes through a current whose intensity corresponds to half the current flowing in the generator, the force exerted on the armature is F '= 2B x L x 1 = LI. 2
This shows that the force applied to the armature of the electrical device and thus to the driving shaft is equal to the counterforce exerted on the shaft by the conventional generator. The force is generated to act in such a direction as to compensate for the opposing force. A slightly stronger current flow provides the required torque on the shaft.
Therefore, the shaft and thus the armature are moved further and electrical energy is generated. In order to allow this half current to flow through the electrical device, half the generator voltage is required. Thus, 1/4 of the generated power is lost to counteract the retarding force. The remaining 3/4 of the generated energy and a little less of it are available for external consumption.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If the field strength of the electrical device is a multiple of the field strength of the generator, for example 5 times, it is necessary that 1/5 of the generated current flow in the electrical device to produce the compensating force. 1/5 of the generated voltage is required for the current flow. Thus 1/25 or 4% of the generated energy is consumed in the electrical device while 96% or slightly less is available for external consumption. In this way, it is not required that any electrical energy from an external source be introduced into the generator according to the invention for generating electrical energy. ....................... "
this device is working in a pricinple of a capacitor,so
working method as " selfcharging rotative capacitor"
Sincerely
OCWL
p.s.: "If you are a physicist, RESPOND TO IT. .... "
I am not professional physician
I am animated physics in a human body,living and applying
knowledge from elsewhere
http://www.tet.tu-harburg.de/downloads/et-pbl/Wikipedia%20-%20Synchronmaschine%20-%20Dezember%202011.pdf (http://www.tet.tu-harburg.de/downloads/et-pbl/Wikipedia%20-%20Synchronmaschine%20-%20Dezember%202011.pdf)
Um nun ein Drehmoment zu erzeugen, muss in den Nuten, die genau unter den Magneten sind, ein Strom fließen. Nach dem Prinzip der
Lorentz-Kraft
wird dann das Moment erzeugt
e=mc² e= Lorentzkraft
https://www.google.pt/search?q=lorentz-transformation&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b&gfe_rd=cr&dcr=0&ei=DlyuWaaRFpHY8ge6kYGYAQ (https://www.google.pt/search?q=lorentz-transformation&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b&gfe_rd=cr&dcr=0&ei=DlyuWaaRFpHY8ge6kYGYAQ)
new ton/tom/som ? A-tom/ton/som(e :) )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4FtrKfZ0Lo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4FtrKfZ0Lo)
after KAOS to the KALM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vg14HPuXLOU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vg14HPuXLOU)
motor-generator assemblies are/were used as frequency converter
for the radio broadcast,this is RF-technology
today small up to "MEMS-"level as thermal-noise/ionic=phonon and
photo-electric/ionic=photon
audio-/video- signal-frequency-band-gap
in memoriam : living equalizing vocoder with echo-hall :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhq7fSrXn0c (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhq7fSrXn0c)
capacitor: = condensator,Lord Kelvin "(bi)metallic spring"-Analogon
My test debunks the claim that a counter rotating rotor/stator motor is more efficient.
The claim is:
When equal current is applied to the motor, the rotary stator motor generates twice the tork as the conventional motor.
When tork, speed and current of the motors are evaluated together it is seen that the rotary/stator prototype draws about
50 percent less current.
The question is; is a rotary/stator motor (or generator!) more efficient than a conventional motor with a fixed stator?
To check this out I build a test setup with 2 the same motors. One of them I rebuild to a motor with a rotating rotor
and a rotating stator. First I had to fix new bearings on the central shaft, second a DC commutator with 2 brushes.
At the rotor shaft and the stator I attached a belt pulley. The pulleys I toke from a demolished MC deck.
Motor and Rotary/Stator motor (RSmotor) are positioned beside each other and connected with 1 or 2 belts, see photo:
The RSmotor is connected to a adjustable DC source with a V/A meter to measure the input power. The normal motor
becomes the generator.
The generator measures the output power over a load of 120 Ohm with a V/A meter. The output power is also a measure for
the tork of the RSmotor. Most important is to know that I work with relative measurements. So, all the frictions and
electromagnetic losses I do not calculate in the outcome because they stay nearly the same for all tests.
OK, the test consists of 3 parts;
1 In/output power when the rotor of the RSmotor with a fixed stator drives a generator.
2 In/output power when the stator of the RSmotor with a fixed rotor drives a generator.
3 In/output power when RS motor drives a generator in counter rotating mode.
The procedure is as follow:
1 - I measure the Volt and Ampere of the RSmotor and multiply both to Watt.
2 - I do the same for the generator.
3 - Then I subtract the generator power from the motor power to get the outcome.
4 - I do this tests 4 times to avoid wrong data and conclusions.
5 - The lower the used power (in Watt), the more efficient the motor is.
The outcome is that a motor with a fixed stator and a rotor driven shaft and a motor driven by a counter rotating rotor stator
do not differ greatly in power as well in efficiency from each other. So, my conclusion is that the claim of using less current
with a counter rotating RSmotor by the same tork is false or at least exaggerated.
The use of an only stator driven RSmotor was in all tests less efficient.